In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Podcast
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN

EDNY, August 29 – Thomas Barrack and Matthew Grimes, indicted for illegal lobbying for the United Arab Emirates, were arraigned on July 26, 2021 before U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York Magistrate Judge Sanket Bulsara. Inner City Press live tweeted it here (and podcast here)

 On August 3, 2021 Grimes asked the Court for permission to travel to New York where his lawyers are based - and then to take the train to Boston (the conditions of release were limited and car and common air carrier, with private jet access cited). Letter on CourtListener here.

On November 2, Judge Cogan held another proceeding in the case - but no listen-only call-in line was provided, unlike the in-person EDNY guilty plea the same day in US v. Daniel Rendon Herrera, a Colombian drug kingpin charged with continuing criminal enterprise and providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization before Judge Dora L. Irizarry. Inner City Press live tweeted thread here.

Why less transparency on Barrack?

On March 15, 2022, with the UAE Mission to the UN under Ambassador Lana Nusseibeh refusing to answer written questions from Inner City Press and documents sealed in EDNY, this Barrack argument; "while the indictment alleges that Mr. Barrack spoke positively about the UAE in the media, see Indictment ¶ 24, those allegations do not show he was the UAE’s agent, see Mot. 7."

On May 24, 2022, Judge Cogan held a proceeding and Inner City Press live tweeted it, here and below.

On August 29, in a nearly final pre-trial conference before the September 19 trial, Judge Cogan held a conference. Inner City Press live tweeted here:

OK - now in near final pre-trial conference for US v. Barrack and Grimes for UAE spying, Barrack's lawyer says jurors seeing his ankle bracelet would be prejudicial.

Judge Cogan: Just don't wear shorts. 

Defense says that proposal to modify Grimes' grand jury testimony to switch "Tom Barrack" to "the other guy" is like "something out of my Cousin Vinny."

AUSA: No, it's not from My Cousin Vinny, it's from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

 Judge Cogan: We'll find a war room for the defense, as close to the courtroom as possible. The prosecution, it's easier for them, they're right across the street...  I could tell the jury, you may be here until January. Just tell me long you'd need.

Defense: If we put on a case, it would be two or three weeks. But we don't know yet.

Judge: I like to say, "The case will take this long," without telling them, the US versus the defense's case. Just project the end date. I think the US adds 25 to 50% to estimate

Voice: Can I cut in?

Judge Cogan: Who is that?
2d voice: The public line.

Judge Cogan: Silence that.

[Note: Inner City Press believes there should be a listen only call in line for this national security trial, given COVID etc.]

 Defense: We don't want a surprise co-conspirator to show in trial. Judge Cogan: The US has been over-inclusive in listing everyone they might call (as) a co-conspirator. Could the government be more specific?

AUSA: It's not as much a mystery as the defense says.

AUSA: There is no requirement that we name every co-conspirator in a conspiracy trial. Judge (to defense) That's the best I can do for you.

Defense: They have an obligation to ID for us every co-conspirators they are going to allege during the trial.

Abbe Lowell: There are motions in limine pending. Given that some of these, I take it, are statements between people we didn't know - that was my point.

Judge Cogan: Mr. Lowell, as a practical matter, I'm including to take evidence like that subject to connection. 

Judge Cogan: I will see you all on September 19. Adjourned.

Back on March 22, 2022, Judge Cogan held a proceeding and Inner City Press again covered it, thread here:

OK - now in case of indicted United Arab Emirates illegal lobbyist Tom Barrack, a proceeding in EDNY.

Judge  Cogan: When can you file your motion - in 2 weeks? The answer is yes. Defense counsel asks for right to reply.

Judge Cogan: What about the Curcio [possible conflict of interest of counsel] hearing?  Let's do it 5:30 on April 7.

 Judge Cogan: I'd be willing to do the trial by video... [Why not? At least a public listen-only call-in line]

Judge Cogan: Is US going to supersede?  AUSA: We are mindful of trial timing, either way we won't impact it. Judge: When will you know? AUSA: By mid June.

AUSA: Your Honor will see us on May 19 on the CIPA issues. We may know by then. Judge Cogan: What might a superseding indictment look like, do you know? AUSA: We know.

  Judge Cogan: Would it mess up the trial schedule? AUSA: We don't think so. No new CIPA.

Judge Cogan: We have another status conference, say, May 24, 11:30 am. It's been designated complex, so [Speedy Trial Act] time is excluded. 

The case is USA V. AL MALIK ALSHAHHI et al., 21-cr-371 (EDNY, Cogan, J.)

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2021 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com