Amid SDNY Admission of
Errors in Ahuja and Shor Case Like In Nejad
New Search Not Of Phone Logs
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Periscope,
Photos
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
June 25– In the US prosecution
of Premium
Point
Investments
hedge funders
Anilesh Ahuja
and Jeremy
Shor, the
government
doggedly tried
to show the
jury the
so-called
sector spread
and mid-bid
mis-marking
scams by which
the two
defendants
allegedly
overvalued
their
portfolios.
Apparently
it worked. But
now?
On
June 21, the day
after a legal
reality
show
surrounding
SDNY US Attorney
Geoffrey
Berman and the
office, we can
report that
only days
before that
Office, after
the Ali Sadr Hashemi
Nejad
"errors,"
admitted
others in Ahuja and
Shor: "Re:
United States
v. Anilesh
Ahuja, et al.
S1 18 Cr. 328
(KPF) Dear
Judge Failla:
The Government
respectfully
writes to
advise the
Court and the
parties that
certain
representations
it made to the
Court during
trial about
the
Government’s
communications
with counsel
for
cooperating
witness Amin
Majidi prior
to Majidi’s
guilty plea
were wrong.
While the
Government’s
communications
with Majidi’s
counsel were
entirely
proper, its
recounting of
those
communications
to the Court
was partly
inaccurate. 1
During trial,
the Government
produced to
defense
counsel a
draft
allocution
that Majidi’s
counsel had
sent to the
Government in
advance of
Majidi’s plea
proceeding
(the “Draft
Allocution”).
The Draft
Allocution
differed from
the allocution
that Majidi
gave (the
“Final
Allocution”).
The Court made
clear that
draft
allocutions
received from
counsel for
cooperating
witnesses
should have
been produced
to the defense
earlier,
pursuant to
United States
v. Triumph
Capital Group,
Inc., 544 F.3d
149 (2d Cir.
2008), and
directed the
Government to
review its
attorney
communications
in this case
for any
additional
materials that
should be
produced to
the defense
pursuant to
Triumph
Capital. (Tr.
479)."
On June
24, the SDNY
US Attorney's
Office now
under Audrey Strauss
wrote that
"the
Government
agrees to
undertake a
search of
internal
emails
(including
calendar
invites), as
well as
internal paper
and electronic
files, for
certain
materials that
would be
responsive to
this request.
Specifically,
the
prosecutors on
the trial team
are searching
all of their
internal
emails
beginning two
days prior to
the plea
proceedings
for Majidi and
cooperating
witnesses
Frank Dinucci
and Ashish
Dole, up to
and including
the date of
those plea
proceedings,1
for any
materials
responsive to
the request in
the Shor
Letter (i.e.
“internal or
external
communications
regarding the
substance or
content of any
draft,
proposed, or
actual plea
allocution
relating to
the scheme
alleged in
this case; any
meetings
regarding
cooperator
allocutions in
this case; and
all versions
of any draft,
proposed, or
actual plea
allocutions
relating to
the scheme
alleged in
this case”
(see Shor
Letter at 8)),
notwithstanding
whether such
materials were
ever
communicated
to outside
counsel or
would be
discoverable
pursuant to
Triumph
Capital,
Brady, Giglio,
or on any
other legal
basis. The
Government
will produce
any relevant
materials
resulting from
this search by
June 26, 2020.
The Government
believes that
searching for
and producing
to the Court
and the
parties
internal
communications
of this kind
is appropriate
in light of
the specific
facts of this
case; namely,
the mistakes
described in
the Government
Letter,
irrespective
of whether
such
communications
are
discoverable
or can be used
in any way by
either
defendant.
However, the
Government
does not
believe that
this search
should be
required to
include phone
logs, as
requested in
the Shor
Letter. To the
extent they
are
maintained,
phone logs
would not
reflect the
substance of
actual
conversations,
and expanding
the search to
include them
is not
warranted." Will
Judge Failla,
like Judge
Nathan, ask
who is
responsible?
Back on
July 11
the jury found
both Ahuja and
Shor guilty.
This came
after, on the
4th of
July, Judge
Katherine Polk
Failla denied
Shor's bid
to introduce
into evidence
portions of
the FBI Form
302 interview
with
James Nimberg.
Or maybe it
was the text
message,
introduced
into evidence,
in which Shor told
Ashisha Dole and
cooperating
witness
Majidi, "I’m
done giving
frank a BJ.
Sorry to be
crass boss.
Back in 3."
On November
25, Judge
Failla sentenced
Ahuja to
50 months and
no forfeiture,
after lavishing
praise on him
and his
family. His
lawyer requested
Otisville, or
Canaan in Connecticut and
in any event
no MCC or
MDC. Judge
Failla said
she would
accommodate
that. She
called Ajuha
"less crude"
than Shor. She
closed by
praising Ajuha
for the
respect he
showed.
What is
such respect
were shown for
all
defendants and
sentencees?
What would
that look
like? It was
said that
filing during
the trial that
were not,
still, in the
public record
now will be
going forward.
There
will also be
something on
restitution
in 90 days. Watch
this site.
On
November 18,
Judge Failla sentenced
Shor to 40 months in
prison. Inner
City Press later
that day asked
Shor if he had
any comment he
would
or could make.
Now on
November 20 he
has added,
and we immediately
publish: "I
still believe,
as Former
Associate
Justice
Brandeis said
many years
ago:
‘... electric
light is the
most efficient
policeman.’
Louis Brandeis
Former
Associate
Justice of the
Supreme Court
of the United
States."
We'll have
more on this.
U.S. District
Court for the
Southern
District Judge
Kathleen Polk
Failla
requested
permission to
ask her own
questions, as
to to clarify
for the jury
the difference
between the
bid and "mid"
price, between
the bid and
asked.
Now on
Saturday, June
29 the lawyers
for Shor have
asked Judge
Failla to
allow in some
evidence -
this as other
defendants are
convicted,
with assigned
lawyers they
say they don't
trust, in
trials lasting
three days,
covered here
by Inner City
Press. The new
Shor filing:
"Dear Judge
Failla: We
write on
behalf of
defendant
Jeremy Shor to
request the
Court’s
permission to
introduce a
single
recorded
statement made
by Amin Majidi
to Mr. Shor on
December 22,
2015. Mr.
Majidi’s
statement is
relevant to
Mr. Shor’s
state of mind
as to why Mr.
Shor continued
to work at
Premium Point
Investments
(“PPI”)
following his
meeting with
the Chief
Compliance
Officer on
December 15,
2015;
specifically,
the statement
constitutes
evidence that
Mr. Shor was
led to believe
that the
pricing
practices at
PPI were going
to improve. We
seek to
introduce the
recording
through cross
examination of
Evan Jay by
playing a
portion of the
audio (the
statement by
Mr. Majidi and
the preceding
non-substantive
statement by
Mr. Shor to
identify him
as the other
participant in
the
conversation)
to Mr. Jay who
we believe
will be able
to identify
the voices on
the recording.
Once verified,
we seek to
play Mr.
Majidi’s
statement in
open court. We
would play the
approximately
one-minute
clip from the
December 22,
2015
conversation
during our
cross
examination of
Mr. Jay:
[SHOR:
You have a
vacation
coming; I’m
starting
vacation on
Thursday, I’m
in tomorrow…
(to Mr. Jay
only)]
MAJIDI:
I mean even,
even, even,
even, even,
you know,
it’s, w-, w-,
what kills me
is that all
that, you
know, I, I
have the
ability to, I
think to be
human and, and
fair about
things and you
know and see
positivity in
stuff. Like,
even, even,
like even the
conversation
you, you had
with, with
Evan, which,
you know, one
level, and you
know I see you
sitting there
with the
compliance
guy, my, my,
I’m pins and
needles, and,
s-, stomach
acid is going
crazy, then I
get pulled
into a
three-hour
meeting when I
was coming out
and joking and
thanking and
dreaming of
sushi, I see
positives come
out of that.
We, we fixed
one trade, we
show we’re
making an
effort, we’ll
clean up the
book, mark it
down for the
end of the
year. So I’m
appreciative
of something
that caused me
a lot of
distress, I, I
know there’s
something good
will come out
of it. So,
what I’m, what
I’m, again I’m
disappointed
that even
despite, you
know, the
shitty year
and stuff like
that, I think
your mindset
is that we
can’t, we
can’t salvage.
But, but, it’s
like, shit,
these, these
things are,
these careers
and
relationships
are long term.
Mr. Majidi’s
statement to
Mr. Shor
constitutes
relevant,
admissible
evidence for
at least two
reasons.
First, Mr.
Majidi’s
assurances—that
“something
good will come
out of” Mr.
Shor’s actions
and that his
actions caused
PPI to “fix[]
one trade” and
would cause
PPI to “clean
up the book”
and “mark it
down for the
end of the
year”—are
relevant to
Mr. Shor’s
state of mind
in December
2015 and
thereafter
because he was
told that his
concerns were
going to be
addressed.
Through recent
testimony, the
Government has
suggested to
the jury that
Mr. Shor is
guilty of the
charged
offenses in
part because
he continued
to participate
in wrongful
conduct after
his meeting
with Mr. Jay.
Specifically,
the following
testimony was
elicited
during the
redirect
examination of
Mr. Majidi: Q.
Is Mr. Shor
talking here
about going to
-- AOC is
where Frank
Dinucci
worked; right?
A. Yes. Q.
What's PT
short for? A.
Performance
Trust. Q. This
is
approximately
a month after
you saw him go
into the
compliance
officer's
office? A.
Yes. Q. Did
Mr. Shor mark
the Mortgage
Credit Fund
for month end
December 2015?
A. Yes. Q. Did
he also do so
for January
2016? A. Yes.
(Tr. 2844:
9-16.)
The
Government
also suggested
yesterday
through
redirect
examination of
Mr. Dinucci
that reporting
issues to
Compliance
does not
obviate past
or continued
criminal
activity. (Tr.
3699: 6-11.)
While that
generally may
be true, Mr.
Majidi’s
statement is
relevant..."
We'll have
more on this.
***
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
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 2006-2019 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|