On SDNY Acts in Ahuja and Shor Case
Now Focus on Who Knew What Before 8 June
2019
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Periscope,
Photos
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Jan 20 – 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? Now
post-trial
filings in the
case allege
that
cooperating
witness Majidi
had his
allocution
written, or
re-written, by
the
prosecutors - and
handed to him
ten minutes before
he read it out
loud, on
October 31,
2018. A
ghoulish
Halloween on
which we'll
have more.
On January 13,
this from
Judge Failla:
"ORDER
as to Anilesh
Ahuja, Jeremy
Shor: Each
prosecutor-declarant
is ORDERED to
identify: (i)
the nature and
scope of their
involvement in
any plea
discussions
with Mr.
Majidi or his
counsel; (ii)
their
involvement in
any
communications
with their
colleagues,
Mr. Majidi,
and/or his
counsel
regarding the
substance of
Mr. Majidi's
allocution;
(iii) the
date, time,
parties to,
and mode of
communicating
for each of
these
communications;
(iv) the
totality of
the
prosecutor-declarant's
knowledge, as
of June 10,
2019,
concerning any
communications
by and among
representatives
of the United
States
Attorney's
Office, Mr.
Majidi, and/or
Mr. Majidi's
counsel
regarding the
substance of
Mr. Majidi's
plea
allocution;
(v) to the
extent the
prosecutor-declarant
answered
questions from
the Court
regarding Mr.
Majidi's plea
allocution on
June 10, 2019,
the bases for
the answers
they provided,
any areas as
to which they
had any
uncertainty in
their answers
to the Court,
and any steps
taken at any
time after
June 10, 2019,
in order to
confirm the
accuracy of
their
representations
to the Court;
and (vi) to
the extent the
prosecutor-declarant
witnessed
other members
of the
prosecution
team answer
questions from
the Court
regarding Mr.
Majidi's plea
allocution on
June 10, 2019,
their
contemporaneous
belief as to
the accuracy
of their
colleagues
representations
to the Court,
the bases for
that belief,
and any steps
taken by the
prosecutor-declarant
at any time
after June 10,
2019, in order
to confirm the
accuracy of
their
colleague's
representations
to the Court.
The sworn
statements are
due to the
Court on or
before
February 12,
2021. Should
the Government
believe that
sealing or
redaction of
any submission
is warranted,
it may apply
to the Court
for leave to
file under
seal or in
redacted form.
After the
Court receives
and reviews
the sworn
statements, it
will schedule
briefing on
the
contemplated
motions of
Defendants
Ahuja and
Shor." We'll
have more on
this.
One more
question was
added on
January 20:
"MEMO
ENDORSEMENT
[425] LETTER
MOTION to
respectfully
request that
the Court
amend its
January 13,
2021 Order to
(a) request
declarations
from other
persons with
firsthand
knowledge of
the events in
question; and
(b) include
two additional
questions
suggested
below. We
believe that
these
additional
declarations
and questions
will further
assist the
Court in its
efforts to
understand the
relevant
facts. In
terms of
declarations,
we
respectfully
request that
Your Honor
direct that
other persons
who
participated
in the events
in question be
asked to
submit
declarations
as to their
recollections
of those
events...ENDORSEMENT....The
Court is in
receipt of the
above letter
from defense
counsel.The
Court declines
to order
affidavits
from
additional
individuals or
to order the
existing three
affiants to
answer
thefirst
question
presented
above.
However, the
Court does
modify its
January 13,
2021 directive
to further
require a
response to
the second set
of questions
presented. The
prosecutor-affiants
are hereby
ORDERED to
include in
their sworn
statements,
due on or
before
February 12,
2021, an
explanation of
the steps they
took before
representing
in their June
8, 2019 letter
to the Court
that they had
reviewed all
communications
with
witnesses'
attorneys,
including
steps taken to
locate
evidence of
oral
communications;
whether they
identified any
of the
undisclosed
communications
at the time;
and, if so,
why those
communications
were not
disclosed
(Signed by
Judge
Katherine Polk
Failla on
1/20/2021)."
On
September
28, 2020, the
US Attorney's
Office asked to
postpone Amin
Majidi's
sentencing for
at least three
months
due to the "post-trial
litigation"
- "Re: United
States v. Amin
Majidi, 18 Cr.
328 (KPF) Dear
Judge Failla:
The Government
respectfully
writes to
request that
the date for
Amin Majidi’s
sentencing,
which is
currently
scheduled for
October 6,
2020, be
adjourned...
in order to
defer the
sentencing
until after
the completion
of the
post-trial
litigation
currently
pending in
this Court.
Counsel for
Mr. Majidi
consents to
this request.
Respectfully
submitted,
AUDREY STRAUSS
Attorney for
the United
States Acting
Under
Authority
Conferred by
28 U.S.C. §
515."
Now
on September
29, Majidi's
sentencing has
been pushed
all the way
back to
February 10:
"MEMO
ENDORSEMENT as
to Amin Majidi
granting [407]
CONSENT LETTER
MOTION
addressed to
Judge
Katherine Polk
Failla from
Max Nicholas
dated
September 28,
2020 re:
Adjournment of
Sentencing.
ENDORSEMENT:
Application
GRANTED. The
sentencing for
defendant Amin
Majidi,
previously
scheduled for
October 6,
2020, is
hereby
ADJOURNED to
February 10,
2021, at 3:00
p.m. in
Courtroom 618
of the
Thurgood
Marshall
Courthouse, 40
Foley Square,
New York, NY.
SO ORDERED."
On August
5, the Second
Circuit granted a
motion to hold
the appeals of Neil
Ahuja and
Jeremy Shor in
abeyance pending
Judge Failla's
inquiry.
Shor's counsel
Justin Weddle
filed that
with Judge Failla
asking to
postpone
surrender
until the
later of
January 4,
2021 or 90
days after any
motions Shor
makes after
the fact
finding process.
On
July 24, Judge
Failla held a
proceeding.
Inner City
Press live
tweeted it, below.
Now
on August
4, from Judge
Failla, this:
"The Court is
in receipt of
the
Government's
July 31, 2020
letter (Dkt.
#393), and
Ahuja's and
Shor's
letter (Dkt.
#395). The
Court resolves
the parties'
dispute as
follows: (i)
the Government
is ORDERED to
expand its
search to
include the
time period of
June 10, 2020
to June 19,
2020, as
requested by
Ahuja and
Shor; (ii) the
Government is
ORDERED to
produce
documents
identified
during its
review that
reflect any
suggestion,
instruction,
direction or
preference
that any
communication
not be sent by
email or
otherwise put
in writing,
that a
communication
take place
in-person or
by telephone,
or that a
method of
communication
other than
email be used;
and (iii)
Ahuja's and
Shor's request
for the
Government to
review
internal
communications
from June 3
2019 to June
11, 2019 is
DENIED, as the
Government's
granular
searches
outlined in
pages 1-3 of
its July 31,
2020 letter
should produce
any relevant
documents from
this time
period. SO
ORDERED.
(Signed by
Judge
Katherine Polk
Failla on
8/4/2020)."
From
July 24: Before
Judge Failla,
a push to get
the type of US
Attorney's
Office
internal chats
that "recently
came up in a
case before
Judge Nathan"
- that is, US
v. Nejad, here..
Judge
Failla began
this
proceeding by
disclosing
having run
into lawyers
in the case,
since the
trial, at a
cocktail party
by Preet
Bharara
- and wants
full answers
Judge
Failla said
the US
Attorney's
Office's
approach to
this inquiry
has been
"interative."
She asks them
to give a
complete
answer: what
happened in
this case?
Urges that
none of the
cooperators be
sentenced
until this
inquiry is
finished. US
seems to
agree.
Defense
lawyer: Your
Honor should
order the
government to
go back and
review the
whole file,
for all Brady
& Giglio -
their
representations
so far, we
can't rely on.
"There was a
deliberate
effort to not
put things in
emails in
order to not
have to
disclose them"
Defense
lawyer: It is
clear that
each of the
cooperators
allocutions
were shaped by
the US
Attorney -
with no
written record
of it. An
edited
document was
created, then
instead of
e-mailing
there is a
phone call to
discuss the
changes. So
what else is
there?
AUSA:
It's unfair to
say we don't
know what
Brady and
Giglio are.
[That's not
what's being
said.]
Judge
Failla: I want
to see
whatever comes
to me in this
matter. Then
I'll decide on
more.
Back
on July 16,
the US
Attorney's
Office
informed Judge
Failla
that they will collect
and release
all records
related to a
November 26,
2019 FOIA
request,
including "any
emails, text messages,
internal chats
and
voicemails...The
Government
plans
to use the
search term
'FOIA' to
conduct this
search." We'll
have more on
this.
Back on
June 21, the day
after a legal
reality
show
surrounding
SDNY US Attorney
Geoffrey
Berman and the
office, Inner
City Press
reported 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."
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
|