Fruman
Pleads Guilty, Parnas & Kukushkin
Trial Oct 12, Info for Fruman Sentencing
Jan 21
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Order Podcast
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Sept 10 – Whether any US
government agency engaged in
wiretapping not authorized by
a court in connection with the
prosecution of David Correia,
Lev Parnas, Igor Fruman and
Andrey Kukushkin came up near
the end of a conference in the
case on December 2,
live-tweeted by Inner City
Press here.
More on Patreon, here.
On September 10,
Igor Fruman pleaded guilty.
Inner City Press live tweeted
it here
(with vlog;
podcast here)
Judge Oetken: I
understand you wish to change
your plea to guilty. Yes.
Judge Oetken: How old are you?
Fruman: 56.
Judge Oetken: How
far did you go in school?
Fruman: University in Ukraine.
Judge Oetken: The
charge is solicitation of a
contribution by a foreign
national. AUSA: ... make one
or more contributions
aggregating $25,000 or more in
one calendar year, willfully
and knowingly. Judge Oetken:
Maximum penalty is five years,
fine of $250,000.
Judge Oetken:
Tell me what you did.
Fruman: A few
years ago, we tried to
legalize cannabis. We
approached an investor in the
cannabis space -- Judge
Oetken: The cannabis space?
Fruman: Yes. One part of the
business plan included
donations to government
officials.
Fruman: I sent a
list of Democrats and
Republicans to the investor. I
had very little knowledge. But
I was aware foreign investors
were not allowed to make
contributions in the US. I
apologize. Thank you. Judge
Oetken: That was true? Fruman:
Yes.
Assistant US
Attorney: We have emails,
showing how money would be
spent for various candidates.
$1 million in $500,000
installments was in fact
wired. And he was in the SDNY
on various dates.
Judge Oetken: I
accept your guilty plea, Mr.
Fruman, to Count Five.
AUSA: The
pre-sentencing report could
benefit from information from
the upcoming trial.
Fruman's lawyer
Todd Blanche: I don't object.
But I'd like to go forward
with sentencing on December
10, unless the trial takes
place. Judge Oetken: I think
it will happen
Fruman's
lawyer Todd Blanche: OK,
January is fine. Judge Oetken:
Jan 21 at 2 pm. Adjourned.
On July 22, Judge
J. Paul Oetken held a
proceeding and stuck to the
October 4 trial date, while
dismissing the defendants'
selective prosecution claim as
implausible, including after
the seizure of Rudy Giuliani's
devices. Inner City Press live
tweeted it, here
and below.
Now on September
7, more on the trial timing,
specifically motions in
limine: "ORDER as to Lev
Parnas, Andrey Kukushkin: The
jury trial in this case is
scheduled to begin with jury
selection on Tuesday, October
12, 2021. At the request of
defense counsel, and without
objection from the Government,
the pretrial schedule is
amended as follows: Motions in
limine, requests to charge,
and proposed voir dire shall
be filed by September 21,
2021. Responses to motions in
limine shall be filed by
September 28, 2021. Defendants
witness list, exhibit list,
and 26.2 statements shall be
produced by September 28,
2021. The final pretrial
conference will be held on
Tuesday, October 5, 2021, at
2:30 p.m."
On August 31, a
date for arraignment on the
most recent indictment: "The
arraignment on the superseding
indictment (S3) is scheduled
for September 27, 2021 at 2:00
pm, which is also the
previously scheduled final
pretrial conference. The Court
hereby excludes time through
October 12, 2021, the date of
trial, under the Speedy Trial
Act, 18 USC 3161(h)(7)(A),
finding that the ends of
justice outweigh the interests
of the public and the
defendants in a speedy trial."
On August 23, it
was announced in the docket
that Fruman was to plead
guilty on August 25: "NOTICE
as to Igor Fruman: AN
IN-PERSON CHANGE OF PLEA
HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR
AUGUST 25, 2021 AT 4:30PM IN
COURTROOM 110 OF 40 FOLEY
SQUARE."
Then on August
24, it was pushed to September
10: "NOTICE AS TO IGOR FRUMAN:
AT THE REQUEST OF DEFENSE
COUNSEL, THE CHANGE OF PLEA
HEARING IS ADJOURNED TO
SEPTEMBER 10, 2021 AT 11:00
AM." Watch this site.
On August 11, the
defendants renewed their bid
to delay the trial to February
7, 2022, now citing COVID-19's
Delta variant and alluding to
new Rule 16 discovery.
On August 12, the
US Attorney's Office opposed
the request, saying it is only
a relatively small amount of
discovery material that is
being given nearly two months
from the trial - which they
want to remain on October 4.
What will Judge
Oetken do? Watch this site.
July 22: now a
proceeding in US v. Lev
Parnas, Igor Fruman &
Andrey Kukushkin
before Judge
Oetken. The trial was supposed
to start on October 4, but
Kukushkin has asked to push it
to Oct 25. But Judge Oetken
has criminal trial(s) from Oct
27 through at least the end of
2021. Hence, this conference.
All rise!
Lev Parnas:
Your afternoon, your Honor,
it's Lev Parnas, I'm here.
Igor Fruman: I am here.
Judge Oetken: I am not able to
move the trial this year - I
have trials Oct 25 to end of
the year, with detained
defendants who take priority.
Also, let's talk disclosures
Judge
Oetken: There's a backlog of
trials. I was going to request
October 4 - the request would
go in Aug 15 and we'd find out
by the end of August. It's
possible the standards will
change and we'll be able to
pick more than one jury a day.
Mr. Roos?
AUSA Nicholas
Roos: We want the trial to go
forward on October 4. They've
been on notice of the date,
after many adjournments. We
think it's a one to two week
trial with a dozen witnesses
or less. The passage of time
effects witnesses.
Judge Oetken:
Will this be three defendants
going to trial? Or any
[pre-trial] disposition? AUSA
Roos: We make offers. But I
have nothing to share at this
point. Judge Oekten: Mr.
Bondy? Bondy: I'll let Mr.
Lefcourt start. Lefcourt: I'll
let Ms. Friedman do it.
Faith
Friedman: There are some
things that cannot be changed.
The US proposed a schedule -
we looked at the calendar and
it's unworkable. We have two
larger aspects: religious
holidays and back to school,
and end of summer time off
after what we've gone through
Faith
Friedman: I'm talking about
the most Holy Days. We will
disconnect from the rest of
the world for six days. We're
entering a period, those of us
with small children, it's
stressful, ten fold more so
after a year of not being in
person.
Faith
Friedman: So we're looking at
Feb 7, 2022, that's what the
defense is proposing, with pre
trial submissions in January
2022. There's no prejudice to
the government. It was all
unexpected. Judge Oetken: The
Jewish Holidays were not
unexpected. Mr. Blanche?
Todd
Blanche for Fruman: My client
shares the holidays.
Bondy: Mr Parnas
is expecting with his wife a
child, I'll announce that
today. Anyway, detained
defendants should take
precedence. Let Mr. Parnas be
with his child and let the
other cases go forward.
Bondy for Parnas:
There are also the recently
seized electronic devices of
Mr. Giuliani. So I join in the
application. AUSA Roos:
There's never a perfect time
for a trial. It's always over
a holiday, or abutting a
holiday. We are trying to
accommodate the defense
AUSA Roos: We're
in July, we can plan. The US
agrees to filings due before
Labor Day. With Fraud
Guarantee severed, this case
is straight forward: a dozen
witnesses. You move the cases
quickly.
Bondy: I do
not believe that a week for
this trial is realistic, with
the voir dire given the
publicity surrounding the
case. Until we know who they
intend to call, we don't know
who we want to call.
Lefcourt: By
February, maybe I'm being
hopeful, you'll have more than
one court room to pick a jury.
Judge Oetken: I am going to
keep it October 4 and I am
hopeful to get that date.
AUSA Roos:
I'll produce our 3500 material
earlier than we usually would.
The witness list, we're
opposed to producing it
earlier. If we don't know if
case will go on Oct 4, even as
a back up, we just can't. I
told defense, if motions
before Labor Day, we'd agree
Judge Oetken: I'll know by
last week of August about the
trial date. We can wait until
Sept 7 --
Faith
Friedman: That's when the
holidays begin. We suggest
September 17, US response by
Sept 24. AUSA Roos: That's
close to the trial date. So
it's the Court's call
AUSA Roos:
As Mr. Bondy telegraphed,
there may be some sort of
defense case, we'll like
disclosure as to that. Judge
Oetken: Ms. Friedman, how
about Sept 3 for motions in
limine? Faith Friedman: People
are not going to be around. We
have to digest the materials.
Bondy: Lev sought
counsel from Mr. Giuliani...
Mr. Giuliani has a
relationship with Mr. Barr...
and other members of
Guiliani's coterie. So we want
material as we'd get under
Giglio and Brady. Mr. Giuliani
was supposed to be on the
flight with Lev
Judge Oetken: The
selective prosecution argument
lacks plausibility. If there
is such a document, I would be
shocked. But if they find one,
I'll review it in camera.
Bondy: Let's say you make a
finding that it breathes life
into the argument --
Judge
Oetken: Final Pre-Trial
Conference Sept 27 at 2 pm. It
might be fairly long. I'll be
working hard over the prior
weekend on the motions. I'll
research the jury instruction,
and how jury selection is
going to take place in our new
world, social distanced
Judge Oetken: I
want to repeat that I do plan
to let you know by late
August, hopefully 23 or 24,
where we are in the pecking
order. I'll put in for three
weeks. I'm redacting something
that I'll put out
shortly. Adjourned.
On July 14, it
was ordered that Parnas will
get not one but two trials,
with "Fraud Guarantee" severed
(with the government's
consent) - "Because Correia
has pleaded guilty and Furman
and Kukushkin are not alleged
to have been involved in the
Fraud Guarantee Scheme, Parnas
is the only defendant charged
in Count Seven. Acknowledging
that there is relatively
little overlap in the trial
evidence that would be offered
in connection with the Fraud
Guarantee Scheme and the other
two schemes, the Government
does not object to severance
of Count Seven for trial under
Rule 14(a). The Court agrees.
Defendants’ motion to sever
the Fraud Guarantee Scheme
(Count Seven) for trial is
granted pursuant to Rule
14(a)." Inner City Press will
covered both trials, and more.
Earlier,
Correia tried to withhold
filings; Inner City Press
opposed it and prevailed. He
pleaded guilty and now on
January 25 partially redacted
his sentencing submission,
which requested a
"non-custodial sentence" - no
jail time.
On February
8 Judge Oetken held the
sentencing - resulted in a
year and a day to allow "good
time" - and Inner City Press
live tweeted it here
(Podcast here).
He got a year and a day.
Filed on
May 25 (but dated May 20), a
letter by Parnas' lawyer
Joseph Bondy purported to
redact portions about the
targets of the warrants
against Giuliani and Giuliani
Partners:
"In a chart, the
Government identified that it
had sought and seized a
variety of undisclosed
materials from multiple
individuals, including: the
iCloud and e-mail accounts of
Rudolph Giuliani (11/04/19);
the iCloud account of Victoria
Toensing (11/04/19); an email
account believed to belong to
former Prosecutor General of
Ukraine, Yuriy Lutsenko
(11/6/19); an e-mail account
believed to belong to the
former head of the Ukrainian
Fiscal Service, Roman Nasirov
(12/10/19); the e-mail account
of Victoria Toensing
(12/13/19); the iPhone and
iPad of pro-Trump Ukrainian
businessman Alexander Levin
(02/28/2020 and 3/02/2020); an
iCloud account believed to
belong to Roman Nasirov
(03/03/2020); historical and
prospective cell site
information related to Rudolph
Giuliani and Victoria Toensing
(04/13/2021); electronic
devices of Rudolph Giuliani
and Giuliani Partners LLC
(04/21/2021); and the iPhone
of Victoria Toensing."
On May 26, Judge
Oekten belatedly ordered the
already released and quoted
letter to be sealed. Perhaps
he had to - the US Attorney's
Office put in a letter asking,
of its letter, that it
"respectfully requests that
the unredacted version of this
letter be maintained under
seal because the redacted
material concerns sealed
search warrants, discovery
subject to the protective
order and/or relates to an
ongoing investigation."
In their letter,
there are docket numbers
redacted.
Judge Oetken ordered a special
master.
Now on May 28,
docketed June 1, the Parnas et
al. defendants have requested
that the Special Master also
identify evidence of
"discriminatory intent" that
supports the Defendants'
selective prosecution
argument. "LETTER REPLY TO
RESPONSE to Motion by Lev
Parnas addressed to Judge J.
Paul Oetken from Joseph A.
Bondy dated June 1, 2021 re
[194] LETTER MOTION addressed
to Judge J. Paul Oetken from
Joseph A. Bondy dated May 27,
2021 re: Request, Joined by
all Defense Counsel, for a
Status Conference on Certain
Discovery-Related Issues (ECF
Redacted) .. (Bondy, Joseph)."
We'll have more on this.
On February
12, the trial for the other
three defendants was pushed
back to October 4: "ORDER as
to Lev Parnas, Igor Fruman,
Andrey Kukushkin: The jury
trial in this case is hereby
scheduled to commence on
October 4, 2021, with jury
selection beginning at 9:30
a.m. Time excluded from
2/12/2021 until 10/4/2021."
From February 8:
Judge Oetken is in his
courtroom, brown wood behind
him. Correia is in a white
room; his lawyer Bill
Harrington in another room,
with books. AUSA Nicolas Roos
in yet another, with
degrees
Judge Oetken: The
sentencing guidelines provide
offense level of 23, minus 3
for accepting responsibility.
Guideline is 33 to 41 months.
Mr. Harrington? You have to
unmute. Correia's lawyer
Harrington: The 33 month
guideline is crude. David
received only $43,000
Harrington:
David had an honest belief in
Fraud Guarantee. He had a
modest upbringing. That's why
he went into business with Lev
Parnas. He's learned about
since his arrest, about who
Mr. Parnas is.
Harrington: Two
of the victims talk positively
about David. If he goes to
jail, he'll face dietary
issues. He made mistakes in
judgment.
AUSA Roos:
Correia was the closer with
Victim-7. And he lived a
lavish lifestyle. Victim-6
invested his nest egg and his
family was injured, exposed to
press attention. That can't be
overlooked.
AUSA Roos:
There's an irony: this
business purported to be about
combatting fraud. But they
were stealing money. He
guaranteed fraud. This was
brazen. A guidelines sentence
is appropriate.
AUSA Roos: The
government is willing to
consider a delayed surrender.
He has a vaccination
underweigh. Judge Oetken: Tell
me about relative culpability,
compared to Mr. Parnas. It's
difficult, since Mr. Parnas
hasn't pled and says he'll go
to trial.
AUSA Roos:
Mr. Parnas the big ideas guy.
Mr. Correia told people where
to wire the money, a key role
in a wire fraud. Inner City
Press @innercitypress · 41m
Judge Oetken: When the
co-defendants were arrested,
Mr. Correia was in the Middle
East. Was there for Fraud
Guarantee? AUSA Roos: He also
worked on Global Energy
Producers.
Judge
Oetken: Victim-6 gave 2
$250,000 wires to Attorney-1.
Was that for Fraud Guarantee?
AUSA Roos: It's immaterial.
Correia said Attorney-1 would
help with a number of things.
Judge Oetken: The
false statement to the FEC?
AUSA Roos: It's a straw donor
violation. AUSA Roos: Here the
straw is the company. Mr.
Correia did not plead guilty
to these substantive counts.
Harrington: Mr. Correia has
agreed to restitution.
Attorney-1 is a high profile
attorney. He was doing nothing
else for the money except for
Fraud Guarantee.
Correia himself:
I let down many people. I have
tried to make sense of this. I
want be a good person. I feel
true remorse. Thank you.
Judge Oetken: I
am persuaded that Mr. Correia
know. The irony of the
business being named Fraud
Guarantee cannot be missed.
Judge
Oetken: One of the victim
said, they caused me loss and
grief by defrauding me. It was
not a momentary lapse of
judgement, it went on for
years. Fraudsters often say,
they thought it would all work
out in the end. There's also
the FEC.
Judge Oetken: Mr.
Correia became a talented
golfer. 2 of 7 victims support
him. In the end, there must be
a significant punishment. 33
months is not unreasonable.
But I will vary. Mr. Correia
received a small proportion of
the money. And he has medical
conditions.
Judge
Oetken: I am open to deferring
his surrender date to May,
depending on vaccination -
that's when BOP aims for full
vaccination. All new entrants
into the system will be
vaccinated. I decided on 12
months and one day in prison.
One day, so Good Time
possible Judge Oekten:
There's also restitution. The
schedule of victims will be
under seal.
Things
ended with Harrington
questioning if Correia had
been read his appeals rights.
He was told he has been. Inner
City Press will continue to
report on these cases.
Now on
February 1, the US has asked
for the guideline sentence, of
33 to 41 months. The US
says, "The text messages
referenced herein have been
produced to Correia in
discovery and will be produced
to the Court upon request."
And what about the public and
press? We'll have more on
this.
Inner City Press
has opposed sealed filings -
now possibly including
Correia's pleas agreements
whether docketed or marked.
On November
12, noting Inner City Press'
advocacy to unseal, Judge J.
Paul Oetken ordered the
full unsealing of Correia's
declarations, in five business
days. Full order now on
DocumentCloud here,
including: "After considering
counsel’s justifications for
sealing or redacting the
declarations (see Dkt. No.
128),1 [FN1: The Court also
takes notice of the letter
filed by Matthew Russell Lee
advocating for public access
to these declarations. (See
Dkt. No. 126)], the Court
orders counsel to promptly
file the unredacted
declarations on the public
docket."
And now, as
advocated for by Inner City
Press, here it is, on
DocumentCloud here.
The unsealed
affidavit: "I am moving to
withdraw because Mr. Correia
has not paid me for any of the
legal work I have performed
for him. Mr. Correia retained
me around the time of his
arrest. Since that time, Mr.
Correia and I have discussed
fees on many occasions and he
has expressed confidence that
he would soon be in a position
to pay for his legal
representation. As recently as
September 19, 2020, Mr.
Correia said that he hoped he
could soon pay his fees. But
he has not been able to do so.
Based on my conversations with
Mr. Correia, and his continued
inability to raise funds, I
believe that his finances will
qualify him for appointed
counsel. 4. Until last week,
an important factor in my
decision to give Mr. Correia
more time to pay was the very
limited scope of the prior
charge against him. It alleged
his participation in a single
conspiracy that primarily
involved a Cannabis business
and a small number of Fall
2018 political contributions
in Nevada. 5. The charges
against Mr. Correia changed
dramatically this past
Thursday, September 17, 2020,
when the Government filed a
superseding indictment (the
“S1 Indictment”) that vastly
expands the scope and
complexity of charges against
Mr. Correia. 6. Count Seven of
the S1 Indictment newly
alleges that Mr. Correia
engaged in a securities fraud
scheme involving an
insurance-product company,
claiming that 7 victims were
defrauded in excess of one
million dollars over almost 7
years based on false
statements about the finances
of that company.
7. Counts Two and
Three of the S l Indictment
further add charges that Mr.
Correia made false statements
and submitted falsified
records to the FEC related to
whether a different entity - a
liquified natural gas company
- was a bona fide business
enterprise. 8. Given the
breadth of the new
allegations, this is now a
much more extensive case than
the one I had been retained to
def end. 9. Regarding the case
calendar, prior to the S l
Indictment, the Court set a
case schedule. Last week, the
parties began discussing the
need to request that the Court
adjust that case schedule in
light of the new charges,
ongoing discovery, and the
COVID pandemic. a. Discovery.
The Government has made
voluminous productions, but
they are nonetheless ongoing.
In a teleconference on Friday,
the Government indicated that
it had a "fair bit" of
additional discovery to make,
including a "sizeable email
production" that it
anticipated making in l O
days. b. Motions. The Court
had previously set a pretrial
motions deadline of October 5,
2020. The parties are
discussing the motion schedule
in light of the SI Indictment,
and I anticipate a request to
adjourn those dates. c. Trial.
A trial date was also set for
February I, 2021. Though still
almost five months away, there
is a question as to whether
this date will hold given
current court procedures that
severely limit jury trials in
the district during the
pandemic. 10. I informed the
Government that I intended to
file this withdrawal motion
and that nonpayment is the
basis of the motion. I have
not otherwise provided them
with the details in this
declaration and I respectfully
request that the Court accept
it ex parte and under
seal." So where is
Avenatti's filing?
The logic
also applies, inter alia, to
the still withheld financial
declarations of Michael
Avenatti, here.
On October
29 Correia pleaded guilty to
two counts. Inner City Press
live tweeted it, here:
Correia's
taxpayer paid lawyer, William
Harrington of Goodwin Proctor,
confirms he'll plead guilty.
Turns out he prefers his name
to be said "Korea," not
Correia like belt in Spanish.
Judge Oetken
making requires findings under
the CARES Act. Will he do DPPA
too?
Correia is
pleading to Counts 2 and 7 of
the superseding indictment:
False Statements to the FEC
and The Fraud Guarantee
Scheme. Correia went three
quarters of the way through
college, he says. Never
treated for mental illness.
Gastro-intestinal is his only
doctor
AUSA Doug
Zolkind, insisting on calling
him "Correia" like belt, not
Korea, runs through the
elements of each count. Judge
Oetken: Are you a US citizen?
Correia: Yes, your Honor.
Now the
plea agreement that the US
Attorney's Office has agreed
to for Correia:
guideline
sentence of 33 to 41 months.
Fine of $15,000 to $150,000.
Judge Oekten:
Tell me what you did.
Correia: I have a
statement. My declaration said
things that were false, I
filed it to get FEC to end
their investigation. I knew it
was wrong. Judge Oekten: What
about count 7? Correia: I have
false info about Fraud
Guaranty
Correia adds that
he thought Fraud Guaranty was
a great project. AUSA Zolkind:
Did the defendant know it
would be carried out by
interstate wires?
Correia: They
were in fact used. AUSA
Zolkind says woulda used
emails. He references Parnas
and Fruman
AUSA
Zolkind: They committed straw
donations. Correia filed a
false affidavit, about
"substantial bone fide"
investments. He knew they were
false, for the $325,000
donation. Also he lied about
Fraud Guaranty, which had no
operations nor insurance
products.
AUSA Zolkind: 7
victims invested in Fraud
Guaranty, between $250,000 and
$500,000 each. But this paid
Parnas' rent and luxury cars,
retail store purchases.
Multiple meetings were held in
Manhattan. Correia's
lawyer: Mr. Correia got very
little of the money.
Judge Oetken: Mr.
Correia, I hereby accept your
guilty plea. For
sentencing, how about
February 12? Correia's lawyer
wants it earlier. Judge
Oetken: February 8, at 11:30
am, then. AUSA Zolkind: The
plea agreement says he
withdraws mandamus in 2d Cir.
AUSA Zolkind
wants to file plea agreement
under seal. Judge Oetken: I
don't usually put plea
agreements on the docket. Then
people could figure out who's
a cooperator.
AUSA Zolkind: But
press could request it. So we
want it redacted.
Judge Oetken: I
won't mark it as a court
exhibit. Adjourned.
[Inner City
Press: The plea agreement is
clearly a judicial document,
whether docketed or not,
whether made a court exhibit
or not (these may be seen as
evasions of transparency.]
Inner City
Press filed, now docketed,
this: "Hon. J. Paul Oetken,
United States District Judge
Southern District of New York,
40 Foley Square, New York, NY
10007 Re: US v. Correia,
19-cr-725-3 (JPO) - Motion for
Leave To Be Heard / Press
Request To Unseal Dear Judge
Oetken: On
behalf of Inner City Press and
in my personal capacity, I
have been covering the
above-captioned case since it
was filed. This concerns
documents filed under
(requested) seal in the case,
19-cr-725.
Defense counsel have
"request[ed] that this motion
be accepted ex parte and filed
under seal." This is
opposition.
Formally, PLEASE TAKE NOTICE
that Inner City Press and its
undersigned reporter, in
personal capacity, will move
this Court before Honorable J.
Paul Oetken, U.S. District
Judge for the Southern
District of New York, at a
date and time directed by the
Court, for entry of an order
granting permission to the
heard on/and the unsealing of
documents filed and/or
submitted in 19-cr-725 (JPO),
pursuant to Docket No. 122 in
that case and the Court's
inherent power, and such other
and further relief as the
Court deem just and
proper.
As the Court is aware, the
public and the press have a
presumptive First Amendment
and common law right of access
to criminal proceedings and
records. See Press Enterprise
Co. v. Superior Court of
California, 464 U.S. 501, 508
(1984). The presumption of
openness can only be overcome
if “specific, on the record
findings are made
demonstrating that closure is
essential to preserve higher
values and is narrowly
tailored to serve that
interest.” Press–Enterprise
Co. v. Superior Court, 478
U.S. 1, 13-14 (1986)
Non-parties such as Inner City
Press and myself have standing
to intervene in criminal
proceedings to assert the
public’s right of access.
United States v. Aref, 533
F.3d 72, 81 (2d Cir. 2008).
...
A trial
date of October 5 was set,
with another conference if
necessary penciled in for July
16 at 2:30 pm. Afterward in
front of 40 Foley Square
Parnas' lawyer Bondy snarked
at the impeachment trial as a
trial by friends; Parnas said
he's trying to get the truly
about Trump and Giuliani and
Ukraine out, but declined to
answer if he is cooperating.
Then he got into a big black
car, saying he was glad to be
back in New York. Inner City
Press Periscope video here.
Inner
City Press
said it would
be there- and
it was. The
case is US
v. Parnas, et
al.,
19-cr-00725
(Oetken).
***
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 2006-2020 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|