In
SDNY Summation Rifle Waved
Around Amid Disdain For
Jailhouse Snitch Bronx Chicken
Spot Killing
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Periscope,
Photos
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
March 20 – For weeks the trial
of US v. Latique Johnson et al
has plodded along in the
U.S.
District Court
for the
Southern
District of
New York Courtroom
318 in 40 Foley Square; on
March 20 a defense lawyer was
giving his summation, waving
around a rifle before SDNY
Judge Paul G.
Gardephe. The
lawyer asked, Do you think you
could stuff this rifle in your
pants? And get in the back of
a taxi? It's ludicrous. He
also mocked a proffered
jailhouse confession -- "who
does that?" -- and emphasized
that government witness
Rosario had access to
discovery in the case. You've
read the book, now you can
tell the story, the defense
lawyer snarked, telling you
jury, You won't lend these
witnesses fifty dollars, why
should you believe them? The
rifle appeared again, (mis)
described as a "baby AK" in
connection with the "chicken
spot shooting." At day's end
on March 18, the defense had
asked for a ruling on a
cryptic note among the 3500
material: "Prince shot
Box kills = beef b/t egp and
brims." Judge Gardephe
asked the
lawyers,
That's some
gangster or
gang? Well,
yes: East
Gangster
Bloods and
bloodhound
brims, was the
answer, all
leading to a
shoot out on
White Plains
Road in The
Bronx. Judge
Gardephe said,
Let the jury
decide what it
means, if as
the government
says it's two
incidents
(Prince being
shot and Box
being killed)
or at the
defense
surmises,
Prince
shooting Box
to death.
Judge Gardephe
said he will
rule on March
19 on the
phone calls
Latique
Johnson the
defendant
wants to
offer. The
case began with a sealed
indictment, signed by Preet
Bharara in 2016, alleging the
use of a firearm for a drug
dealing conspiracy in The
Bronx. Preet has moved on, but
the trial continues. On March
15 there was talk of sour
diesel marijuana packed in
vacuum sealed bags, BWM car
keys and digital scales. Judge
Gardephe said he would not be
comfortable with a witness
saying he thought the Facebook
photo showed marijuana; the
relative attributability of
Instagram and Facebook pages
was discussed, although the
companies are commonly owned.
During the trial the jury has
only sat 9:30 to 2:30; next
week it will shift to a full
shift to 5 pm if Judge
Gardephe has his way. Inner
City Press will be there -
watch this site. Back on March
8 a shooting in The Bronx in
October 2018 was the subject
of an ill-attended SDNY
conference.
Jerome Jackson
is described
as in a white
t-shirt with
silver handgun
on 2 October
2018 on
Freeman Street
- but in the
SDNY courtroom
of Judge Kevin
Castel he was
in jail house
blues and
shackles. His
lawyer Julia
Gatto
questioned
whether the
NYPD
detectives who
questioned
Jackson about
the shooting
were in fact
part of a
joint task
force with the
Feds - no,
Karin Potlock
for the
government
said, and on
that basis no
suppression -
and questioned
probable
cause. There
will be a
hearing on
that on April
Fools Day and
Inner City
Press aims to
be there. The
case is US
v. Jackson,
18 CR 760. A
week before on March 1 when
Statue of Liberty climber
Patricia Okoumou appeared in
the SDNY , it was to face
revocation of bail for more
recent climbs, all to protest
the separation of immigrant
families. SDNY Judge
Gorenstein did not revoke bail
but imposed house arrest. He
jibed that it appeared Ms.
Okoumou could only support
herself by donations garnered
by climbing. Afterward Inner
City Press asked her lawyer
Ron Kuby about this argument.
He said the judge has it
precisely wrong, or in
reverse: she raised money
because she is an activist,
she is not an actively in
order to make money. Ms.
Okoumou raised her fist, and
headed to Staten Island.
Photos here.
Inner City Press, which
interviewed Okoumou on
December 5 just after another
SDNY decision, in the Patrick
Ho / CEFC China Energy UN
bribery case, headed out and
streamed this
Periscope, and this Q&A,
with more to come, on this
case and others. How guns
eject shell casings was the
subject of expert testimony in
a Bronx gang trial on February
27 in the U.S.
District Court
for the
Southern
District of
New York.
Before Judge
Robert W.
Sweet, an ATF
agent traced a
bullet back to
Illinois;
under cross
examination he
said a shell
casing might
eject feet
rather than
yards unless
it bounced on
something.
Then testimony
went back to
2007, a
14-year old
with a gun
heading from
the Millbrook
projects to
the Mitchell
Houses. The
defense asked
for a mistrial
when the name
of a second
gang was
introduced;
the
prosecution
shot back (so
to speak) that
it came from
photos on the
defendant's
own Facebook
page. And so
it goes in
trials these
days. Back
on February 25 a prison
sentence of life plus five
years was imposed for a Bronx
murder by SDNY Chief Judge
Colleen McMahon on February
25. She presided over the
trial in which Stiven
Siri-Reynoso was convicted of,
among other things, murder in
aid of racketeering for the
death of Jessica White, a 28
year old mother of three, in
the Bronx in 2016. Jessica
White's mother was in the
court room; she was greeted by
Judge McMahon but declined to
speak before sentencing.
Siri-Reynoso was representing
himself by this point, with a
back-up counsel by his side.
Judge McMahon told him,
"You're a very smart man... a
tough guy, a calculating
person... You are a coward,
sent a child to do it for
you... Your emissary shot the
wrong person, a lovely lady...
It was a vicious, evil attack
against the good people of
that neighborhood." When she
imposed the life plus five
sentence, a woman on the
Jessica White side of the
courtroom cried out, yes
Ma'am, put the animal away!
Later, after Siri-Reynoso
ended asking how he can get
more documents about the case,
a woman on his side of the
courtroom said, "No te
preocupes, muchacho, Dios sabe
lo que hace" - don't worry,
God knows what he is doing.
But does He? Earlier on
February 25 when the
government tried to defend its
2018 change of policy or
practice on Special Immigrant
Juvenile status in the U.S.
District Court for the
Southern District of New York
Judge John G. Koeltl had many
questions about the change. He
asked, are you saying that all
the decisions before 2018 were
just wrong, under a policy in
place but not implemented at
the time? In the overflow
courtroom 15C the largely
young audience laughed, as the
government lawyer tried to say
it wasn't a change of policy
but rather an agency
interpretation of the statute.
Shouldn't there have been
notice and comment rulemaking
under the Administrative
Procedure Act? The government
said the argument proffered
for this was about the Freedom
of Information Act (on which,
as Inner City Press has noted,
the US Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency
has similarly reversed its
policy 180 degrees without
justification). SDNY Judge
Koeltl demanded t know if the
government is arguing that no
juvenile court in New York,
California (and maybe Texas
for other reasons he said) is
empowered to grant relief. The
answer was far from clear -
but where the ruling is going
does seem so. Watch this site.
The Bangladeshi Central Bank
which was hacked for $81
million in February 2016, on
January 31 sued in the US
District Court for the
Southern District of New York.
Now the first pre-trial
conference in the case has
been set, for 2 April 2019
before SDNY Judge Lorna G.
Schofield. Inner City Press
will be there.
In Dhaka, the
Criminal Investigation
Department which failed to
submit its probe report into
the heist on time has now been
ordered by Metropolitan
Magistrate
Sadbir Yasir
Ahsan
Chowdhury to
do so by March 13 in
Bangladesh Bank cyber heist
case.
In the U.S.
District Court for Central
California, the unsealed
criminal complaint against
Park Jin Hyuk lists four email
addresses involved in
spear-phishing Bangladesh Bank
and among others an unnamed
"African Bank;" one of these
addresses is said to also have
communicated with an
individual in Australia about
importing commodities to North
Korea in violations of UN
sanctions.
To the Federal
Reserve, Inner City Press has
requested records relating to
the Fed's role with response
due in 20 working days - watch
this site. In the SDNY, the
case is Bangladesh Bank v
Rizal Commercial Banking Corp
et al, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of New York,
No. 19-00983. On February 3 in
Dhaka Bangladesh Bank's
lawyer Ajmalul
Hossain
said it could take three years
to recover the money. The
Bank's deputy governor Abu
Hena Razee Hasan said those
being accused -- in the civil
not criminal suit -- include
three Chinese nationals.
Ajmalul Hossain said the Bank
is seeking its hacked million
plus interest and its expenses
in the case. He said US
Federal Reserve will extend
its full support and that
SWIFT, the international money
transfer network, also assured
of providing all the necessary
cooperation in recovering the
hacked money. The
Philippines returned $14.54
million in November 2016, so
$66.46 million has yet to be
retrieved. Now defendant RCBC
Bank of the Philippines has
hired the Quinn Emanuel law
firm to defend it, and it
already fighting back in
words. RCBC’s lead counsel on
the SDNY case, Tai-Heng Cheng,
said: “This is nothing
more than a thinly veiled PR
campaign disguised as a
lawsuit. Based on what we have
heard this suit is completely
baseless. If the Bank of
Bangladesh was serious about
recovering the money, they
would have pursued their
claims three years ago and not
wait until days before the
statute of limitations. Not
only are the allegations
false, they don’t have the
right to file here since none
of the defendants are in the
US." But it seems the funds
were transferred to and
through the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York. And as Inner
City Press reported in the US
v. Patrick Ho case last year,
the wiring of funds through
New York can confer
jurisdiction. Inner City Press
will be covering this case.
The first paragraph of the 103
page complaint reads, "This
litigation involves a massive,
multi-year conspiracy to carry
out one of the largest banks
heists in modern history right
here in New York City. On
February 4, 2016, thieves
reached into a bank account at
the Federal Reserve Bank of
New York (“New York Fed”) and
stole approximately $101
million (out of the nearly $1
billion they attempted to
steal). The bank account was
held for the benefit of
Bangladesh Bank, which is
Bangladesh’s Central Bank.
Bangladesh Bank has had a
45-year banking relationship
under which it has placed its
international reserves with
the New York Fed. The New York
Fed is a critical component of
the United States’ central
banking system and its link to
the international financial
system." Bangladesh's lawyers
on the case are "COZEN
O’CONNOR John J. Sullivan,
Esq. Jesse Loffler, Esq.
Yehudah Gordon, Esq." We'll
have more on this.
Debaprasad
Debnath, a general manager at
the central bank’s Financial
Intelligence Unit, Joint
Director Mohammad Abdur Rab
and Account and Budgeting
Department General Manager
Zakir Hossain all left Dhaka
to head to New York, for the
filing of the lawsuit, which
Inner City Press will be
following.
They say the
Federal Reserve Bank of New
York, which on January 29 was
instructed by the US State
Department to allow Juan
Guaido to access Venezuelan
accounts, will be helping its
Bangladeshi counterpart to get
to the bottom of the
hack. Those eyed include
Philippines’ Rizal Commercial
Banking Corporation or RCBC
and some of its officials, and
Philrem Service Corporation,
casino owners and
beneficiaries. Ajmalul Hossain
QC, a lawyer for the central
bank, is with them to file the
case.
It is an
interesting twist on the SDNY
as venue for the money
laundering and FCPA
prosecution of Patrick Ho of
CEFC for bribery in Chad and
to Uganda - in this case, too,
the money flowed through New
York. Inner City Press intends
to cover the case.
***
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
|