In Griffith
NoKo Crypto Case Denial of Motions to
Dismiss and for Bill of Particulars So
Trial
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Pod
Exclusive Patreon
BBC
- Guardian
UK - Honduras
- The
Source
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Jan 27 – Virgil Griffith,
charged with violating North
Korea sanctions in connection
with a crypto-currency
conference there, now faces
trial in September 2021 in the
U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York.
This emerged at a
telephone conference in the
case on December 22.
Griffith's defense lawyer
Brian E. Klein spoke among
other things about filings not
yet placed in the public
docket, only emailed to SDNY
Judge P. Kevin Castel.
Now on
January 27, Judge Castel has
denied Griffith's motions for
to dismiss the indictment, and
for a bill of particulars:
Examining the indictment in
light of the parties’
arguments, the Court concludes
that it provides adequate
notice of the charges against
Griffith sufficient to enable
him to prepare for trial and,
if it becomes necessary, plead
double jeopardy as a defense.
Further, upon review of the
law governing the offense
conduct, the indictment states
a federal crime and violates
no constitutional prohibition.
Thus, the motion to dismiss
will be denied. Griffith’s
demand for a bill of
particulars will also be
denied... Griffith asserts
that he is an American citizen
from Tuscaloosa, who at the
time of the acts underlying
the indictment, was domiciled
in Singapore working for the
Ethereum Foundation as a
Senior Researcher. (Doc 65 (D.
Mem.) at 8.) His position was
similar to a business
development manager for the
Foundation. (Id. at 9.) As
part of his employment and
interest in cryptocurrencies,
Griffith spoke and gave
presentations at various
panels or conferences about
the technology. (Id.) In
August 2018, Griffith learned
about a cryptocurrency
conference in North Korea."
And the rest is history. Full
order on Inner City Press'
DocumentCloud,
here.
the parties have
laid out their disagreements
on a stipulation: "The
Government proposes the
following stipulation: The
Government is not arguing in
this case that the information
that the defendant allegedly
provided and intended to
provide at the Cryptocurrency
Conference held in Pyongyang
in April 2019 was above and
beyond the then-existing
capabilities and knowledge of
at least certain individuals
within the government of the
Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea. The defense proposes
the following stipulation: Any
information that Mr. Griffith
disclosed or provided during
his time in North Korea in
April 2019, including at the
Cryptocurrency Conference held
in Pyongyang, was previously
known to, and accessible from,
the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea. The parties
shared their proposals with
each other, conferred
regarding their respective
positions, and determined that
an agreement could not be
reached." Full letter on
Patreon here.
On January
12 Klein filed multiple
exhibits, with many
redactions. Inner City Press
is reviewing them but for now
can first report there's an
email from Brandon M.
Cavanaugh of the FBI to three
redacted recipients, that "Hey
sir. Its [REDACTED.] However,
DOJ asked us to hang on on
reaching out to OFAC.
Apparently, one or more people
have already reached out to
[REDACTED] and he's becoming
frustrated. Just wanted you to
be aware of the sensitivity."
Watch this site.
Inner City Press, which has
covered the case from
Griffith's first appearance in
the SDNY Magistrates Court to
his Christmas 2019 holiday
legal moves to get released to
home confinement in Alabama,
has previously successfully
sought sealed documents in
this criminal case, see below.
Dec 22 podcast here.
It live tweeted the
December 22 arguments, here
and below.
On December
30, the parties agreed the
Griffith case can be tried in
September 2021, specifically
September 7: "Re: United
States v. Virgil Griffith, 20
Cr. 15 (PKC) Dear Judge
Castel: The parties submit
this letter in response to the
Court’s December 22, 2020
order to advise on whether
there is any reason why the
“the Court ought not seek a
date for commencement of trial
on or after September 7, 2021
and before September 30,
2021.” ECF No. 82. The parties
have conferred and identified
no reason why the case cannot
be tried on or about September
7, 2021 and within the window
identified by the Court.
Defense counsel, however,
request the date of September
7, 2020 because Mr. Buckley
has a federal criminal trial
in Chicago, United States v.
Gregg Smith, 19 Cr. 669 (EEC)
(N.D. Ill.), currently
scheduled to commence on
October 18, 2021." Watch this
site.
After-hours on
December 28 the SDNY
prosecutors admitted another
errors, like in the Iran/Nejad
and other cases - and belated
promised to give the defense -
but not the public - the
information they withheld and
mis-represented, see more on
Patreon here:
"Re: United States v. Virgil
Griffith, 20 Cr. 15 (PKC) Dear
Judge Castel: The Government
respectfully submits this
letter to correct a factual
error at the December 22, 2020
argument. The Government
apologizes to the Court and
counsel for the mistake. The
Court inquired at the argument
about the initiation of
communications with the Office
of Foreign Assets Control
(“OFAC”) regarding “Virgil
Griffith’s activities in North
Korea.” (Tr. 42 (enclosed as
Exhibit A)). The Government
responded that the first
contact between prosecutors
and OFAC occurred on November
19, 2019, and that there were
additional communications
“between the FBI and another
employee of OFAC” in “October
of 2019.” (Id.). The
Government later specified
that “October 24[, 2019,] is
the initiation of conversation
between OFAC and the FBI.”
(Tr. 48; see also Def. Reply
Ex. G). Based in part on those
representations, the Court
ruled at the argument that the
Government must “do a Brady
review with OFAC that begins
as of October 24, 2019, with
the initiatory conversation
between an FBI agent and
someone at OFAC . . . for any
Brady materials in OFAC’s
possession on or after that
date.” (Tr. 50-51). Following
the argument, the Government
re-reviewed communications it
has collected to date and
realized that the FBI began to
communicate with OFAC
regarding topics that are
relevant to this case on
August 5, 2019. To address
this error and related
difficulties in identifying
the onset of communications
with OFAC prior to undertaking
the review, the Government
will request from OFAC—without
date limitation— any materials
relating to Griffith and the
2019 Cryptocurrency Conference
in Pyongyang, including
participants such as the
coconspirators described in
the Complaint, and any
materials relating to
witnesses for the Government
at trial. Based on that
review, the Government will
make any necessary disclosures
or proceed, with notice to
defense counsel, under the
Classified Information
Procedures Act." More on
Patreon here.
Judge Castel:
This is a case with a single
count, of conspiracy to
violate the law, the IEEPA,
not the substantive charge.
That may have consequences.
The president at the time,
President Obama, barred export
of goods and services to the
DPRK [North Korea]
Judge Castel: I'm
looking at an email from
Matthew McKenzie, it says "the
basis for Griffith's
presentation was publicly
available info does not
undermine the conclusion" that
it violated the law. He
packaged the info for the DPRK
audience
Judge Castel:
They traveled to a country
where sale was blocked. They
agree they are going to
endeavor to sell the blocked
weapons discussed at the Paris
Air Show [this is a
hypothetical]. Perhaps you
could speak to that?
Griffith's lawyer:
Hypotheticals are hard
Griffith's
lawyer: We're talking about
publicly available technology,
not weapons. Judge
Castel: What if the conference
was just a prelude, but
there'd be follow through, to
transfer info tailored for the
DPRK? Griffith's lawyer: That
does not fit this case
Griffith's
lawyer: The government here is
restricting speech. We're
encouraging the court to apply
strict scrutiny... We had a
whole string cite about
intangible goods and services.
We think the indictment should
be dismissed. AUSA Ravener: We
specify the services
AUSA
Ravener: We cite Griffith
pitching his company to the
conference attendees. He was
offering crypto-currency
services.
Judge Castel: Did
this conspiracy end, having
achieved its purposes by the
time Mr. Griffith departed
North Korea airspace? Or was
it longer?
AUSA Ravener: He
followed up, that he'd like to
find an emissary to make the
crypto-currency exchange. At
the conference he identified
himself as working for the
Ethereum Foundation. He said,
we can give you contracts that
don't go through the US
Judge Castel: He
was a senior research for the
Ethereum Foundation. That was
essentially a marketing
position. Did Ethereum
Foundation provide services to
others? Or just promote the
Ethereum blockchain? AUSA
Ravener: We would have to
conduct further investigation
AUSA Ravener:
Ethereum deals in Ether,
that's potentially a service.
We have evidence that Mr
Griffith spoke with
individuals at Ethereum about
this ideas of providing
services to North Korea. He
was admonished not to go. But
he went anyway.
Judge
Castel: Usually the US has no
problem showing the guilty
hand, they have problems with
showing the guilty mind, mens
rea. Here maybe the government
can show guilty mind - but you
still have to show the guilty
hand, the actus reus. AUSA:
We'll show at trial
AUSA Ravener: He
created a bespoke presentation
for the DPRK. It's clear he
had done so in coordination
with the DPRK. He was the
keynote speaker. It's out of
the information materials
exemption in the OFAC regs
Judge Castel: My
understanding of the exemption
is that it is not precluded
just because the audience
didn't know the information.
AUSA: He create a pitch how
the info could be used to
evade sanctions. And he
pitched his own financial
services processing services.
AUSA Ravener: We
believe he tried to acquire
domain names like
http://blockchain.kp or
http://crypto.kp, to enter
this market... Judge Castel:
So you say the conspiracy
continued to December 2019.
Griffith's
lawyer: If he gave this speech
at Columbia University and
it's allowed under the First
Amendment, then it's allowed
here. Part of a pitch? That is
not in their briefs. With
respect to Ethereum
Foundation, they want to have
it both way. He was on leave
Griffith's
lawyer: Ethereum is not a
company. It's a blockchain.
Judge Castel: I got it. The
Foundation supports the
blockchain. But Mr. Griffith
received a paycheck or
something from the Ethereum
Foundation to promote the
blockchain
Judge Castel: How
does doubt by OFAC about
whether it's a violation of
law do anything for the
defense? Griffith's lawyer
Brian Klein: They asked OFAC
for a determination to allow
the arrest, and for a witness
for the trial. So the OFAC
doubts come into play. AUSA
Wirshba: We'll be turning over
3500 material.
Griffith's lawyer
Klein: I'm glad to here that.
We want to know what OFAC
said. They are also relying on
Chevron deference. We need
access to these records. They
need to review it for Brady
material. [See Rule 5f]
Griffith's
lawyer Klein: We'd like to
know OFAC's view of DPRK's
crypto currency capability.
Judge Castel: My library could
have that info, but they can't
get it in North Korea, and in
DPRK they don't have Google
searches. Klein: We think some
in DPRK have Google
Griffith's
lawyer Klein: We believe North
Korea already knew a lot
before Mr. Griffith's alleged
speech. Judge Castel: You may
want to ask to know the
identity of all witnesses,
like in any drug conspiracy
case in this courthouse. The
ID of cooperators.
Griffith's
lawyer Klein: We need the
identity of the witness. Judge
Castel: That's usually not
given, at least in drug
cases. Now he cites the
Middendorf factors - Inner
City Press covered that case,
here
Judge
Castel is back to the McKenzie
email. AUSA: That was the
first contact before our
Office and OFAC's counsel
office. There were discussions
between the FBI and OFAC, in
October 2019. Another call in
November.
Judge Castel:
What about Witness Number 2?
AUSA: The government is
withholding only limited
information. Griffith's
lawyer Klein: Before Judge
Broderick, another prosecutor
said everyone in the DPRK
works for the government.
Griffith's lawyer
Klein: A jury should know that
people in North Korea have
info about crypto currency. We
should get the info now, we
are entitled to it or to a
broad stipulation.
Judge Castel:
There's more merit to that.
I'm going to address that in
my ruling
Griffith's
lawyer Klein: This is the
first we're hearing about a
call between FBI and OFAC --
Judge Castel: But you got
notice of that in writing, Tab
G, in your possession.
Griffith lawyer Klein: The
AUSA spoke about another call,
too [He did]
Judge
Castel (with a ruling tone of
voice) - The communications
between the FBI and OFAC began
in October 2019. When the
prosecution conducts a joint
investigation, courts in this
circuit have held they must
review the other agency's
material for Brady material
Judge
Castel: My colleague Judge
Oetken set forth a very useful
test in Middendorf. But it
does not completely fit here.
OFAC interprets its own
regulations. So now a Brady
review is required, from
October 2019 onward
Judge
Castel: With regard to Witness
Number 2, the case law is that
nothing obligates the
government to disclose the
identity of its witnesses
before trial. I understand
that a redacted version of
Witness 2's statement has been
provided.
Judge Castel: The
government says that Mr.
Griffith's supporters will try
to help him. So I am
withholding the identity to
protect the witness [!] I'm
going to reserve decision on
materials about DPRK's crypto
capabilities. The parties may
wish to stipulate on this
Judge
Castel proposes a trial date:
after Labor Day 2021. Klein: I
want to discuss that with my
client. We intend to ask for
loosening of restrictions - he
has been without Internet.
Judge Castel: Each side should
write to me why Sept 7, 2021
trial doesn't work
Griffith's lawyer
Klein: We will put in a letter
on loosening
restrictions. Judge
Castel: It's one thing to have
a case with tough issues. But
it's a joy to a judge to have
lawyers that can answer
questions. It has been
helpful. Peaceful holidays to
Mr. Griffith
On exclusion of
time under Speedy Trial Act,
Klein said he'd like to speak
with Griffith; his other
lawyer Mr. Buckley said March
makes sure. Judge Castel: I
exclude time to Sept 7, this
is not a run of the mill case.
Adjourned
Update: after
publication of the above, this
order: "ORDER as to Virgil
Griffith. Defendants motion to
compel discovery of material
in the possession of OFAC is
GRANTED to the extent that the
government is directed to
conduct a review of material
in the possession of OFAC for
the period from October 24,
2019 to the present that is
related to Mr. Griffith's
prosecution; the government
shall disclose any materials
that must be disclosed to the
defendant consistent with the
governments obligations.
Defendant's motion to compel
discovery of the identity of
the individual identified as
Witness 2 is DENIED. The Court
defers ruling on defendants
motion to compel a search of
files of certain government
agencies regarding the
cryptocurrency and blockchain
capabilities of the DPRK. The
parties shall meet and confer
on a stipulation. The proposed
stipulation shall be submitted
to the Court no later than
January 25, 2021. The parties
are directed to submit a
letter to the Court by
December 30, 2020 setting
forth any reason why the Court
ought not seek a date for
commencement of trial on or
after September 7, 2021 and
before September 30, 2021. A
conference is set for
September 7, 2021 at 9:30 am
in Courtroom 11D 500 Pearl
Street, New York, NY. For
reasons stated on the record,
time is excluded in the
interest of justice under the
Speedy Trial Act through
September 7, 2021 to allow
both sides to discuss a
resolution of this matter and
review discovery Time excluded
from 12/22/20 until 9/7/21.
(Signed by Judge P. Kevin
Castel on 12/22/20)(jw)
"
Back on
November 10, Inner City Press
went in person to the
proceeding in Judge Castel's
Courtroom 11D. It was alone in
the gallery; in the front were
the three ASUAs, Mr. Buckley
for Griffith, and on the side
CISO Hartenstein, who performs
the same role in the CIA leaks
case US v. Joshua Schulte.
The
government said it won't make
its CIPA motion under March
19. Buckley point out that is
more than a year after
Griffith was arrested, and
that Griffith is seeking FBI
and other information.
Judge
Castel replied that he will
bring the parties in on
December 22. He said the
public portion of the CIPA
Section 2 conference was over;
he told Mr Buckley he did not
have to wait around (and Inner
City Press, by implication,
either). But what are the
rights of the press and public
with respect to these CIPA
sealings?
Earlier in
the case: Judge Castel to his
credit the same day asked each
side's counsel to respond:
"The Court has received an
application from Inner City
Press for the unsealing of
certain applications by the
defendant for the issuance of
subpoenas. The parties shall
respond to the application by
May 22, 2020. If there is no
objection, the Court will
order the applications and any
resulting order unsealed."
On May 29,
Judge Castel ruled: "Defendant
is directed to file forthwith
on ECF his ex parte and in
camera applications for
subpoenas pursuant to Federal
Rule of Criminal Procedure 17.
(Signed by Judge P. Kevin
Castel on 5/29/2020) (ap)."
And now
they have been filed: a March
17 letter and affirmation, and
the subpoena itself, for "A
list of any and all IP
addresses associated with the
email address
dprk.un@verizon.net, and any
logs or similar records of
access to the email address
dprk.un@verizon.net, for the
period from November 1, 2018
to October 30, 2019."
Inner City
Press has uploaded the
application, affirmation and
subpoena on Patreon here.
An
aside: the application of
diplomatic immunity and/or the
Vienna convention to this
subpoena, and Verizon's
response to it, remain
UNclear.
On June 1,
Griffith's lawyer filed a
motion to dismiss for lack of
venue, stating that Griffith's
email to the North Korea
Mission in New York, responded
to, might not have been
"received" in New York. Inner
City Press is tweeting the
photo here.
Watch this site.
On
May 28, from Judge Castel
again to his credit, this:
"ORDER as to Virgil Griffith.
The government advises that
the defendant consents to
public disclosure of his ex
parte and in camera
application for a subpoena
pursuant to Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 17 (the
Application) but does not
consent to advance disclosure
of the Application to the
government. To enable the
government to intelligently
state its position on public
disclosure, defendant shall
transmit the Application to
the government by 1 p.m.
today, May 28, 2020. The
government shall state whether
it has any objection to public
disclosure by 1 p.m. on May
29, 2020. The Court will
thereafter rule on whether the
Application should be publicly
filed (Signed by Judge P.
Kevin Castel on 5/28/20)(jw)."
Watch this site.
The case is US v.
Griffith, 20-cr-15
(Castel).
***
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 2006-2020 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|