On
OneCoin DOJ Admits Konstantin Lied of
Laptop Inner City Press Filed to Unseal
Here
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Podcast Filing
BBC
- Decrypt
- LightRead - Vlog
-
Source
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Sept 25 -- For money
laundering for scam crypto
currency OneCoin, lawyer Mark
Scott was convicted by a jury
after testimony by Konstantin
Ignatov and others but was
allowed to remain free on bail
pending sentencing. Sebastian
Greenwood, meanwhile, is in
detention and will wait (at
least) a year for a trial.
On
September 21, 2021 there was a
proceeding on and with
Greenwood and Inner City Press
live tweeted it here
and below (and podcast here)
Late on
September 24, a month after
Inner City Press filed to
unseal it, Scott's counsel's
allegation that Konstantin
Ignatov lied that he threw
away a laptop in Las Vegas,
when he returned it to
OneCoin, has been partially
unsealed. Letter on Patreon here.
Scott's
counsel's second letter refers
to notes in an Exhibit A -
still no provided even into
September 25 - stating that
Konstantin as recently as
August 25, 2021 lied about
returning the laptop to
OneCoin because he didn't
think the US Government would
believe him... Letter on
InnerCityPress' DocumentCloud
here.
We asked, But
where is Exhibit A? Where is
the DOJ's information?
Now later on
September 25, DOJ has filed
some, including "Scott argues
that he is entitled to a new
trial under Rule 33 on the
basis that cooperating witness
Konstantin Ignatov testified
falsely about throwing his
laptop computer (the “Laptop”)
into a trash bin in Las Vegas
in February 2019. (Tr. 206).
Scott further alleges that the
Government purposefully
withheld this information from
the defense. To be clear, the
prosecutors in this case first
learned of these serious
allegations only when Scott
filed his Supplemental Motion.
Since then, the Government has
investigated the allegations
raised by the letter.
Specifically, the Government
has spoken with Ignatov
regarding the incident (who
immediately admitted to the
perjury) and to the U.K.-based
law enforcement agent who
first learned of the
allegations against Ignatov.
The Government immediately
turned over the notes from
those interviews to the
defense. As explained below,
Scott’s Supplemental Motion
should be denied for two
reasons: (1) the perjured
testimony, amounting to only a
small piece of Ignatov’s
testimony and regarding an
event that took place after
the charged conspiracy and was
unrelated to Scott’s guilt,
was not material to the jury’s
verdict; and (2) Ignatov’s
full testimony had limited
relevance to the key issue in
dispute at trial, i.e.,
Scott’s knowing participation
in the charged criminal
conspiracies. The Government
presented overwhelming
independent evidence of
Scott’s guilt, consisting of
emails, chat messages, bank
records, travel records, other
witness testimony, and
recordings, that supported the
jury’s verdict on that issue
(and all of the other elements
of the charged offenses)." 32
pages on Patreon here.
More to follow.
From Sept 21:
Assistant US Attorney Dimase:
We have nearly completed
providing discovery to Mr.
Greenwood. Still to be
produced is the dump of a cell
phone recovered from Mr.
Greenwood in jail. The gov't
today received a 20 GB
download from the phone.
Judge
Ramos: After that, discovery
will be complete?
AUSA Dimase: We
may obtain more... We had
discussions about a motion
schedule in the first half of
2022, in the Spring with a
trial in the summer or fall.
Greenwood's
lawyer: We could come back in
five months and update you, if
we're done with our review of
the discovery, with an eye on
a Fall trial.
Courtroom Deputy
Rivera: February 24 at 3:30
pm. AUSA Dimase: In
person? Judge Ramos: I'm
always hopeful.
Greenwood's
lawyer: Thank you for your
time. Judge Ramos: We are
adjourned. Please stay well.
On May 24,
2021 Mark Scott's sentencing
was again pushed back, this
time from June 14 into
September.
On August 24,
Mark Scott's lawyers
asked for yet another
postponement of his
sentencing, in a heavily
redacted letter. The basis is
a motion filed under seal, and
a medical procedure "due to
the COVID-19 situation in
Florida."
On August 25, the
US Attorney's Office opposed
the request, but left the
basis mysterious, writing:
"The Government is in the
process of investigating the
allegations raised in the
supplemental motion and will
respond to the claims raised
by the motion. Nonetheless,
even the claims in the
supplemental motion do not
establish a basis for a new
trial pursuant to Rule 33
under prevailing legal
precedent."
And on August 25,
Inner City Press filed a
letter with Judge Ramos,
cc-ing the prosecutors and
Scott's counsel, formally
asking that the motion be
unsealed - still not docketed
as of Aug 30, unlike the
practice of other SDNY judges.
(Now
on
DocumentCloud,
here;
podcast here).
Vlog here.
On
September 13,
counsel for
Mark Scott and
for the US
Attorney's
Office were told
by Judge
Ramos'
chambers (to its
credit),
"Judge Ramos
directs the
parties to
response to
this request."
On September
16, Scott's
lawyer
responded: "On
September 10,
2021 the
Government
filed its
opposition to
Mr. Scott's
Supplemental
Motion for a
New Trial,
disclosing
that
Konstantin
Ignatov
perjured
himself in the
trial of Mark
Scott and that
an
investigator
with the
Manhattan DA's
Office, who
was involved
in the
prosecution,
received a
credible
report about
this perjury
in June and
failed to take
further action
or disclose
that
information to
the defense.
Based on these
revelations,
Mr. Scott has
made further
information
requests to
the
Government,
which the
parties are
discussing.
The parties
propose
advising the
Court of a
proposed
schedule for a
further
submission by
Mr. Scott on
his
application
once the
Government has
addressed
these
requests.
Separately, we
have discussed
with the
Government a
redacted
version of the
motion papers
that could be
publicly
filed, relying
on the
Government’s
assessment of
what may be
necessary to
address
concerns that
initially led
counsel for
Mr. Scott to
file his
application
under seal. We
expect to
transmit an
agreed upon
set of
redacted
materials to
the Court
shortly for
the Court’s
consideration
and public
filing."
At 10:33 am on
September 24
Judge Ramos docketed:
"MEMO
ENDORSEMENT
[407] LETTER
MOTION
addressed to
Judge Edgardo
Ramos from
Arlo
Devlin-Brown
dated
9/16/2021...ENDORSEMENT...The
following
redacted
materials are
approved for
public filing:
(1) the
government's
version of Mr.
Scott's August
23, 2021
letter motion;
(2) Mr.
Scott's August
26, 2021
letter; and
(3) the
government's
September 10,
2021
opposition.
(Signed by
Judge Edgardo
Ramos on
9/23/21)."
But by
10 pm on
September 24,
nothing... Watch
this site.
On
September
9,
Sebastian
Greenwood's
September 10
proceeding was
pushed back to
September 21:
"NOTICE OF
HEARING as to
Karl Sebastian
Greenwood
Status
Conference set
for 9/21/2021
at 10:30 AM
before Judge
Edgardo Ramos."
Watch this
site.
We
note that
since our August
25 filing, the
US Attorney's
Office has slipped
into a
footnote,
"Scott's
counsel
informed the
Government
today that: 'In
light of the
Government's
recent
disclosure that
its
cooperating
witness
committed
perjury and
the lack of
prior
disclosure to
the
defense...".
Can you say, Konstantin
Ignatov?
And why hasn't
the request to
appeal
been acted on?
The August 25
letter: Dear Judge
Ramos: This
concerns, in the
above-captioned criminal case
that concerns money laundering
for the OneCoin scheme, the
request to entirely seal a
judicial document requesting a
new trial for the defendant.
The filing(s) should be
unsealed in full, or if the
Court sees fit, in
part. I have
been covering the case for
Inner City Press, see also,
e.g., The Guardian (UK),
November 25, 2019, "In
testimony live-tweeted by the
investigative
journalism website Inner
City Press, Ignatov
reportedly referred to
Abdulaziz as 'one of the main
money launderers' involved in
the scheme."
Yesterday,
Scott's counsel filed a letter
(Dkt 390) requesting a
sentencing adjournment based
on "the need for the Court to
consider and address the
Supplemental Rule 22 Motion
(including the request for an
evidentiary hearing) filed
under seal on August 23,
2021." That motion is a
judicial document, within the
meaning of United States v.
Aref, 533 F.3d 72, 81-83 (2d
Cir. 2008) and Lugosch v.
Pyramid Co., 435 F.3d 110 (2d
Cir. 2006) - it should be made
available.
It is not
entirely clear to me if the
letter has been docketed.
There is an August 13 notation
of a SEALED DOCUMENT placed in
vault. This is a request to
unseal that as well, and to
review the redaction in Dkt
390. Judge Richard Sullivan,
only today, ruled that a
discussion of a defendant's
COVID status was not entitled
to sealing. See US v. Ernest
Murphy, 18-cr-373 (Sullivan),
dkt 857. This is a case
of public import, and these
are judicial documents.
Inner City
Press routinely files requests
to unseal in this District,
and other Districts -
including as cited in its
March 31 request, here
And Judge Broderick's
docketing of Inner City Press'
request to unseal in US v.
Ashe / Piao, 15-cr-706, Dkt No
999 (Inner City Press letter)
& Dkt 998 (ordering that
sealing be justified or
removed by April 9).
And see,
regarding public access to
allegedly confidential
information, Judge Furman's
recent grant of Inner City
Press request to unseal in US
v. Avenatti, 19-cr-374 (JMF),
Docket No. 134. See also, July
27, 2021, NYLJ,
"Judge Orders Release of
Michael Avenatti's Financial
Affidavits In Stormy Daniels
Theft Case," "Journalist
Matthew Russell Lee of Inner
City Press had intervened,
advocating for the affidavits'
release."
(Now on
DocumentCloud, here;
podcast here).Watch
this site.
Inner
City Press
back on March
13 asked the
US Attorney's
Office Press
Office for its
filings not
yet in the
public
docket.
Here
is Inner City Press' Periscope
video upon leaving the
courthouse. The case is US v.
Scott, 17-cr-630
(Ramos).
***
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 for
|