In SDNY Murky Mag Court Rhino Horn Arraignment of Kampala Man But Case Sealed

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon

SDNY COURTHOUSE, June 13 – While many even most cases in the Magistrates Court of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York are sealed, on June 13 SDNY US Attorney Geoffrey L. Berman announced the indictment of four citizens of African nationsfor trafficking in rhino horn, elephant ivory and heroin into New York and that one of them, a Liberian named "Kampala Man," had earlier in the day been arraigned in the Magistrates Court. But even an hour later, the case file or docket for 19-cr-338 said "This case is under seal." Why?

   The announcement said, "Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, David Bernhardt, the United States Secretary of the Interior, and Christopher T. Tersigni, the Special Agent in Charge of the Special Operations Division of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”), announced today that MOAZU KROMAH, a/k/a “Ayoub,” a/k/a “Ayuba,” a/k/a “Kampala Man,” AMARA CHERIF, a/k/a “Bamba Issiaka,” MANSUR MOHAMED SURUR, a/k/a “Mansour,” and ABDI HUSSEIN AHMED, a/k/a “Abu Khadi,” were charged in an indictment for participating in a conspiracy to traffic in rhinoceros horns and elephant ivory, both protected wildlife species, valued at more than $7 million that involved the illegal poaching of more than approximately 35 rhinoceros and more than approximately 100 elephants.  In addition, KROMAH, CHERIF, and SURUR were charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering, and SURUR and AHMED were charged with participating in a conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute more than 10 kilograms of heroin.  KROMAH, a citizen of Liberia, was arrested in Uganda on June 12, 2019, and expelled to the United States.  He was arraigned before U.S. Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker earlier today and detained.  CHERIF, a citizen of Guinea, was arrested in Senegal on June 7, 2019, and remains in custody in Senegal pending a process through which his extradition, deportation or other lawful removal to the United States is being considered by Senegalese authorities.  SURUR and AHMED, both citizens of Kenya, remain fugitives.  The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Gregory H. Woods.                 

According to allegations in the Indictment unsealed today in Manhattan federal court:     KROMAH, CHERIF, SURUR, and AHMED were members of a transnational criminal enterprise (the “Enterprise”) based in Uganda and surrounding countries that was engaged in the large-scale trafficking and smuggling of rhinoceros horns and elephant ivory, both protected wildlife species.  Trade involving endangered or threatened species violates several U.S. laws, as well as international treaties implemented by certain U.S. laws.                 

From at least in or about December 2012 through at least in or about May 2019, KROMAH, CHERIF, SURUR, and AHMED conspired to transport, distribute, sell, and smuggle at least approximately 190 kilograms of rhinoceros horns and at least approximately 10 tons of elephant ivory from or involving various countries in East Africa, including Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea, Kenya, Mozambique, Senegal, and Tanzania, to buyers located in the United States and countries in Southeast Asia.  Such weights of rhinoceros horn and elephant ivory are estimated to have involved the illegal poaching of more than approximately 35 rhinoceros and more than approximately 100 elephants.  In total, the estimated average retail value of the rhinoceros horn involved in the conspiracy was at least approximately $3.4 million, and the estimated average retail value of the elephant ivory involved in the conspiracy was at least approximately $4 million.                 Typically, the defendants exported and agreed to export the rhinoceros horns and elephant ivory for delivery to foreign buyers, including those represented to be in Manhattan, in packaging that concealed the rhinoceros horns and elephant ivory in, among other things, pieces of art such as African masks and statues.  The defendants received and deposited payments from foreign customers that were sent in the form of international wire transfers, some which were sent through U.S. financial institutions, and paid in cash.                 On a number of occasions, KROMAH, SURUR, and AHMED met with a confidential source (“CS-1”), both together and separately, concerning potential purchases of elephant ivory and rhinoceros horn.  During these meetings and at other times via phone calls and an electronic messaging application, CS-1 discussed with KROMAH, SURUR, and AHMED, in substance and in part, the terms of the sale, including the price, weight, or size of the rhinoceros horns, payment, destination, and delivery options.  CS-1 also discussed with CHERIF via phone calls and electronic messages, in substance and in part, the terms of the sales, as well as how to send payment for the rhinoceros horns from a United States bank account located in Manhattan." Inner City Press will follow this.

 On June 12 Alberto Carrasco a/k/a Moreno came through, charged with agreeing to sell a kilo of heroin in The Bronx.

   The Complaint, 19-MAG-5567, has the DEA's Mark Hadzewycz recounting that on June 3 Confidential Source-1 spoke with Carrasco or Moreno then met him on June 5 on Washington Avenue in The Bronx. CS-1 was showing a "six pack" photo array afterward and picked up Moreno. On June 11 on Lorillard Place they met again, agreeing to the sale of heroin in what the complaint calls a Bronx Shopping Center.

 Carrasco or Moreno in fact brought the drugs, or a weighed bag, from a "particular multifamily home in Mamaroneck, NY."  It was 1.17 kilograms of heroin. He has been detained, with Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker writing on the order additional reason: pending order of protection, strength of evidence including results of search of D's premises." His lawyer is CJA Kelly Sharkey; this; his preliminary hearing is set for June 26. Inner City Press,occupied at that time with a rogue cop's sentencing, aims to be there.

The day before on June 11 a man charged with Social Security fraud in Nebraska was brought by U.S. Marshals before Judge Parker, at the end of the day.

  Judge Parker's Deputy, following a best practice, read out not only the defendant's name, Colbert, but also a number, 19-MAG-5552. An hour after the proceeding, still nothing. Then the Rule 5(c)(3) affidavit, by Deputy Marshal Eric Kushi. It refers to a criminal case number 19 Cr. 3041.

 The defendant has two names: Justin Alexander Colbert, and Nicholas Ryan Hanshaw.

 The Assistant U.S. Attorney referred to an order- it sounded like a sealing order, which is done too frequently, but turned out by 8 pm to be UNsealing - drafted by a colleague seemingly Rushmi Bhaskaran, and Judge Parker said whatever it was it would be signed. (To her credit, she did not grant the baseless request to exclude time until Colbert's slated appearance at the Lincoln, Nebraska courthouse on June 26 before a Judge John Gerard.)

  Colbert or his family have the funds to travel back for that appearance, and perhaps back to New York after that. His Federal Defender, Ian Marcus Amelkin along with an FD intern arranged for Colbert to get a Metrocard. He was released on his own signature of a $20,000 bond, to be signed by June 25 by his mother as well. And that was it. For now. Inner City Press was the only media in the Mag Court and is continuing to dig into all this. Watch this site, @InnerCityPress and the new @SDNYLIVE.

A defendant was released with reporting "only by phone or web, no home visits" in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York's Magistrates Court as the last case of the week of Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein.

  Why could Pre-Trial Services not conduct any home visit? If it it because the defendant - murkily announced as Miguel (Tobias?) Mendez is a cooperating witness, why do it in open court? How to justify remanding some, compared to this? 

  There is no Miguel Mendez as a defendant in PACER; the Assistant US Attorneys on June 7 were whispering as if part of a conspiracy themselves. Where is the accountability? Where is the transparency? 

The next hearing for Bryan Pivnick is July 1.  Inner City Press and @SDNYLIVE will be there.

As 2 Guineans and 1 Burkinabe Serving UN in Mali Are Killed, Two Tier Peacekeeping?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 28 -- In Northern Mali an attack claimed by Ansar Dine has killed two UN Peacekeepers from Guinea and a UN contractor from Burkina Faso. The UN mission MINUSMA and now the Security Council have condemned the attack. 

 Among the questions that arises is whether those coming to Mali to fill in for the French -- from Germany and Slovakia, for example -- will serve under the UN's blue flag, or separately as the French have in Mali, and do in the Central African Republic and Cote d'Ivoire. 

  The arrangement has always seemed strange to some, particularly given that France has controlled UN Peacekeeping for more than fifteen years. (There is also the matter of the French Sangaris troops being accused of child rape in CAR.) 

  But in Mali, where African troops serving MINUSMA have complained about being cannon fodder, it is particularly stark: better armed European troops housed separately than the African peacekeepers who are being targeted. It's called the European Union Training Mission. What's wrong with serving with UN Peacekeeping?

  Back on October 1 when Mali's Foreign Minister Abdulaye Diop came to the UN General Assembly stakeout, Inner City Press was prepared to ask him about the International Criminal Court case about the destruction of cultural heritage in Timbuktu.

  But the head of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, who even earlier on October 1 openly refused to answer Inner City Press questions about UN Peacekeeping rapes and Ladsous having linked them to "R&R," here, acted like he owned the UN and its stakeout, and not the member state(s).

  Ladsous had his spokesperson order the UN Television boom microphone operator to keep the mic away from Inner City Press; he solicited another questioner to ask. Vine here.

But does Ladsous have the right to make it impossible to ask a question to a member state's foreign minister?

  Not only are Ladsous' comments on the rape an embarrassment to the UN and to several Troop Contributing Countries -- now Ladsous' defensiveness is putting the UN Secretariat at odds with, essentially censoring, member states, at least those from Africa.

  One observer asked, afterward, would Ladsous does this with the Foreign Minister of Ukraine? Of Slovakia? Is Ladsous' strange entitlement limited to (Francophone) African countries? We'll have more on this.

When UN Peacekeepers are determined, by the UN itself, to have killed three civilians in Mali by using excessive force, what accountability is there?  None - and UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous on April 2 refused to answer questions about his own responsibility. Video here. Vine here.  

 On June 23, Inner City Press asked Mali's foreign minister Diop to confirm that the UN is going to pay compensation to the families of those its peacekeepers killed in Gao. He told Inner City Press to "ask the UN."

  And so Inner City Press did ask, at the June 23 noon briefing:

Inner City Press: This is something that the Malian Foreign Minister said to ask you.  So, I want to say that in advance before asking you.  And it has to do with whether… I asked him whether the UN is in fact going to pay monetary compensation to civilians that were killed by peacekeepers in Gao in that report that was issued some time ago.  And he said:  You should ask the UN.  So, I'm asking you.  Is the…

Spokesman:  Okay.  I will… let me check on what we'd announced at the time, and I'll get back to you.  [He later added that a compensation fund had been set up by the Department of Field Support.]

 The bracketed material, Dujarric's Office added to the transcript, after emailing Inner City Press this:

"Regarding your question on compensation for casualties in Gao, Mali, we would like to recall that a compensation fund has been set up by the Department of Field Support."

  Inner City Press has been told - NOT by the Spokesperson's Office -- that the UN is calculating how much to pay each family in Mali. But why has the UN paid NOTHING to the families of those killed by the cholera the UN brought to Haiti? Inner City Press asked the UN's Mali envoy Mongi Hamdi, who gamely tried to distinguish the two cases, focusing on the UN exonerating itself in Haiti. We'll have more on this.

  On June 11, the day after an attack against Malian military posts in the south of the country that killed one soldier and injured two, MINUSMA issued a statement which the Free UN Coalition for Access translates here:

  “MINUSMA firmly condemns the cowardly terrorist attack  against posts of the Malian military and security forces in Misseni / Kadiolo, in the south of Mali. The attack early on the morning of June 10 killed one soldier and injured two, as well as causing physical damage. MINUSMA offers its condolence to the Government and Armed Forces of Mali as well as to the soldier's family. The Mission wishes a fast recovery for the two wounded soldiers. MINUSMA again underlines the urgency of advancing the peace process to ensure that the Government and the stakeholders can combine their efforts and act in unity to put an end to the terrorism which threatens Mali and its people.”

  That the attack happened in southern and not northern Mali may be a bad omen.

After his May 16 press conference in Bamako, Ladsous saidthe UN's report about its killings in Gao will never be released; follow up question here. During the press conference, tellingly, Ladsous berated Malians for not sufficiently thanking... France and its Force Serval. Audio here, Minute 27:52.  

  Ladsous said, referring to criticism of him and his mission by Mali's president and others at the signing ceremony the day before, "Did I hear a single word of thanks for France and its Operation Serval? No." (Translation by Free UN Coalition for Access.)

   In this use of his UN post to serve France, for which he was a (most undiplomatic) diplomat for decades, this is similar to Ladsous' much worse intervention into the process of the UN Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights in trying to get fired OHCHR whistleblower Anders Kompass, who exposed reports of French Sangaris Force soldiers raping children.

  This appears in the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling reinstating Kompass, at Paragraph 9. It was not contested by OHCHR.  Ladsous, breaking with his striking refusal to answer Press questions, told Inner City Press, "I deny that." Video here.

 But Ladsous has not explained or answered what he is denying: getting involved in l'affaire Kompass at all, or just the wording? Ladsous was not asked this question in Bamako.

 On May 18, Inner City Press asked the UN's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq who Ladsous was speaking for:

Inner City Press: Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous of DPKO held a press conference in Bamako over the weekend.  There was some criticism, by actually the President of Mali, of the mission.  But, I wanted to ask specifically, in his press conference, he said that he sort of chided, he said:  Was there even a word of thanks for its operation in Sangaris?  No.  Isn't that curious?  And I wanted to know, in what capacity was he saying that?  Is the UN?  Does the UN have a position on Malians not being sufficiently grateful to France or was he speaking in some other capacity?

Deputy Spokesman:  I don't have any real comment.  I would just refer you to the text of his statements.  And if you have anything further, you can ask our colleagues in peacekeeping.

  Later on May 18, a well placed African Permanent Representative said "Ladsous should resign."

 On May 10, two UN Peacekeepers were wounded in Mopti in Mali, see below.

 Now Ladsous is under fire for appearing in a UN Dispute Tribunal ruling as urging the firing of the whistleblower who exposed rapes by French soldiers in the Central African Republic. Ladsous denied it - to Inner City Press - but the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights did not dispute it. Accountability?

 On May 10 "around 1 pm, the forces of MINUSMA on patrols hit a mine or an improvised explosive device 25 kilometers from Tenenkou, in the region of Mopti,” MISUMSA said in a statement.

  “Two blue helmets were seriously injured by the explosion and their evacuation to the MINUSMA hospital in Timbuktu was underway, MINUSMA said.

   “The head of MINUSMA Mongi Hamdi strongly the attack against the peacekeepers and emphasized that MINUSMA remains more determined than ever to implement its mandate in support of Mali and its people.”

 On May 8, the UN announced what the Press already knew, that Mbaranga Gasarabwe, a Rwandan national, is moving from the Department of Safety and Security in New York to become Hamdi's deputy in Mali. We wish her well.

Tellingly, Ladsous refused an invitation to attend a "protection of civilians" high level event in Rwanda in May,click here for that scoop.

 Back on April 27 the MINUSMA mission issued a statement that the Platforme group attacked the town of Manaka, loosely translated by Inner City Press below. But how does UN Peacekeeping killing civilians, then its boss refusing to answer or even take questions about it, impact the UN's credibility?

 Here is our loose translation of the MINUSMA press release of April 27:

SRSG Mongi Hamdi called for the armed groups to immediately cease hostilities and return to their positions. “This resurgence of tension puts in jeopardy all efforts to restore durable peace in Mali,” Hamdi said. MINUSMA said that on Monday near noon the mission learned of an attack launched by the MAA-Platform and GATIA groups on the town of Menaka, held by elements of the Coordination of Movement of Azawad (CMA). MINUSMA said it deployed helicopters to evaluate the situation.

Hamdi went to Nouakchott on April 26 to meet the representatives of the CMA, who reaffirmed their adherence to the peace process under way, and confirmed their intention to initial the agreement.

“Two months of intense negotiations involving all of the parties with a view to put an end to the Malian crisis could be threatened. These actions are a grave violation of the ceasefire accords reiterated in the declaration of February 19, 2105,” Hamdi said in his statement.

Hamdi also cited the UN Security Council's statement of February 6 which threatened the imposition of targeted sanctions on anyone who returned to hostilities and violated the ceasefire.

“I therefore appeal for calm and reason for the benefit of all Malians. The only solution to this crisis is through the route of dialogue. I remain convinced that all the parties will show wisdom and reason and sign this historic peace agreement,” Hamdi said.

  Here's what Inner City Press asked the UN about Darfur on April 27:

Inner City Press: on Darfur, I saw the clarification put out by UNAMID [African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur], but the Government of Sudan is saying that the UNAMID peacekeepers killed seven civilians, and I wonder, what… beyond just UNAMID putting out a press release, some of which in the past have been press releases that the UN has ultimately walked away from, is there an intention to do the type of report that was done in Mali when people were killed or in Haiti when people… when people were shot at?

Deputy Spokesman Frahan haq:  On that, I actually expect that we will have a statement from the Spokesman for the Secretary-General responding to the latest events in Darfur.  So, I'll wait until… until we get that.

Inner City Press:  But, is the protocol if a Member State alleges that UN peacekeepers have killed civilians to do such a report, or is there no such protocol?

Deputy Spokesman:  Like I said… first of all, I… as you know, you're aware of the press release from UNAMID, which is their clarification of the situation, and then beyond that, we do expect to have a statement attributable to the Spokesperson.

  But when the statement came it did not even mention the government's allegations. Khartoum's credibility may be low - but what about Ladsous'? We'll have more on this.

Amid Ebola Pledges, Inner City Press Asks UNDP's Helen Clark Who Ensures Payments Are Actually Made

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 10 -- On the eve of the UN's all-day Ebola pledging event, Inner City Press asked the UN Development Program's Coordinator of Ebola Response Sunil Saigal what steps UNDP would take to ensure that those who announced pledges actually pay them. In response, he acknowledges that non-payment is a problem, but added that “it's not for us to say.” Video here.

   On July 10 while the presidents of Sierra Leone, Liberia, Guinea -- and Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe -- spoke inside the UN's Trusteeship Council Chamber, out on First Avenue there were protests about not only Alpha Conde of Guinea but also “Koroma, where is the Ebola money?”Photo here.

  In the afternoon a self-described representative of the Sierra Leone diaspora spoke inside the UN, for the “private sector;” it was not clear why the diaspora protesting outside was not allowed in the UN.

   A question and answer stakeout that was scheduled for 5 pm took place closer to 6 pm. Inner City Press askedUNDP's Helen Clark what steps are being taken to ensure that the announced pledges are in fact paid. Inner City Press cited a study by Oxfam of under-payment of pledges on Haiti, Gaza and Lebanon - the radical underpayment in Yemen has yet to be studied -- and Helen Clark said she read it. She said UNDP will be contacting the pledgers. But will they go public with the non-payers?

  There were pledges which were limited to only some of the three countries - the UN position on this wasn't clear, and the question wasn't taken. Still, Helen Clark took and answered a press question inside the UN in New York, as the Free UN Coalition for Access has been asking for some time. So, onward and upward. Watch this site.