SDNY COURTHOUSE, March 21 – When Cesar Sayoc was led into the courtroom of Judge Jed Rakoff in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on March 21 to plead guilty to 65 counts his raspy voice was barely audible, even from the front row where Inner City Press sat. The problem was more than volume. On the key point of whether he intended for the bombs he sent to people ranging from Joe Biden to Kamala Harris to Tom Steyer to explode, Sayoc was unclear. Afterward some said he was "crazy like a fox," ready to make this argument at his sentencing on September 12.
But Sayoc also asked Judge Rakoff if the government will give him a list of the property of his that they are taking, when that is fully covered in the plea agreement that Sayoc ostensibly read and understood. At one point Sayoc began to ask Judge Rakoff a question and his Federal Defender lawyers cut him off, "conferred" with him and the question went away. Perhaps this is to help him. But it does not seem unreasonable to ask, Is Sayoc competent? Especially when he is pleading, or has pled, guilty to charges involving life imprison plus ten years.
Judge Rakoff, in fine form, made fun of the government's assertion of its power even after death. But again the nagging question: is Sayoc competent? Early in the proceeding he said a sentence that no one understood. Then he referred to AA. Then his voice trailed off. How will he be at sentencing? Inner City Press will be there - in the front row or closer. More on this to follow.
The day before there was another, lower profile change of plea to guilty on wire fraud charges before SDNY Judge George B. Daniels. But when it was time to allocute there was a problem, or at least a long pause. Defendant Evaldas Rimasauskas read a statement how he set up bank accounts in Latvia and Cyprus and got Victim-1 and Victim-2 to wire money into them. But then Judge Daniels asked, "Why did the victims wire the money?"
Rimasauskas conferred with his lawyer Paul D. Petrus, and with the interpreter. Finally they asked, Can you repeat the question? Judge Daniels did, including What were they promised? "I'm not 100% sure," Rimasauskas said. The government jumped in to say he was not charged with inducing, only with logistics. But he was described as being involved in false contracts to support transfers. Didn't he know what the Victims thought they were buying? The ritual of allocation had broken down. Afterward some said the indictment should have been read more closely. But shouldn't a defendant who is actually guilty of the charge being pled to be able to answer such a question? If not, why even hold these empty ceremonies? We'll have more on this - sentencing is set for July 24 at 10 am. The case is US v. Rimasauskas, 16 cr 841.
Another ceremony: back on March 18 when the marshals brought in another defendant, Ronald Johnson, he signed the change of plea. Then he it was time for him to allocute, he haltingly read out a generic statement written for him by his lawyer. That between January, no June, and October 2018 he "wittingly" sold firearms. Judge Crotty asked, Did your lawyer write your statement? Yes. Do you adopt it? No. No? Oh, yes. The guidelines suggested 97 to 121 months, but on the count pled to, the maximum if five years or sixty months. The case is US v. Johnson, 18 cr 907. Sentencing is set for June 12. Look for the straight five... For weeks the trial of US v. Latique Johnson et alhas plodded along across Pearl Street in SDNYCourtroom 318 in 40 Foley Square; by March 20 summations are set to begin. 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. SDNY Judge Paul G. 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.
