by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
SDNY COURTHOUSE, April 10 – After Alexander Mashinsky of Celsius was arrested on July 13, US Attorney Damian Williams held a press conference, and Inner City Press asked him to explain his thinking in agreeing to release on bail for Sam Bankman-Fried but demanding and obtaining pre-trial detention of Avi Eisenberg.
US Attorney Williams responded that every case is different. Inner City Press asked if his office would be seeking the detention of, or agreeing to release, Mashinsky. He declined to say either way, saying you will soon see.
Jump cut to December 3, 2024 when Inner City Press went to cover US v. Mashinsky - Judge John G. Koeltl asked, do you wish to plead guilty to Counts 2 and 5? He said yes. Thread here.
The plea was accepted and sentencing set for April 8, 2025 - with plea agreement, surprisingly, has a guideline of 360 months, plea agreement (and analysis) on Patreon here
Back on November 7, oral arguments (Inner City Press live tweeted here). Later Inner City Press saw him, along carrying two legal briefs, going into Pre-Trial Services on the 5th floor.
On February 5, 2025 Mashinsky's lawyers wrote in asking to push his sentencing back a month from April 8 to May 8, saying the US Attorney's Office does not for now consent - letter on Patreon here
On February 7, Judge Koeltl extended to May 8, and asked if a Fatico (fact finding) hearing is needed: "ENDORSEMENT...The scheduled charges to objections to the Pre-sentence Report and the final Pre-Sentence Report are approved. Sentence adjourned to May 8, 2025 at 10:00am. Sentencing submission date as indicated in the transcript of December 3, 2024 at pages 30-31. The parties should advise the Court promptly if a Fatico hearing is necessary."
On April 10 Judge Koeltl held a proceeding and said he wouldn't know about a Fatico until he sees Mashinsky's sentencing submission. Then as it had an hour earlier in US v. Do Kwon, the DOJ April 7 memo about ending regulation by prosecution came up:
Judge Koeltl: Does the DOJ memo impact this case?
Mashinsky's lawyer: That's the $100 billion question. We are asking DOJ in DC.
AUSA Allison Nichols: The April 7 memo is forward looking. They should direct their arguments to SDNY
More on Substack here
The case is US v. Mashinsky, et al., 23-cr-347 (Koeltl)
***
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
