Thursday, January 30, 2025
Wednesday, January 29, 2025
Tuesday, January 28, 2025
Monday, January 27, 2025
Sunday, January 26, 2025
Saturday, January 25, 2025
Friday, January 24, 2025
As Sean Combs Attacks Search of His Cell in MDC Now Says Investigator Was a Prosecutor
by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 24 – At 4:30 pm on September 16 Inner City Press was told by its SDNY source to expect "the big one" - Sean Combs - the next day in the courtroom here.
At US Attorney Damian Williams' press conference Inner City Press asked if his office would be seeking detention - Yes, he said. Detention memo on Patreon here.
[Inner City Press published book / audio book Diddy Do It? on Sept 20 on Amazon here]
On December 16, in the run-up to the December 18 conference, letter on Patreon here.
Inner City Press live tweeted the December 18 conference, thread here.
On December 30 Combs' lawyers reiterated their request for a Kastigar hearing, arguing that not only the fruits of the search by their derivatives too much be excluded.
On January 3 Judge Subramanian asked for more information by January 17.
On January 14 Combs' lawyers filed a motion about the protective order, arguing that "attorney eyes only" videos in the case they say prove the prosecution is "sexist and puritanical" and that it is consensual - 7 page letter on Patreon here
On January 17 the US responded to Judge Subramanian, including that "Investigator-1 provided a high-level overview of the contents of the BOP Notes, including the defendant’s plans to discredit possible witnesses and find dirt on people."
On January 24 Combs' lawyer replied that "Investigator-1 became an agent of the prosecution team and worked to advance its case" - 7 page letter on Patreon here.
Extra/analysis on X for Subscribers here & Substack here
The case is USA v. Combs, 1:24-cr-542 (Subramanian)
***
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 patr. on.
Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
For Murder While Robbing Bronx Smoke Shop Payne Sentenced to 22 1/2 Years in Prison
by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 23 – For shooting a man in the head and killing in the course of the armed robbery of a smoke shop in the South Bronx back on November 20, 2019, Anthony Payne was up for sentencing on January 23, 2025 before U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain. Inner City Press was there, thread:
Defense lawyer, arguing for a 12 year sentence, tells judge "No one is watching this case." Inner City Press as only media here will live tweet, thread below
AUSA Domenic Gentile: It's the people who sold him the gun we want to hear about this.
Defendant Anthony Payne: I pray to God... I am truly sorry [Victim's family member hwre in the gallery expresses skepticism] Judge: Please stay quietly with me as I reflect
Judge: The sentencing guideline is 292 months to 300 months. On Nov 20, 2019 Mr Payne drove from Brooklyn to a smoke shop in the Bronx to rob it. He shot the victim in the head. Then he moved to Georgia. Later he was arrested. He is 33. His mother died in 2016
Judge: He worked at an airplane catering company at JFK airport called SkyChef. He says he needed more money for his family. He clearly has mental health problems, but there has been no treatment at the MDC.
The government let him plead not the murder, with a 25 year cap. The victim had a daughter, who will grow up without a father. Mr. Payne, please rise... I sentence you to 270 months [22 and 1/2 years] in prison.
More/poem on X for Subscribers here and Substack here
The case is USA v. Payne, 1:23-cr-345 (Swain)
***
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
Javice Trial For Fooling JPMC Delayed a Week as Motion to Sever From Amar Denied
by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 23 – JPMorgan Chase bought a start-up called Frank, which claimed to have 4 million students signed up to file their FAFSA forms, for $175 million. Then Chase learned Frank had only 300,000 customers.
On April 4, 2023, Frank founder Ms. Charlie Javice was brought before U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses, represented by Quinn Emanuel.
The complaint quotes Javice messages with the engineers she hired to create the false data, and to enter in data she bought on the open market. To one of them, she is quoted, "We don't want to end up in orange jumpsuits."
In the tri-state, it is Westchester County Department of Corrections in Valhalla that dresses its inmates in orange. MDC Brooklyn uses beige; Essex County Corrections Facility in New Jersey uses yellow.
In any event, white collar defendant Javice, who took on an appropriately or strategically contrite look on Worth Street still barricaded for the nearby state court arraignment of former President Donald Trump, was freed on $2 million bond, travel restricted to SDNY and EDNY and the Southern District of Florida, where she lives.
On May 18, Javice was indicted on bank, wire and securities fraud counts, and the case assigned to District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein.
In June the US prosecutors sought to intervene in and stay the SEC's case against Javice. Inner City Press attended and covered the oral argument and now first reports that Judge Lewis J. Liman has granted the motions to intervene and stay, noting among other things that "Javice will have access to a vast amount of material usable in the civil case through the means of Rule 16 discovery in the criminal case. That discovery will include virtually all of the SEC’s investigative file. And it will include documents from at least 30 different third parties. She has not made a convincing case that she needs more document discovery to be prepared to move quickly in this case when the criminal case is resolved and the stay is lifted."
The (stayed) civil case is Securities and Exchange Commission v. Javice et al, 23-cv-2795 (Liman)
On July 13, Javice and her co-defendant were arraigned, and Judge Hellerstein asked why JPMC didn't find the fraud in due diligence. Inner City Press was there, thread:
All rise!
Judge: How do you plead? Javice: Not guilty. Judge: How do you pronounce your name? Javace? Javice: "Jah-veese."
Judge: And Mr Amar?
Amar (takes off COVID mask still required in this courtroom) Not guilty
Judge Hellerstein: I'm puzzled, why didn't JP Morgan Chase figure this out during due diligence? AUSA: They created fake data. [Javice is shaking her head No, pink cardigan tied over her shoulders]
Judge: Defense wants a delay? Spiro: The US is just regurgitating JPM Chase's civil case. AUSA: Mr Spiro is confused about Rule 16. Judge: Can you subpoena JPMC? AUSA: We'd have to see if that complies with Rule 17. Judge to AUSA: Why don't *you* subpoena JPMC?
AUSA: We'll be getting it. Judge: We'll meet in 30 days. August 15 at 11 am. I'll sent a motion schedule at that time. Adjourned.
On July 27, the prosecutors wrote it to say they are unavailable on August 15, and that the Court said it would be available on September 20. But Javice will not consent to exclude Speedy Trial Act time until then. Letter on Patreon here.
On August 23, Inner City Press was there. Thread.
On September 26, Judge Hellerstein held a conference and ordered: "Briefing schedule: Deft's by 10/13; Govt's by 10/27; Hearing set for 11/2/23 at 2:30 p.m.; Time excluded until 11/2/23; in the interest of justice; Stat. conf. previously set for 10/24/23 is adjourned; Defts. cont'd. on bail."
On November 7 Judge Hellerstein set a trial date of October 15, 2024.
On November 10 - Veteran's Day - Javice's lawyers filed "On November 9, 2023, I served a subpoena to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“JPMC”), issued pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c) (the “JPMC Subpoena”), by email to Ms. Kristy Greenberg, partner at Hogan Lovells US LLP, and counsel for JPMC. 3. Also on November 9, 2023, Ms. Greenberg responded confirming that she was willing and authorized to accept service of the JPMC Subpoena by email on behalf of JPMC."
On August 6 there was a hearing, or a series of Judge Hellerstein rulings, on privilege claims. Inner City Press was there. Thread:
Judge Hellerstein: I will read and rule on these messages chronologically... Setting up a call, not privileged. Next, about options, it's advice, it's privileged... This one involves lawyers, but it is not advice. It is not privileged.
On August 20, Judge Hellerstein ordered: "ORDER as to Charlie Javice, Olivier Amar: The parties agree that by September 6, 2024, each defendant will give notice if he or she intends to present a defense based on advice of counsel. Each defendant is so-ordered. The parties dispute what such disclosure should include. The government argues that the "specific bases, and scope" of the defense should be provided, including: (a) which attorneys, if any, the defendants purportedly relied on; (b) the timing and substance of the alleged advice upon which the defendants relied; and (c) all documents (including attorney-client and attorney work product documents) currently in the defendants' possession, custody, or control that support or might impeach or undermine any such defense. ECF No. 148. Defendants state that they are "not able to comply with the full scope of the government's broad and unusual disclosure demand at this time." Id A disclosure is meaningless without content. Defendants, if they intend to present advice-of-counsel evidence or arguments at trial, shall identify the attorney or attorneys who gave the advice, when they gave the advice, and if oral, the substance of the advice, or, if written, the documents upon which defendants relied. Defendants state that they may be unable to disclose documents possessed by JPMC due to its assertion of the attorney--client privilege. Defendants shall identify any such documents and, if not produced by JPMC, file a motion to seek disclosure. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 8/20/2024)."
On September 23, the trial was pushed back to February 10, 2025, and then a conference, thread
now at US v Charlie Javice, she's laughing and chipper at defense table; JPM Chase's lawyers are at front table with the prosecutors. "I don't like that," says the clerk.
Judge: I held that half of the documents for which privilege was claimed were noy in fact privileges. JPM Chase's lawyer: The bznk is the 3d party victim, from whi h the defendants stole $150 million. This discovery is too burdensome
Javice lawyer: This began a year ago. Even things that against us give us context
Judge: Try to agree in an hour...
[They're back - in less than an hour] Judge: I order production... AUSA: Ok, motions in limine due Jan 13.
Judge: Fine... It's a 4 week trial. US v Hwang went 9 week, it had been expected to go 7..
On January 21, 2025 co-defendant (for now) Amar wrote it, two days before a conference: "As Ms. Javice noted in her severance motion papers, we are prepared to provide the Court—outside the presence of the Government and Ms. Javice and under seal—additional details regarding Mr. Amar’s anticipated antagonistic defense. ECF No. 185 at 2 n.2; ECF No. 219 at 3 n.1. If the Court determines that a declaration would be helpful in resolving the pending motion, we respectfully request that the Court order that it may be submitted ex parte and that it shall be maintained under seal, to avoid unfairly prejudicing Mr. Amar by previewing details of his anticipated defense to the Government or to Ms. Javice." Letter on Patreon here
Inner City Press live tweeted the more than two hour hearing on January 23, here. Trial was delayed one week to February 18; the motion to sever was denied. The basis for the delay was late production of Amar's Google Drive, which Judge Hellerstein criticized, linking it to sloppiness in the Menendez case. Inner City Press published a book on Menendez, and is preparing one on Javice (and Chase / Dimon).
This case is US v. Javice, et al., 23-cr-251 (Hellerstein)
***
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
In DOJ Live Nation Antitrust Suit Questions of Tying SeatGeek and If DC Is Effective Enforcer
by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 22 – In the lawsuit by the US Department of Justice and 30 states against Live Nation Entertainment and Ticketmaster, on July 29 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Arun Subramanian held a conference on the proposed protective order, and discovery timelines. Inner City Press live tweeted it, thread.
On January 22, 2025 there were oral arguments on Live Nation's motion to dismiss the tying claim, from the thread:
DOJ lawyer: Force Live Nation to deal with its competitor. Or force them to divest Live Nation-owned amphitheaters.
Judge Subramanian: Is disaggregation possible?
DOJ: Greek Theater [LA] and Red Rocks [Colorado] do that. It can be done.
Judge Subramanian: OK, I want each side to send me a letter about the tying claim, on the facts. Now the antitrust standing issue. Who'll speak for plaintiffs?
DOJ: My colleague from DC.
Judge Subramanian: One more question: is this a per-se claim? DOJ lawyer: Yes.
DC OAG's Office: And we are efficient enforcers, we meet the test. We have pled they maintain a monopoly in the fan-facing ticket market
Judge: OK, I'll await those letters. Adjourned.
The case is United States of America et al v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. et al., 24-cv-3973 (Subramanian)
***
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.
sdny
Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UNRWA Moved to Dismiss Case for UN Aid to Hamas Oct 7 Attacks Now Says US Supports It
by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 21 - For the UN's role in Hamas' October 7 attacks, non-US citizen plaintiffs and estates on June 24 filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against UNRWA, Philippe Lazzarini, Pierre Krahenbuhl, Filippo Grandi, Leni Stenseth, Sandra Mitchel, Margot Ellis and Greta Gunnarsdottir.
The individual plaintiffs are sued for, inter alia, their "constant travel to New York" to raise and get money and "their material support of Hamas' terror infrastructure." Also cited, for jurisdiction and venue, is "over one billion dollars from UNRWA's New York bank account in Manhattan that Defendants then caused to be delivered to Gaza in cash U.S. dollars to benefit Hamas."
Inner City Press, which daily cover the SDNY court in-person and the UN from outside the gate, banned from entry by SG Antonio Guterres, asked Guterres' spokespeople Stephane Dujarric and Melissa Fleming about the lawsuit, without any response per usual.
Nor have they responded to Inner City Press' June 19 application to enter the UN to ask these questions.
On November 14, after the election, UNRWA used public money to hire Curtis, Mallet-Provest. On December 16 they filed a 38 page memo now on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud here
On January 21, 2025, hours after UNRWA's actions on October 7, 2023 were repeatedly raised to Elise Stefanik in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, UNRWA's and Guterres' lawyers, with taxpayer funds, filed a reply that "the U.S. has taken the position that Defendants qualify for immunity. Dkt. No. 17. Nothing more is needed." Will that remain the US' position? Reply memo on DocumentCloud here.
The UNRWA case is ESTATE OF TAMAR KEDEM SIMAN TOV, BY HEIR-AT-LAW GAD KEDEM v. UNITED NATIONS RELIEF AND WORKS AGENCY (UNRWA) et al., 24-cv-04765 (Torres)
***
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
Javice For Trial For Fooling JPMC Moved to Sever From Amar Who Wants to File Under Seal
by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 21 – JPMorgan Chase bought a start-up called Frank, which claimed to have 4 million students signed up to file their FAFSA forms, for $175 million. Then Chase learned Frank had only 300,000 customers.
On April 4, 2023, Frank founder Ms. Charlie Javice was brought before U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses, represented by Quinn Emanuel.
The complaint quotes Javice messages with the engineers she hired to create the false data, and to enter in data she bought on the open market. To one of them, she is quoted, "We don't want to end up in orange jumpsuits."
In the tri-state, it is Westchester County Department of Corrections in Valhalla that dresses its inmates in orange. MDC Brooklyn uses beige; Essex County Corrections Facility in New Jersey uses yellow.
In any event, white collar defendant Javice, who took on an appropriately or strategically contrite look on Worth Street still barricaded for the nearby state court arraignment of former President Donald Trump, was freed on $2 million bond, travel restricted to SDNY and EDNY and the Southern District of Florida, where she lives.
On May 18, Javice was indicted on bank, wire and securities fraud counts, and the case assigned to District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein.
In June the US prosecutors sought to intervene in and stay the SEC's case against Javice. Inner City Press attended and covered the oral argument and now first reports that Judge Lewis J. Liman has granted the motions to intervene and stay, noting among other things that "Javice will have access to a vast amount of material usable in the civil case through the means of Rule 16 discovery in the criminal case. That discovery will include virtually all of the SEC’s investigative file. And it will include documents from at least 30 different third parties. She has not made a convincing case that she needs more document discovery to be prepared to move quickly in this case when the criminal case is resolved and the stay is lifted."
The (stayed) civil case is Securities and Exchange Commission v. Javice et al, 23-cv-2795 (Liman)
On July 13, Javice and her co-defendant were arraigned, and Judge Hellerstein asked why JPMC didn't find the fraud in due diligence. Inner City Press was there, thread:
All rise!
Judge: How do you plead? Javice: Not guilty. Judge: How do you pronounce your name? Javace? Javice: "Jah-veese."
Judge: And Mr Amar?
Amar (takes off COVID mask still required in this courtroom) Not guilty
Judge Hellerstein: I'm puzzled, why didn't JP Morgan Chase figure this out during due diligence? AUSA: They created fake data. [Javice is shaking her head No, pink cardigan tied over her shoulders]
Judge: Defense wants a delay? Spiro: The US is just regurgitating JPM Chase's civil case. AUSA: Mr Spiro is confused about Rule 16. Judge: Can you subpoena JPMC? AUSA: We'd have to see if that complies with Rule 17. Judge to AUSA: Why don't *you* subpoena JPMC?
AUSA: We'll be getting it. Judge: We'll meet in 30 days. August 15 at 11 am. I'll sent a motion schedule at that time. Adjourned.
On July 27, the prosecutors wrote it to say they are unavailable on August 15, and that the Court said it would be available on September 20. But Javice will not consent to exclude Speedy Trial Act time until then. Letter on Patreon here.
On August 23, Inner City Press was there. Thread.
On September 26, Judge Hellerstein held a conference and ordered: "Briefing schedule: Deft's by 10/13; Govt's by 10/27; Hearing set for 11/2/23 at 2:30 p.m.; Time excluded until 11/2/23; in the interest of justice; Stat. conf. previously set for 10/24/23 is adjourned; Defts. cont'd. on bail."
On November 7 Judge Hellerstein set a trial date of October 15, 2024.
On November 10 - Veteran's Day - Javice's lawyers filed "On November 9, 2023, I served a subpoena to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“JPMC”), issued pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c) (the “JPMC Subpoena”), by email to Ms. Kristy Greenberg, partner at Hogan Lovells US LLP, and counsel for JPMC. 3. Also on November 9, 2023, Ms. Greenberg responded confirming that she was willing and authorized to accept service of the JPMC Subpoena by email on behalf of JPMC."
On August 6 there was a hearing, or a series of Judge Hellerstein rulings, on privilege claims. Inner City Press was there. Thread:
Judge Hellerstein: I will read and rule on these messages chronologically... Setting up a call, not privileged. Next, about options, it's advice, it's privileged... This one involves lawyers, but it is not advice. It is not privileged.
On August 20, Judge Hellerstein ordered: "ORDER as to Charlie Javice, Olivier Amar: The parties agree that by September 6, 2024, each defendant will give notice if he or she intends to present a defense based on advice of counsel. Each defendant is so-ordered. The parties dispute what such disclosure should include. The government argues that the "specific bases, and scope" of the defense should be provided, including: (a) which attorneys, if any, the defendants purportedly relied on; (b) the timing and substance of the alleged advice upon which the defendants relied; and (c) all documents (including attorney-client and attorney work product documents) currently in the defendants' possession, custody, or control that support or might impeach or undermine any such defense. ECF No. 148. Defendants state that they are "not able to comply with the full scope of the government's broad and unusual disclosure demand at this time." Id A disclosure is meaningless without content. Defendants, if they intend to present advice-of-counsel evidence or arguments at trial, shall identify the attorney or attorneys who gave the advice, when they gave the advice, and if oral, the substance of the advice, or, if written, the documents upon which defendants relied. Defendants state that they may be unable to disclose documents possessed by JPMC due to its assertion of the attorney--client privilege. Defendants shall identify any such documents and, if not produced by JPMC, file a motion to seek disclosure. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 8/20/2024)."
On September 23, the trial was pushed back to February 10, 2025, and then a conference, thread
now at US v Charlie Javice, she's laughing and chipper at defense table; JPM Chase's lawyers are at front table with the prosecutors. "I don't like that," says the clerk.
Judge: I held that half of the documents for which privilege was claimed were noy in fact privileges. JPM Chase's lawyer: The bznk is the 3d party victim, from whi h the defendants stole $150 million. This discovery is too burdensome
Javice lawyer: This began a year ago. Even things that against us give us context
Judge: Try to agree in an hour...
[They're back - in less than an hour] Judge: I order production... AUSA: Ok, motions in limine due Jan 13.
Judge: Fine... It's a 4 week trial. US v Hwang went 9 week, it had been expected to go 7..
On January 21, 2025 co-defendant (for now) Amar wrote it, two days before a conference: "As Ms. Javice noted in her severance motion papers, we are prepared to provide the Court—outside the presence of the Government and Ms. Javice and under seal—additional details regarding Mr. Amar’s anticipated antagonistic defense. ECF No. 185 at 2 n.2; ECF No. 219 at 3 n.1. If the Court determines that a declaration would be helpful in resolving the pending motion, we respectfully request that the Court order that it may be submitted ex parte and that it shall be maintained under seal, to avoid unfairly prejudicing Mr. Amar by previewing details of his anticipated defense to the Government or to Ms. Javice." Letter on Patreon here
This case is US v. Javice, et al., 23-cr-251 (Hellerstein)
***
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