Epstein Secrets

SDNY News Clips Wednesday, July 31, 2019 Contents Public Corruption. 2 Epstein. 2 Collins. 18 Securities and Commodities Fraud. 20 Stewart 20 Thompson. 22 Pinto-Thomaz. 24 Narcotics. 26 Castro. 26 Rochester Drug Company. 28 Civil 30 Life Spine. 30 Matters of Interest 32 The U.S. said a Calif

bes By Walter Pavlo 7/30/19 Sean Stewart was indicted on insider trading charges back in May 2015 during U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara's reign over the Southern District of New York. Now, over four years since his indictment, Sean can reflect back on a wild journey of being convicted, sentenced to 3 years prison, having that con

ch included a cryptocurrency escrow company called Volantis Escrow Platform LLC and a related company, Volantis Market Making LCC. The 48-year-old Thompson was arrested in Easton, and was charged with two counts each of commodities fraud and wire fraud. Easton police assisted in serving the arrest warra

rials with the threat of putting people in prison for years. It is a waste of resources. It looks like the ghost of Bharara still haunts the SDNY. Thompson Easton man accused of stealing $7M via fake Bitcoin transactions Lehigh Valley Live By Sarah Cassi 7/30/19 An Easton man who headed a cryptocurr

ources. It looks like the ghost of Bharara still haunts the SDNY. 20 EFTA00018485 --- PAGE BREAK --- SDNY News Clips, Wednesday, July 31, 2019 Thompson Easton man accused of stealing $7M via fake Bitcoin transactions Lehigh Valley Live By Sarah Cassi 7/30/19 An Easton man who headed a cryptocurr

In that case, the plaintiff withdrew the complaint it had brought in federal court in Pennsylvania and, instead, reached a private settlement with Thompson. Thompson then breached the agreement by failing to make the first settlement payment, Forbes reported. 22 EFTA00018487 --- PAGE BREAK --- SDNY

racy." In April of this year, criminal charges were brought against Rochester Drug Co-operative. Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and Ray Donovan, the Special Agent in Charge of the New York Division of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), announced the charges. Ro

ons. The Court disagrees for two independent reasons. First, under controlling Second Circuit precedent, the NPA does not bind the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Second, it does not cover the offenses charged in the S1 superseding indictment. 3 EFTA00020263 --- PAGE BREAK --- Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN

PAGE BREAK --- Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 4 of 34 A. The non-prosecution agreement does not bind the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York United States Attorneys speak for the United States. When a U.S. Attorney makes a promise as part of a plea bargain, both contract principles and d

nce and to bring to the Court's attention any issues that require resolution before trial. "This is all that Rule 404(b) requires." United States v. Thompson, No. 13-cr-378 (AJN), 2013 WL 6246489, at *9 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 3, 2013). The Court concludes this schedule is generally reasonable, although additiona

ons. The Court disagrees for two independent reasons. First, under controlling Second Circuit precedent, the NPA does not bind the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Second, it does not cover the offenses charged in the S1 superseding indictment. 3 EFTA00022093 --- PAGE BREAK --- Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN

PAGE BREAK --- Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 207 Filed 04/16/21 Page 4 of 34 A. The non-prosecution agreement does not bind the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York United States Attorneys speak for the United States. When a U.S. Attorney makes a promise as part of a plea bargain, both contract principles and d

nce and to bring to the Court's attention any issues that require resolution before trial. "This is all that Rule 404(b) requires." United States v. Thompson, No. 13-cr-378 (AJN), 2013 WL 6246489, at *9 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 3, 2013). The Court concludes this schedule is generally reasonable, although additiona

ons. The Court disagrees for two independent reasons. First, under controlling Second Circuit precedent, the NPA does not bind the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Second, it does not cover the offenses charged in the S1 superseding indictment. 3 EFTA00029542 --- PAGE BREAK --- Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN

PAGE BREAK --- Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 208 Filed 04/16/21 Page 4 of 34 A. The non-prosecution agreement does not bind the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York United States Attorneys speak for the United States. When a U.S. Attorney makes a promise as part of a plea bargain, both contract principles and d

nce and to bring to the Court's attention any issues that require resolution before trial. "This is all that Rule 404(b) requires." United States v. Thompson, No. 13-cr-378 (MN), 2013 WL 6246489, at *9 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 3, 2013). The Court concludes this schedule is generally reasonable, although additional