The Weakest Of The Middle Seasons According To Criminal Minds Fans – Looper

On the Criminal Minds” subreddit, u/LordCoke-16 posted a poll asking users what the weakest seasons of the series were, with the choices including Season 7, Season 8, and Season 9. The latter season won the poll overwhelmingly with 121 of its 244 total votes. The race between Seasons 7 and 8 was a little more neck and neck, with the two seasons earning 58 votes and 65 votes, respectively. u/blackzapatos had one of the top-rated comments on the poll’s Reddit thread, writing, “I think season 4 is the best season, but the worst out of these, definitely 9.”

Interestingly enough, more than one user stated that Season 6 was actually the weakest of the show. For instance, u/mccabebabe admitted, “6 actually,” while u/MandaPandaLee voted for 9, but agreed with their fellow Redditor, writing, “I think 3 is probably my favourite, and 6 my least favourite. I chose 9 out of these three though.” 

Indeed, while fans had plenty of love to give for the earlier seasons of “Criminal Minds,” the consensus seemed to be that — among the options presented — Season 9 was by far the weakest of the CBS procedural’s middle seasons.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source link

The Most Serious Criminal Minds Character According To Fans – Looper

When asked which character they thought was the most serious, “Criminal Minds” fans on Reddit made their voices heard. User reyn-egade submitted a poll with Jason Gideon (Mandy Patinkin), Aaron Hotchner (Thomas Gibson), Will LaMontagne (Josh Stewart), and Leroy Jethro Gibbs (Mark Harmon) from “NCIS” as options and the results weren’t even close. LaMontagne got 19, Gibbs received 28, and Gideon notched a respectable 139 votes, but the big winner was Hotch, who received 451 out of 637 votes — good enough for 70% of respondents. 

In addition to voting, other users definitely had some thoughts on the matter. User GlitchingGecko called Gibbs” a complete hard-ass,” but pointed out that “as soon as he’s around a kid he turns into a marshmallow.” User Suitable_Emergency34 said they understood why Hotch came out on top, but wanted to point something out. “At least Hotch can joke around, or at least he did more often in season 1. Seeing that for the time the Gideon was there, I barely saw him smile or anything, I’d say he’s the most serious/stoic character.”

Adblock test (Why?)

Source link

The Theranos Trial: Elizabeth Holmes’s Defense Works to Undermine Central Prosecution Witness – The Wall Street Journal


Former Theranos lab director Adam Rosendorff appeared as a prosecution witness on Tuesday.

Photo: Vicki Behringer

SAN JOSE, Calif.—A lawyer for Theranos Inc. founder Elizabeth Holmes tried to undercut a key prosecution witness’s testimony Tuesday, as new clues emerged about her defense strategy of shifting blame to her former top deputy and ex-boyfriend.

Former Theranos lab director Adam Rosendorff testified Tuesday in Ms. Holmes’s criminal-fraud trial that every time the company fielded a physician complaint, every time quality control failed and every time test results fell out of appropriate ranges, “it raised serious and grave concerns…

SAN JOSE, Calif.—A lawyer for Theranos Inc. founder

Elizabeth Holmes
tried to undercut a key prosecution witness’s testimony Tuesday, as new clues emerged about her defense strategy of shifting blame to her former top deputy and ex-boyfriend.

Former Theranos lab director Adam Rosendorff testified Tuesday in Ms. Holmes’s criminal-fraud trial that every time the company fielded a physician complaint, every time quality control failed and every time test results fell out of appropriate ranges, “it raised serious and grave concerns for me about the accuracy of the testing process.” The concerns eventually led him to quit, he said.

Lance Wade,
an attorney for Ms. Holmes, took an aggressive stance during his cross-examination, pushing Dr. Rosendorff to say that he was coached by prosecutors on the answers he gave.

His voice rising, Mr. Wade asked whether during several preparation sessions with prosecutors and federal agents, Dr. Rosendorff went through the questions they intended to ask and the answers he planned to give.

“I was always instructed to be truthful and tell the truth,” Dr. Rosendorff responded.

Asked a second time, he responded, “I was merely instructed to tell the truth.”

Mr. Wade’s stance with Dr. Rosendorff differed substantially from his conciliatory tone during cross-examination of prosecution witnesses in previous weeks of Ms. Holmes’s trial. The 37-year-old Stanford University dropout is accused of 10 counts of wire fraud and two counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud for representations she made to investors and patients about Theranos’s finger-prick blood-testing technology.

So far, Ms. Holmes’s defense against allegations that she overstated Theranos’s capabilities has been limited to cross-examination and Mr. Wade’s opening remarks to jurors. Court filings partially unsealed Monday night offered hints about what her defense might look like when it is her turn to call witnesses to the stand—and potentially take the stand herself.

As the long-awaited trial of Theranos founder and former CEO Elizabeth Holmes gets underway, WSJ looks back at the scandal’s biggest milestones and speaks with legal reporter Sara Randazzo about what we can expect to see in the fraud trial. Photo Illustration: Adele Morgan/WSJ

The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition

The filings, unsealed in response to a motion by The Wall Street Journal’s publisher, Dow Jones & Co., show how she might position herself against Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, her former boyfriend and No. 2 at the company, who is accused of the same crimes. Both have pleaded not guilty.

Ms. Holmes’s lawyers have said in filings that she could argue that she and Mr. Balwani had an emotionally and physically abusive relationship that left her under his control during the period in which the government alleges the two blood-testing executives committed a massive fraud. Mr. Balwani’s lawyer has said that Mr. Balwani “unequivocally denies that he engaged in any abuse at any time.”

Ms. Holmes’s lawyers explained in a newly unsealed filing that “she deferred to and relied on what she perceived to be Mr. Balwani’s business acumen. She relied on Mr. Balwani to provide her with accurate information about the state of the company’s operations.”

Without conceding that any statement she made was actually false, her lawyers said that she can still argue that, “If Ms. Holmes in good faith believed that what she was saying was true because she relied on and deferred to Mr. Balwani, she did not commit wire fraud.”

Ms. Holmes met Mr. Balwani during a language-immersion trip to China when she was 18-years-old and he was 37, Ms. Holmes’s lawyer told jurors earlier in the trial. In his early years with the company, the executive used his personal wealth, gained from his work at an earlier tech startup, to help prop up Theranos.

Weeks of prosecution witnesses remain before Ms. Holmes’s lawyers can present their defense in full.

Dr. Rosendorff is the eighth witness to take the stand so far.

The former lab director testified that his concerns culminated in late 2014, when he decided to quit, days after Mr. Balwani discussed firing him in an email to Ms. Holmes that was shown to jurors Tuesday.

In the weeks leading up to his resignation, Dr. Rosendorff exchanged a series of heated emails with Mr. Balwani and others, including Ms. Holmes’s brother, Christian Holmes, a senior Theranos manager who fielded customer complaints.

When told by Mr. Holmes how to respond to a doctor who complained about cholesterol results, Dr. Rosendorff responded that he wouldn’t do it. “If you’re asking me to defend these values then the answer is no,” he said in a Nov. 14, 2014, email.

On Dr. Rosendorff’s last day of work, he testified, he met with Mr. Balwani and when the Theranos executive offered his hand Dr. Rosendorff declined to shake it.

Dr. Rosendorff testified that after he left Theranos, he spoke to two lawyers and to then-Wall Street Journal reporter

John Carreyrou
about his experience at the company. “I felt obligated from a moral and ethical perspective to alert the public,” he said.

The Wall Street Journal first reported on questions about Theranos’s technology in 2015, including that the company ran few tests on its proprietary finger-stick machines and instead used commercial blood analyzers that it sometimes modified.

Dr. Rosendorff said he spoke off the record to Mr. Carreyrou, and his name never appeared as a source in the Journal’s reporting. Mr. Carreyrou and a spokesman for the Journal declined to comment.

During cross-examination, Mr. Wade questioned Dr. Rosendorff about his legal obligations as lab director and whether he ever offered lab tests for patient use that weren’t accurate.

Dr. Rosendorff responded that no, whenever he was alerted that a test was inaccurate or unreliable, he ordered the lab to cease doing those tests.

Write to Sara Randazzo at sara.randazzo@wsj.com

Adblock test (Why?)

Source link

The Character Criminal Minds Fans Would Want To Be Interrogated By – Looper

Over 1,500 people responded to the Reddit poll, and with an astounding 575 votes, the clear winner is Spencer Reid, played by Matthew Gray Gubler. It’s an intriguing choice, especially as anyone who watches “Criminal Minds” knows how intelligent Reid is. The pilot episode tells us that he has an I.Q. of 187, and he’s become known throughout the show’s run for picking up on details everyone else notices. To have him interrogate you is basically inviting to get caught red-handed. But it would appear that most people have an ulterior motive for wanting to be in the same room as Reid. 

Based on comments throughout the thread, it appears most people will utilize any excuse to sit across from the dreamboat. Redditor u/Plz_dont_judge_me writes, “Yup, I’d let Reid slap some cuffs on me any day.” Meanwhile, M3lsM3lons gets even more graphic by stating, “Reid, with the hope that he’d manhandle me, Cat Adams style.”

It seems quite a few fans have the hots for Spencer Reid. Hopefully, the chance to look into those hazel eyes is worth any criminal charges that may come your way.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source link

Lawyer who compared R. Kelly to Martin Luther King couldn't convince jury – Reuters

Sept 27 (Reuters) – The late addition of a lawyer with experience handling high-profile clients wasn’t enough to help singer R. Kelly beat charges that he sexually abused women for decades.

Attorney Deveraux Cannick, who joined Kelly’s legal team just a few months before the long-awaited trial, argued in court that his accusers were former fans who became disgruntled after falling out of his favor, and that his sexual relationships were consensual. He made headlines for comparing Kelly to the slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. read more

A federal jury in Brooklyn on Monday convicted Kelly of sex trafficking, after prosecutors spent nearly six weeks making the case that the singer used his fame to exploit women and have sex with underage girls.

Outside the courthouse Monday, Cannick told reporters that the defense team was “disappointed” by the outcome and would explore options for an appeal. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday.

In June, Kelly fired two of his lawyers amid internal tension on his legal team. During a hearing, former Kelly defense attorney Steve Greenberg said he clashed with two other members of the defense team, who “can’t deal with stress.”

Cannick made his first appearance in the Kelly case on June 22, according to court filings.

He is part of five-attorney firm Aiello & Cannick, based in Queens. According to the firm’s website, his clients have included Saikou Diallo, the father of Amadou Diallo, who was shot 41 times by New York City police officers in 1999. He helped secure the state’s largest wrongful death settlement at the time.

Cannick, who early in his career worked in the Bronx County District Attorney’s office, specializes in criminal defense and civil rights cases. In 2019, he defended a man accused of kidnapping Chicago rapper Tekashi 6ix9ine, who Cannick claimed staged his own abduction in order to generate publicity. Cannick’s client was found guilty and sentenced to 24 years in prison.

Reporting by Karen Sloan;
Editing by David Bario, Noeleen Walder and Aurora Ellis

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source link

The Scandal On Criminal Minds You Didn't Know About – Looper

In April 2018, a former digital imaging technician for “Criminal Minds,” Tony Matulic, filed a complaint against ABC, which co-produced the series, and Entertainment Partners, the company that processed payroll for the show’s crew, with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, alleging that he was fired from the show after speaking out about the behavior of Greg St. Johns, the show’s director of photography, who, he says, repeatedly grabbed his rear end (via Variety).

Greg St. Johns would go on to be named over and over again in Variety’s interviews with 19 current or former “Criminal Minds” crew members, conducted following the filing of Matulic’s complaint. In October 2018, Variety released an exclusive report, detailing St. Johns’ repeated groping of male staffers’ bodies; a pattern of verbal abuse toward staffers; and backing from the Human Resources department and other executives who facilitated the firings of crew members who spoke out about the abuse St. Johns inflicted.

Following the Variety report, in July 2019, a former 2nd assistant cameraman, Todd Durboraw, filed a complaint of his own, suing St. Johns, as well as ABC, CBS, Entertainment Partners, and Warner Bros. (although this company is uninvolved in the production of “Criminal Minds”) for sexual harassment, assault, battery, and retaliation, citing offenses remarkably similar to those listed in the Matulic complaint (via The Hollywood Reporter).

Adblock test (Why?)

Source link

Kristin Henning on "Rage of Innocence," child overpolicing – Los Angeles Times

On the Shelf

The Rage of Innocence: How America Criminalizes Black Youth

Kristin Henning
Pantheon: 521 pages, $30

If you buy books linked on our site, The Times may earn a commission from Bookshop.org, whose fees support independent bookstores.

Kristin Henning used to think that the aggressive presence of heavily armed police in American schools was a reaction to the epidemic of school shootings. The timing was right: There were 9,400 “school resource officers” nationally in 1997, before Columbine; by 2016 there were at least 27,000.

But Henning, a lawyer in Washington, D.C., who has represented Black youth for a quarter-century, also knew cops tended to target and physically mistreat students of color; whatever profiling was going on, it had little to do with the demographics of school shooters. So she dug deeper and found a much earlier accelerator of police presence: integration.

“As we think about reform we need to understand the past,” Henning says. “We have to think hard about how we got here.”

Henning’s new book, “The Rage of Innocence: How America Criminalizes Black Youth,” blends history, data, anecdotes and adolescent brain science to lay out the case that when it comes to school policing, we have it exactly backward.

“The average person isn’t even cognizant of the implicit ways in which Black children are treated differently and criminalized,” she says. When a child is singled out this way, it can often become self-fulfilling: “It’s human nature to feel rejected and it starts a vicious cycle where you’ll distrust authority.” The result, she says, is “empirically supported by facts”: Overpolicing leads to an increase in crime.

Walter Mosley, Luis Rodriguez, the coiner of #BlackLivesMatter and others sketch a hopeful future for L.A. and the U.S. after George Floyd protests.

Even so, she argues that most criminal charges against Black youth are trumped up. “The vast majority — 80 percent or more — of crimes committed by children are non-serious crimes,” she says. “We could reduce law enforcement engagement with young people by 80 percent and we would all be fine, but people don’t believe that.”

Henning, who leads workshops for prosecutors, judges, defenders and others around racial justice and the legal system, spoke with The Times about the worst of the outrages and the glimmers of hope.

A book cover of "The Rage of Innocence"

(Alfred A. Knopf)

Do you find it surprising that you still must explain your humanity to your fellow Americans?

I am still shocked and outraged that people do not accept what is unequivocally true, which is that Black children are children too. We know more about the adolescent brain and adolescent psychology than ever before, yet we still don’t change. Adolescents all over the world engage in the same impulsive, peer-influenced, sensation-seeking behaviors that your own kids do and that you did as a kid. Yet we still see racial disparities in the ways we respond to normal behavior by Black children.

Was writing the book an upsetting experience?

On my computer are files going back for years, a collection of cases that were ridiculous, so it’s been in my heart and my gut for a long time. But then I forced myself to watch documentaries and interviews with mothers and fathers who have lost Black children, Trayvon Martin’s family, Tamir Rice’s, Mike Brown’s. Reliving those stories was so painful, I would have nightmares while writing; I was much more emotional than I ever thought I’d be.

Why is it important to understand the way puberty has started earlier for poor children, especially Black and brown children?

It’s about getting people to see a young person in that face as opposed to physical features of breasts or height or weight. There’s an intersection between the racial bias and adultification — you almost now have an excuse not to see them as children. Tamir Rice was big, but he was a child.

You spent a lot of time on the less extreme cases — and the lasting trauma of being constantly frisked or arrested.

The trauma portion was essential to include; the research on the impact of trauma on people of color but especially adolescents was mind-boggling. I see it when I talk to young people, but when you tie the research to it you see how it’s a much larger issue. There’s body camera footage from the police where officers walk into a neighborhood and four or five Black and brown kids will just lift their shirts to expose their waistband [to show they have no gun] without even being asked. That’s a state of trauma and that’s not known at all.

Salaam, one of the five convicted in 1989 for a crime they didn’t commit, collaborated with author Ibi Zoboi on the verse novel “Punching the Air.”

People are probably more aware of street harassment, but you devote a lot of time to the dangers of implicit bias deep inside schools.

School is supposed to be a safe space. Studies show it is even more embarrassing to get stopped by police in school than on the street, and it builds distrust of authority. The school system has become an extension of the criminal legal system. Principals become the wardens; teachers become the guards.

The strongest resistance to change comes from police unions. Does that frustrate you?

They’re the ones resistant to reform. It’s critically important in dealing with adolescents to reduce swagger. I’d want to ask officers, “How are you in an ego battle with a 13- year-old?” Kids haven’t yet learned to express themselves and sometimes they don’t even know what they’re feeling. We have to get officers to remember what they were like as teenager and say, “You’re the adult and you need to act like one.”

But you make the point that many officers don’t see them as children.

Part of my goal is to shift the narrative, to help people break that blind spot of bias, but it’s going to take work. I wish we could change minds and attitudes but sometimes you have to change the techniques first. Create minimal standards or requirements — like no use of force on adolescents, no weapons for officers in schools or on playgrounds. With ideas like that you can gradually better relationships.

Are there any signs of progress?

In 2000, the Supreme Court case of Illinois vs. Wardlow said that flight from the police is appropriately interpreted as consciousness of guilt. So if a teen has been stopped before or is just nervous and he runs, then the police has the right to presume them guilty of a crime. But since 2015, a number of state high courts have been slowly rolling back that decision.

The problems cannot be solved entirely by the law, but this is important. What seems like tinkering around the edges is opening the door to incredibly important conversations about the meaning of race and trauma in the law. If we have a law that prohibits police officers from asking a child to lift their shirt or to consent to a frisk, that might be one less child in the system. The cumulative effects of those little pieces have major impacts.

Advocates of police reform are upset about the delays in removing the LAPD from traffic enforcement. They fear their cause may lose steam.

Are you hopeful because of the changes you see or despairing because so many still need to be made?

I can’t let myself despair too much or the work becomes overwhelming. We have to work on saving one kid at a time, changing one state at a time, one law at a time. Keep your eye on the daily prize and hope that in the end it gets us closer to where we need to be. I don’t think in my lifetime I’ll see the kind of change we really need, but I think I will see the moral arc bending toward justice.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source link

Questionable Things We Ignore In Criminal Minds – Looper

Penelope Garcia and Derek Morgan flirt back and forth constantly as a gesture of friendship that often serves to lighten the mood against a backdrop of death and darkness. Fans tend to fall into one of two camps on the Garcia-Morgan flirtation spectrum — either they love it and they find it absolutely delightful or they see it as inappropriate and cringey. But even if you fall into the first category, it’s hard to believe that Garcia’s comments would be allowed to pass for long in any professional environment, especially the FBI.

Although both Morgan and Garcia frequently exchange sexy banter, Garcia’s language frequently crosses a line that would easily be seen as offensive or even threatening by a man. Her comments range from plausibly deniable (answering her phone, “Rainmaker. How wet do you want it?”) to outright asking Morgan, “If I figure it out, does it earn me a night of passionate lovemaking?”

In Season 9, Morgan and Garcia do get called out in a Human Resources seminar with a PowerPoint explaining that sexual harassment can look like “a conversation between two coworkers” that involves phrases like “Baby Girl,” “Chocolate Thunder,” “more cushion for the pushin’,” and “Where’s my big black twelve-pack?”

Garcia’s immediate response is embarrassment and frustration that someone blabbed, while Morgan is even less concerned, dismissing the event with a defiant, “So what? I am not about to change how I am with you because Bob in payroll doesn’t get the joke.”

Since write-ups for workplace behavior don’t seem to be a thing at the BAU, after easing up for an episode or two, the besties basically blow the whole thing off and get right back to the babygirling.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source link

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Announces Criminal And Civil Charges Against CEO Of Apparel Company For Engaging In Customs Fraud – Department of Justice

Audrey Strauss, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Peter C. Fitzhugh, the Special Agent in Charge of the New York Office of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations (“HSI”), and Marty Raybon, Acting Director, Field Operations, New York, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”), announced the filing of criminal and civil charges against GEORGE ILOULIAN, a/k/a “George Illulian,” the CEO of an apparel company located in New York, New York.  ILOULIAN was charged, in an indictment unsealed yesterday, with participating in a years-long scheme to defraud CBP by submitting invoices to CBP that falsely understated the true value of the goods his company imported into the United States, thereby evading the obligation to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in customs duties. 

ILOULIAN was arrested yesterday and presented before U.S. Magistrate Judge James L. Cott in Manhattan federal court.  The criminal case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Paul G. Gardephe.  In addition, a civil fraud lawsuit against ILOULIAN and his company, DELTA UNIFORMS, INC. (“DELTA”), which is also assigned to Judge Gardephe, was unsealed in Manhattan federal court earlier today.  The civil complaint asserts that ILOULIAN and DELTA violated the False Claims Act by misrepresenting the true value and nature of the goods they imported into the United States on entry documents submitted to CBP.  The conduct in this matter was first brought to the attention of federal law enforcement by a whistleblower who filed a lawsuit under the False Claims Act.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss said: “As alleged, George Iloulian cheated the United States out of hundreds of thousands of dollars by causing false documents that misrepresented the value of imported goods to be submitted to CBP to avoid paying lawfully owed customs duties.  Iloulian now faces criminal charges for his alleged fraud, and the government’s civil suit seeks treble damages and penalties against Iloulian and his company.”

HSI Special Agent in Charge Peter C. Fitzhugh said: “Iloulian allegedly evaded the obligation to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in customs duties using a double-invoicing scheme, essentially creating two invoices, one for payment and one for customs.  HSI New York and U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to partner in protecting U.S. trade from perpetrators who intentionally defraud the U.S. government for a profit.”

CBP Acting Director of New York Field Operations Marty Raybon said: “U.S. Customs and Border Protection is proud to have played an important role to this ongoing investigation that resulted in the takedown of an elaborate conspiracy to defraud the United States of hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue.  This case serves as a great example of collaborative law enforcement efforts to uncover and dismantle nefarious enterprises that seek to defraud the United States government for personal gain while causing economic harm to their competitors.” 

According to the allegations in the Government’s indictment and civil complaint[1]:

From at least in or about 2010 through at least in or about 2020, ILOULIAN, and others known and unknown, including individuals associated with overseas manufacturers, conspired to submit fraudulent invoices to CBP that understated the value of apparel imported into the United States, thereby depriving the United States of hundreds of thousands of dollars in customs duty revenue.  ILOULIAN and his co-conspirators achieved lower customs duties on imported goods in two ways: (i) a “double-invoicing scheme,” and (ii) a “fabric-type scheme.”

To effect the double-invoicing scheme, which was perpetrated by ILOULIAN and his co-conspirators from at least in or about 2010 through at least in or about 2020, ILOULIAN utilized two invoices: One invoice, at times referred to by ILOULIAN and his co-conspirators as the “Actual Invoice” or the “For Payment” invoice, contained higher prices and reflected what DELTA actually paid overseas manufacturers for apparel.  The second invoice, which they at times referred to as the “Customs Invoice” or “For Customs Declaration” invoice, contained false lower prices.  The information in the Customs Invoice was submitted by DELTA, through a customs broker (the “Customs Broker”), to CBP.  CBP relied on the information from the Customs Invoice in assessing and collecting customs duties from DELTA.  Accordingly, by presenting the false Customs Invoices to CBP, DELTA was able to pay fraudulently lower customs duties than DELTA actually owed.  In one version of the double-invoicing scheme, DELTA directed an overseas manufacturer to send to DELTA two sets of invoices for the same shipment of merchandise, the Actual Invoice and the Customs Invoice.  In a second version of the double-invoicing scheme, the overseas manufacturer provided DELTA with only the Actual Invoice; a Customs Invoice was created by other means and provided by DELTA to the Customs Broker.

From at least in or about 2011 through at least in or about 2016, ILOULIAN and his co-conspirators also engaged in a fabric-type scheme.  To effect the fabric-type scheme, DELTA directed an overseas manufacturer to misstate the composition of the fabric in the apparel in order to obtain a lower duty rate.  Specifically, the invoice would indicate that the imported goods were predominantly made of cotton rather than from man-made fibers, even though the reverse was true.  The falsified invoices were then presented to CBP, which allowed DELTA to pay lower customs duties than DELTA actually owed, because materials containing more cotton than man-made materials are subject to lower duty rates.

These multi-year fraud schemes resulted in the loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars in duty revenue to the United States.

*                      *                      *

ILOULIAN is charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, one count of wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, and one count of falsely effecting the entry of goods into the United States, which carries a maximum sentence of two years.  The maximum potential sentences in this case are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendant will be determined by the judge.  ILOULIAN and DELTA are also charged with civil claims under the False Claims Act, through which the Government may recover treble damages and civil penalties arising from his conduct.

Ms. Strauss thanked HSI, CBP, and the Special Agents of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York for their efforts and ongoing support and assistance with the case.

The criminal case is being handled by the Office’s General Crimes Unit, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Kaylan E. Lasky is in charge of the prosecution.

The civil case is being handled by the Office’s Civil Frauds Unit, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Dominika Tarczynska is in charge of the matter.

The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

 


[1] As the introductory phrase signifies, the entirety of the texts of the indictment and the civil complaint, and the descriptions of the indictment and civil complaint set forth herein, constitute only allegations, and every fact described should be treated as an allegation.

Adblock test (Why?)

Source link