12/23/21, 7:58 PM In SDNY Ahuja and Shor Case Now Motion to Dismiss Indictment or For A New Trial

In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE,

FP, Georgia,
NYT,  Azerbaijan,
CSM Click here
to contact
us     .

These reports are usually

available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis

, Share |    Tweet

Follow
on TWITTER


In SDNY Ahuja and Shor Case Now
Motion to
Home
-
Dismiss Indictment or For A New
Trial
By Matthew
Russell Lee Scope
Photo
Patreon
SDNY
COURTHOUSE,  April 4 – In
the US
prosecution of Premium
Point
Investments
These
reports are usually available
through

Google News and on

Lexis-Nexis
hedge funders
Anilesh Ahuja
and Jeremy
Shor,
the
government
doggedly tried
to show the
jury
CONTRIBUTE
the
so-called
sector spread
and mid-bid
mis-
(FP
Twitterati 100, 2013)
marking
scams by which
the two
defendants
ICP on YouTube allegedly
overvalued
their
portfolios.
More:
InnerCityPro  
Apparently
it worked. But
now in
April? On
April 2, the
defendants
filed a memo
in support
of
their motion to
dismiss the
indictment or
for
a new
trial, beginning:
"The
circumstances
that
have led
to the filing
of this motion
are
extraordinary.
It has taken
Rule 17(c)
subpoenas and
a post-trial
FOIA request
to
BloggingHeads.tv
unearth
documents that
were in the
Sept
24, 2013 prosecutors’
possession and
indisputably
Follow @FUNCA_info
should have
been disclosed
to the defense
before trial.
Those
documents,
which never
UN: Sri Lanka

would have
seen the light
of day if the
VoA: NYCLU defendants had
not resorted
to these

FOIA
Finds  
extraordinary
forms of
“self-help,”
demonstrate
beyond any
reasonable
dispute
Google,
Asked at UN that
the
government:
failed to
disclose Brady
About Censorship,
Moved to
Censor the and Giglio
material
before,
during, and
after
Questioner, Sources Say, trial;
provided
assurances to
the Court that
it
Blaming UN - Update -
Editorial had
conducted
specific
searches of
its
Support this work by communications
when in fact
the government
buying this book either did not
conduct those
searches or
was
careless
in doing so;
and made
representations,
in response to
questions from
the Court (and
on which the
Court
expressly
relied) that
were
both
incomplete and
incorrect. If
the
prosecutors
had conducted
even the
slightest
inquiry to
confirm the
accuracy of
those
www.innercitypress.com/sdny25ahuja040421.html 1/6
12/23/21, 7:58 PM In SDNY Ahuja and Shor Case Now Motion to Dismiss Indictment or For A New Trial
Click
on cover for secure
site orders
representations,
it would have
been apparent
to
them that
those
representations
were not
"Toxic
Credit in the
also includes
Global Inner City"
accurate. Even
if
unintentional
and lacking in
  bad faith, the
government’s
reckless
  indifference
to the
defendants’
rights
 
prejudiced the
defendants and
warrants

dismissal of
the Indictment
or, at a
minimum, a
Community new
trial." Full
memo on Patreon
here.
We'll
Reinvestment
have more on
this.
Bank
Beat
Freedom
of Information  On
September
28, 2020, the
US Attorney's
  Office asked to
postpone Amin
Majidi's
How
to Contact Us sentencing for
at least three
months
due to the
"post-trial
litigation"
- "Re: United
States v.
Amin
Majidi, 18 Cr.
328 (KPF) Dear
Judge
Failla:
The Government
respectfully
writes to
request that
the date for
Amin Majidi’s
sentencing,
which is
currently
scheduled for
October 6,
2020, be
adjourned...
in order to
defer the
sentencing
until after
the completion
of the
post-trial
litigation
currently
pending in
this Court.
Counsel for
Mr. Majidi
consents to
this request.
Respectfully
submitted,
AUDREY
STRAUSS
Attorney for
the United
States
Acting
Under
Authority
Conferred by
28
U.S.C. §
515."
 Now
on September
29, Majidi's
sentencing
has
been pushed
all the way
back to
February
10:
"MEMO
ENDORSEMENT as
to Amin
Majidi
granting [407]
CONSENT LETTER
MOTION
addressed to
Judge
Katherine Polk
Failla from
Max Nicholas
dated
September 28,
2020 re:
Adjournment of
Sentencing.
ENDORSEMENT:
Application
GRANTED.
The
sentencing for
defendant Amin
Majidi,
previously
scheduled for
October 6,
2020, is
hereby
ADJOURNED to
February 10,
2021, at
3:00
p.m. in
Courtroom 618
of the
Thurgood
Marshall
Courthouse, 40
Foley Square,
New
York, NY.
SO ORDERED."
 
On August
5, the Second
Circuit granted a
motion to hold
the appeals of Neil
Ahuja and
Jeremy Shor in
abeyance pending
Judge
Failla's
inquiry.
Shor's counsel
Justin Weddle
filed that
with Judge Failla
asking to
postpone
surrender
until the
later of
January 4,
2021 or
90
days after any
motions Shor
makes after
the
fact
finding process.

www.innercitypress.com/sdny25ahuja040421.html 2/6
12/23/21, 7:58 PM In SDNY Ahuja and Shor Case Now Motion to Dismiss Indictment or For A New Trial

 On
July 24, Judge
Failla held a
proceeding.
Inner City
Press live
tweeted it, below.
 Now
on August
4, from Judge
Failla, this:
"The Court is
in receipt of
the
Government's
July 31, 2020
letter (Dkt.
#393), and
Ahuja's
and
Shor's 
letter (Dkt.
#395). The
Court
resolves
the parties'
dispute as
follows: (i)
the
Government
is ORDERED to
expand its
search to
include the
time period of
June 10,
2020
to June 19,
2020, as
requested by
Ahuja
and
Shor; (ii) the
Government is
ORDERED to
produce
documents
identified
during its
review
that
reflect any
suggestion,
instruction,
direction or
preference
that any
communication
not be sent by
email or
otherwise put
in
writing,
that a
communication
take place
in-
person or
by telephone,
or that a
method of
communication
other than
email be used;
and
(iii)
Ahuja's and
Shor's request
for the
Government to
review
internal
communications
from June 3
2019 to June
11,
2019 is
DENIED, as the
Government's
granular
searches
outlined in
pages 1-3 of
its
July 31,
2020 letter
should produce
any
relevant
documents from
this time
period. SO
ORDERED.
(Signed by
Judge
Katherine Polk
Failla on
8/4/2020)."

From
July 24: Before
Judge Failla,
a push to
get
the type of US
Attorney's
Office
internal
chats
that "recently
came up in a
case before
Judge Nathan"
- that is, US
v. Nejad, here..

Judge
Failla began
this
proceeding by
disclosing
having run
into lawyers
in the case,
since the
trial, at a
cocktail party
by Preet
Bharara 
- and wants
full answers
Judge
Failla said
the US
Attorney's
Office's
approach to
this inquiry
has been
"interative."
She asks them
to give a
complete
answer: what
happened in
this case?
Urges that
none of the
cooperators be
sentenced
until this
inquiry is
finished. US
seems to
agree.
 Defense
lawyer: Your
Honor should
order the
government to
go back and
review the
whole
file,
for all Brady
& Giglio -
their
representations
so far, we
can't rely on.
"There
was a
deliberate
effort to not
put things in
emails in
order to not
have to
disclose them"

www.innercitypress.com/sdny25ahuja040421.html 3/6
12/23/21, 7:58 PM In SDNY Ahuja and Shor Case Now Motion to Dismiss Indictment or For A New Trial

Defense
lawyer: It is
clear that
each of the
cooperators
allocutions
were shaped by
the US
Attorney -
with no
written record
of it. An
edited
document was
created, then
instead of
e-
mailing
there is a
phone call to
discuss the
changes. So
what else is
there?
 AUSA:
It's unfair to
say we don't
know what
Brady and
Giglio are.
[That's not
what's being
said.]
 Judge
Failla: I want
to see
whatever comes
to
me in this
matter. Then
I'll decide on
more.
Back
on July 16,
the US
Attorney's
Office
informed Judge
Failla
that they will collect
and
release
all records
related to a
November 26,
2019 FOIA
request,
including "any
emails, text
messages,
internal chats
and
voicemails...The
Government
plans
to use the
search term
'FOIA' to
conduct this
search." We'll
have more
on
this.
Back on
June 21, the day
after a legal
reality
show
surrounding
SDNY US Attorney
Geoffrey
Berman and the
office, Inner
City
Press
reported that
only days
before that
Office, after
the Ali Sadr Hashemi
Nejad
"errors,"
admitted
others in Ahuja and
Shor:
"Re:
United States
v. Anilesh
Ahuja, et al.
S1
18 Cr. 328
(KPF) Dear
Judge Failla:
The
Government
respectfully
writes to
advise the
Court and the
parties that
certain
representations
it made to the
Court during
trial
about
the
Government’s
communications
with
counsel
for
cooperating
witness Amin
Majidi
prior
to Majidi’s
guilty plea
were wrong.
While
the
Government’s
communications
with
Majidi’s
counsel were
entirely
proper, its
recounting of
those
communications
to the
Court
was partly
inaccurate. 1
During trial,
the
Government
produced to
defense
counsel a
draft
allocution
that Majidi’s
counsel had
sent
to the
Government in
advance of
Majidi’s plea
proceeding
(the “Draft
Allocution”).
The Draft
Allocution
differed from
the allocution
that
Majidi
gave (the
“Final
Allocution”).
The
Court made
clear that
draft
allocutions
received from
counsel for
cooperating
witnesses
should have
been produced
to the
www.innercitypress.com/sdny25ahuja040421.html 4/6
12/23/21, 7:58 PM In SDNY Ahuja and Shor Case Now Motion to Dismiss Indictment or For A New Trial

defense
earlier,
pursuant to
United States
v.
Triumph
Capital Group,
Inc., 544 F.3d
149 (2d
Cir.
2008), and
directed the
Government to
review its
attorney
communications
in this case
for any
additional
materials that
should be
produced to
the defense
pursuant to
Triumph
Capital. (Tr.
479)."
 On June
24, the SDNY
US Attorney's
Office
now
under Audrey Strauss
wrote that
"the
Government
agrees to
undertake a
search of
internal
emails
(including
calendar
invites), as
well as
internal paper
and electronic
files, for
certain
materials that
would be
responsive to
this request.
Specifically,
the
prosecutors on
the trial team
are searching
all of their
internal
emails
beginning two
days prior to
the plea
proceedings
for Majidi and
cooperating
witnesses
Frank Dinucci
and Ashish
Dole, up
to
and including
the date of
those plea
proceedings,1
for any
materials
responsive to
the request in
the Shor
Letter (i.e.
“internal or
external
communications
regarding the
substance or
content of any
draft,
proposed, or
actual plea
allocution
relating to
the scheme
alleged in
this case; any
meetings
regarding
cooperator
allocutions in
this case; and
all
versions
of any draft,
proposed, or
actual plea
allocutions
relating to
the scheme
alleged in
this case”
(see Shor
Letter at 8)),
notwithstanding
whether such
materials were
ever
communicated
to outside
counsel or
would be
discoverable
pursuant to
Triumph
Capital,
Brady, Giglio,
or on any
other legal
basis. The
Government
will produce
any
relevant
materials
resulting from
this search by
June 26, 2020.
The Government
believes that
searching for
and producing
to the Court
and
the
parties
internal
communications
of this
kind
is appropriate
in light of
the specific
facts
of this
case; namely,
the mistakes
described in
the Government
Letter,
irrespective
of whether
such
communications
are
discoverable
or can
be used
in any way by
either
defendant.
However, the
Government
does not
believe
that
this search
should be
required to
include
phone
logs, as
requested in
the Shor
Letter. To
the
extent they
are
maintained,
phone logs
would not
reflect the
substance of
actual
conversations,
and expanding
the search to

www.innercitypress.com/sdny25ahuja040421.html 5/6
12/23/21, 7:58 PM In SDNY Ahuja and Shor Case Now Motion to Dismiss Indictment or For A New Trial

include them
is not
warranted." Will
Judge
Failla,
like Judge
Nathan, ask
who is
responsible?
 
Back on
July 11
the jury found
both Ahuja
and
Shor guilty.
This came
after, on the
4th of
July, Judge
Katherine Polk
Failla denied
Shor's
bid
to introduce
into evidence
portions of
the
FBI Form
302 interview
with
James Nimberg.
Or maybe it
was the text
message,
introduced
into evidence,
in which Shor told
Ashisha Dole
and
cooperating
witness
Majidi, "I’m
done
giving
frank a BJ.
Sorry to be
crass boss.
Back
in 3."
 
  
We'll have
more on this.
***

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

Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold

Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends):

718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are

listed here,
and some are
available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2019 Inner City

Press, Inc. To request reprint
or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
for

www.innercitypress.com/sdny25ahuja040421.html 6/6