Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 1 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 51 15 Cr. 867 (RMB) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - against REZA ZARRAB Defendant. BAIL APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF REZA ZARRAB BRAFMAN ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: Benjamin Brafman, Esq. Marc Agnifilo, Esq. Joshua D. Kirshner, Esq. Attorneys for Reza Zarrab 767 3"d Avenue, 26th FL New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 750-7800 Fax: (212) 750-3906 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 2 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK S1 15 Cr. 867 (RMB) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -against- REZA ZARRAB, Defendant. Preliminary Statement We write on behalf of our client, REZA ZARRAB, in the above-referenced case, to request a hearing before this Court at Your Honor?s earliest convenience to determine the conditions of Bail necessary to assure Mr. Zarrab?s appearance in court.1 Introduction and Proposed Conditions of Release As this Court noted at the arraignment in this matter, Mr. Zarrab is presumed to be innocent. The law is clear that prior to a conviction, ?liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception." United States v. Sam, 481 US. 739, 755 (1987). Moreover, in deciding a Bail issue pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3142, the ?court should bear in mind that it is only a limited group of offenders who should be denied Bail pending trial.? United States v. Shakur, 817 F.2d 189, 195 1 There is no reason to suggest that Mr. Zarrab is a danger to the community in any way. Mr. Zarrab does not have a criminal record and is only charged with assisting in money transmissions that allegedly constitute criminal violations, therefore, this letter focuses on the conditions necessary to assure Mr. Zarrab?s appearance in this Court when required. Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 3 of 22 (2d Cir. 1987). Indeed, the Bail Reform Act requires that the Court impose ?the least or combination of conditions, will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of the community.? 18 U.S.C. 3142(c)(1)(B). Nor do the facts of this case trigger either of the rebuttable presumptions of detention.2 Therefore, the burden of establishing that there are no appropriate conditions of release falls squarely on the Government based on the factors set forth in the Bail Reform Act that we review below. With those legal principles in mind, counsel is prepared to offer the following conditions3 that, we respectfully submit, are more than sufficient to reasonably assure Mr. Zarrab?s appearance during the pendency of this case: . A $50 million personal recognizance bond secured by $10 million in cash; . Travel restricted to the Southern District of New York; . Surrender of all travel documents4 with no new applications; - Strict Pretrial Services Supervision; . Home detention with GPS monitoring at Mr. Zarrab?s residence in Manhattan (Mr. Zarrab may only leave his residence for medical treatment, counsel meetings, religious services, and court appearances? all with prior notification to Pretrial Services); and . Mr. Zarrab?s presence at his residence5 is to be secured by the Guidepost Solutions LLC6 security company ("Guidepost?) with the following provisions: 0 24-hour armed former or off-duty law enforcement officers; 0 Two officers per shift; 2 As this Court is aware, the Bail Reform Act provides for a rebuttable presumption of detention for cases fitting only two categories one where the defendant is charged with certain firearms or drug offenses; and a second where the defendant has certain prior convictions. As noted, neither applies here. 3 These conditions were provided to the government in an effort to reach an agreement as to Bail, but, ultimately, the government indicated that there are no conditions to which it would agree. 4 In addition to his Turkish and Iranian travel documents, Mr. Zarrab has also voluntarily surrendered his Macedonian passport. 5 In the event that ball is granted, Mr. Zarrab has entered into a lease for an apartment that has already been inspected and approved by Guidepost. Also, Guidepost has already started installing security cameras throughout the residence. 6 Guidepost is run by Bart Schwartz, the former Chief of the Criminal Division of the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. It is widely recognized as the preeminent provider of pretrial security solutions. Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 4 of 22 0 One supervisory security professional overseeing and scheduling the security detail; 0 Security both at the residence and whenever Mr. Zarrab leaves the building pursuant to Bail conditions; 0 Guidepost will also provide, as needed, a security vehicle with driver, when Mr. Zarrab must travel to counsel?s office, court, religious services, or medical treatment; and Guidepost agrees to communicate with Pretrial Services, the Court, and/or the US. Attorney?s Office, as required by the Coun. Background Reza Zarrab is 33 years old and a citizen of Turkey. He lives in Istanbul with his wife, Ebru GUndes Sarraf, who is a famous singer and television personality, and their five-year?old daughter. In Turkey, he is a respected businessman who is devoted to his family and philanthropic causes. Many of the important charitable causes that he supports are detailed in this application. On December 15, 2015, an indictment was filed under seal charging him and his co-defendants with non-violent financial crimes. Mr. Zarrab was arrested on March 21, 2016 at Miami International Airport as he voluntarily entered the United States with his wife and daughter to visit Miami and subsequently Disney World. Mr. Zarrab was detained immediately and spent 22 days in the Federal Detention Center in Miami, Florida. He was then transported to Tallahassee, Atlanta and Oklahoma City before arriving in this District on April 26, 2016. No prior application for Bail has been made. The Indictment Reza Zarrab is one of three defendants charged in a four-count indictment alleging violations of US. Sanctions against Iran, Bank Fraud, Conspiracy, and Money Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 5 of 22 Laundering. For purposes of this application, Mr. Zarrab concedes that the Indictment includes serious felony charges a fact which, however, does not distinguish it from almost all of the federal felony indictments brought in this District. Notably, however, the Indictment includes only allegations of financial crimes. There are no allegations of violence or potential violence in the indictment and, as noted, none of the charges creates any presumptions of detention under the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. 3142(f)(1), or is othenNise identified in the Act as the sort of crime for which bail should be denied, see 18 U.S.C. 3142(g)(1). The Legal Standards and Authority A. The Bail Reform Act The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution provides: ?Excessive bail shall not be required.? US. Const. amend ?Unless this right to bail before trial is preserved, the presumption of innocence, secured only after centuries of struggle, would lose its meaning.? Stack v. Boyle, 342 US. 1, 4 (1951). Consistent with these fundamental principles, the Bail Reform Act of 1984 ?requires a court to order the pre-trial release of a defendant on a personal recognizance bond ?unless the [court] determines that such release will not reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required or will endanger the safety of any other person or the community.? United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63, 75 (2d Cir. 2007) (quoting 18 U.S.C. 3142(b)). Even the court determines that a defendant's release on an unsecured bond presents a risk of flight, the law still favors pre-trial release ?subject to the least restrictive further condition, or combination of conditions, that [the court] determines will reasonably assure the Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 6 of 22 appearance of the person as required.? (quoting 18 U.S.C. Thus, a court may not order pretrial detention unless it finds ?that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person? at trial. 18 U.S.C. 3142(e). As the Second Circuit has repeatedly recognized, ?[u]nder this statutory scheme, ?it is only a limited group of offenders who should be denied bail pending trial.? Sabhnani, 493 F.3d at 75 (quoting SM, 817 F.2d at 195) (quotation marks omitted). ?Because the law thus generally favors bail release, the government carries a dual burden in seeking pre?trial detention.? First, it must establish by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant would present an actual risk of flight. lg, If the government satisfies this burden, it ?must then demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that no condition or combination of conditions could be imposed on the defendant that would reasonably assure his presence in court.? (citing m, 817 F.2d at 195). The Ball Reform Act lists thirteen categories of conditions that may be imposed to minimize the risk of flight, plus a catch-all category of ?any other condition that is reasonably necessary? to satisfy the aforementioned joint objectives of bail. 18 U.S.C. 3142(c)(1)(B)(xiv). B. Bail Condition of Home Detention with 24-Hour Armed Security The Second Circuit and otherjudges in this District and in the Eastern District of New York have repeatedly agreed that a defendant?s willingness to submit to home detention policed by 24-hour armed security guards will substantially mitigate any risk of flight. See, Sabhnani, 493 F.3d at 77. In the hope of reaching an agreement with the government, we informed the prosecutors assigned to this case that our Bail proposal would include the conditions that Mr. Zarrab be subject to home detention with Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 7 of 22 electronic GPS monitoring by Pretrial Services and 24-hour physical surveillance by armed security guards. The government rejected our proposal as inadequate, a position that is inexplicably at odds with the government?s accession to similar conditions in the Bernard Madoff matter. See United States v. Madoff, 586 F. Supp. 2d 240, 244 n.3 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (noting that the Government ?submitted the jointly proposed Bail condition modifications,? which included that the condition that Madoff employ a security firm, at his wife?s expense, to provide 24-hour monitoring of Madoff?s building and video monitoring of his apartment doors). In seeking detention, the government may argue that releasing Mr. Zarrab on these conditions would be inappropriate because it would allow a wealthy defendant to be released on the condition that he pay for a private jail. This argument should not fare any better here than in the other courts that have rejected it. Judge Jed Rakoff of this District specifically rejected the government?s argument that private security guards impermissibly favored the wealthy: It cannot be gainsaid that many kinds of bail conditions favor the rich, and, conversely, that there are many defendants who are too poor to afford even the most modest of bail bonds or financial conditions of release. This is a serious flaw in our system. But it is not a reason to deny a constitutional right to someone who, for whatever reason, can provide reasonable assurances against flight. United States v. Dreier, 596 F. Supp. 2d 831, 833 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). Tellingly, the same Bail conditions we offer were also approved by other federal judges in New York, including Judge Seybert in the David H. Brooks case (E.D.N.Y. Case 06 Cr. 550) and recently by Judge Scanlon in the FIFA bribery case for the defendant Jeffrey Webb (E.D.N.Y. Case 15 Cr. 252), a non-United States citizen, and, as we more fully Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 8 of 22 discuss ME. by both District Judge Vernon Broderick and Magistrate Judge Fox in the UN. Bribery case, where the defendant Ng Lap Seng, also a non-United States citizen, was granted Bail with similar conditions. Although not specifically resolving the issue, the Second Circuit has aptly pointed out that the government?s argument fails to consider that some wealthy defendants would have been initially granted Bail if they were not as wealthy. See United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) (?The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be ?contrary to principles of detention and release on Bail? to allow wealthy defendants ?to buy their way out by constructing a private The government cannot logically argue that wealth increases the risk of flight at the same time that wealth should not be used to justify bail conditions; the government cannot have it both ways. Even in United States v. Cilins, No. 13 Cr. 315 (WHP), 2013 WL 3802012 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2013), where the District Court rejected the armed guard condition, Judge William H. Pauley acknowledged that ?other judges in this district have found that an armed security guard may be sufficient to assure a defendant?s appearance, even when he is a serious risk of flight.? In all events, is readily distinguishable. First, the charged conduct there involved obstruction of investigative and criminal processes. The defendant there, a French citizen, was charged with three counts of witness tampering, one count of obstructing a criminal investigation, and one count of destroying, altering, falsifying records in a federal investigation. at ?According to the Government, each offense obstructed a federal investigation into the conduct of Cilins and his associates." Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 9 of 22 Id. at Second, the alleged misconduct was ongoing: ?when Cilins was arrested after his last meeting with the cooperating witness, he had $20,000 in cash on his person.? Id. Here, in contrast, the government does not contend that Mr. Zarrab?s alleged misconduct is ongoing. Third, the court relied on the fact that ?France refuses to extradite its citizens,? which meant that ?Cilins can avoid prosecution on this Indictment if he can reach French soil.? Id. Turkey, by contrast, has an extradition treaty with the United States and recently complied with a US. request for extradition of a high?profile hacking suspect. See DOJ Press Release, Man Pleads Guilty to Facilitating Computer Hacking of Vermont Company (Dec. 2, 2015).7 Finally, the court emphasized that Cilins had repeatedly evaded the government?s attempts to accurately assess the scope of his assets, leading the court to conclude that Cilins?s ?lack of candor adds to the risk of flight and buttresses this Court's conclusion that nothing short of detention can reasonably assure Cilins's appearance at trial.? 2013 WL 3802012, at Mr. Zarrab, in contrast, has been forthright with this Court throughout these proceedings.8 C. Recent Precedent in This District Supports Bail With 24-Hour Home Detention and 24-Hour Armed Security Directly supporting defendants? application for granting Bail with the condition, amongst others, of home detention with 24-hour armed security, is Judge Vernon Broderick?s (affirming Magistrate Judge Fox) recent decision in United States v. No Lap 7 See 8 Similarly, any reliance on United States v. Valerio, 9 F. Supp. 3d 283 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) would also be unjustified. In Valerio, the defendant was charged with producing child pornography involving three-year- old and six-year-old victims. at 285. After an extensive discussion addressing the defendant?s danger to the community, Judge Bianco concluded that the defendant?s ?attempt to replicate a jail in his home is insufficient to adequately address the issues of dangerousness raised by his release.? at 296. In addressing the defendant?s risk of flight, Judge Bianco noted that the case involved a fifteen-year minimum sentence. ld_. at 298. These concerns are not present in Mr Zarrab's case, as there is no legitimate argument that Mr. Zarrab poses a threat to the community and there is no mandatory minimum sentence in his case. Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 10 of 22 SEQ. No. 15 Cr. 706 (S.D.N.Y). Exhibit 1 (Transcript of Bail Hearing). The Ng case is particularly instructive because it involved similar circumstances to those present here a foreign defendant with limited ties to the United States, significant personal wealth and a potentially high guideline sentence for non?violent, economic offenses if convicted. Ng Lap Seng, a citizen of China, was arrested on a Complaint on September 19, 2015 while attempting to board his private plane. Mr. Ng, who the government alleged is worth approximately $1.8 billion, is not a United States Citizen and has no ties to the United States. Significantly, unlike Mr. Zarrab, Mr. Ng owned or had access to several private planes in the United States and was intending to leave the United States when arrested. On the other hand, Mr. Zarrab was arrested entering the country on a commercial airline on what was to be a visit to Disney World with his family. Furthermore, while Mr. Zarrab does have significant personal and family wealth, he does not have anywhere near the $1.8 billion dollars in net worth the government alleged of Mr. Ng. Thus, any argument that the proposed conditions would somehow not be meaningful to Mr. Zarrab would be specious. Finally, in the Ng case, despite vigorous objection from the government at both the Magistrate and District Court level, Magistrate Judge Fox and District Judge Broderick ordered Mr. Ng?s release with nearly identical conditions to those we propose for Mr. Zarrab, including the use of Guidepost to provide 24-hour armed security. Notably, to date, Mr. Ng has been compliant with all of the conditions of Bail since his release in October, 2015. There simply is no fact present here that would lead the Court 10 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 11 of 22 to believe that Mr. Zarrab would not be similarly compliant with these stringent conditions should the Court grant Bail as requested.9 Mme?ht The proposed conditions of release, specifically home detention with 24-hour armed security, obviates any perceived risk of flight due to Mr. Zarrab?s lack of ties to the United States. The significant bond and other proposed conditions of Mr. Zarrab's pre-trial release are more than sufficient to accomplish the aims of the Bail Reform Act. As noted above, the Bail Reform Act requires the release of a defendant on the ?least restrictive? conditions necessary to ?reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of any other person and the community.? S_e? 18 U.S.C. 3142(c)(1)(B) (emphasis added). To determine the least restrictive conditions of release necessary to achieve the aims of the Bail Reform Act, the Court must consider the following factors: (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense charged; (2) the weight of the evidence against the defendant; (3) the history and characteristics of the defendant; and (4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that would be posed by the defendant?s release. ?e_e 18 U.S.C. 3142(g); See also US. v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63, 76 (2d Cir. 2007); United States v. Orena, 986 F.2d 628, 632 (2d Cir. 1993). An analysis of these factors compels the conclusion that the proposed conditions of Mr. Zarrab?s release are more than sufficient to accomplish the aims of the Bail Reform Act. 9 We also note that no person has ever absconded or failed to appear in Court when required in any of the numerous cases in which Guidepost has provided private security. 11 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 12 of 22 A. Nature and Circumstances of the Crimes Charged In evaluating the ?least restrictive? Bail conditions that will ?reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of any other person and the community,? the Court must take into account: ?the nature of the circumstances of the offense charged, including whether the offense is a crime of violence, a Federal crime of terrorism, or involves a minor victim or controlled substance, firearm, explosive, or destructive device.? Si 18 U.S.C. 3142(g)(1). It is clear from the statutory language that the primary consideration for the Court, is whether the charged crime involved violence, narcotics, sex crimes, terrorism, or weapons. The fact that the statute mentions these crimes in particular, is an indication that Congress viewed these specific offenses as more deserving of detention or strenuous Bail conditions than other offenses, all else being equal. Critical here to the Court?s analysis of the ?nature and circumstances of the crime charged,? is that Mr. Zarrab has not been charged with any crime involving violence, sex trafficking, terrorism, minor children, narcotics, or weapons. Accordingly, there is nothing about the nature and circumstance of the charged offenses to suggest that pre? trial detention is necessary to achieve the purposes of the Bail Reform Act. B. Weight of the Evidence The government will argue that its case against Mr. Zarrab is strong. The allegations, however, against Mr. Zarrab will be sharply contested at trial. The work done by Mr. Zarrab?s counsel thus far provides ample basis for belief that the charges are ill-founded and that the government will not prevail at trial. In any event, the strength of the government case is generally considered the ?least important? of the 18 U.S.C. 12 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 13 of 22 3142(g) factors for the court to consider when determining the conditions necessary to satisfy the aim of the Bail Reform Act. See US. v. Jones, 566 F. Supp.2d 288, 292 (S.D.N.Y. 2008). C. History and Characteristics of Mr. Zarrab Despite his lack of ties to the United States, the facts here concerning Mr. Zarrab?s history and characteristics underscore that he is not a risk of flight. Mr. Zarrab is a husband and a father who is committed to his family and would not countenance life as a fugitive. Mr. Zarrab belongs to a close-knit family, his parents having been married 45 years. He is uncle to his two siblings? four children. He-is a member of the Muslim faith, as is his wife, and they are raising their daughter in that same faith. Mr. Zarrab was born in Tehran, Iran on September 12, 1983. The youngest of three siblings, he moved to Istanbul, Turkey with his family as a one-year?old child. He holds Iranian, Turkish and Macedonian passports, but has always considered himself Turkish at heart, having lived in Turkey most of his life. Mr. Zarrab attended elementary school and high school in Istanbul. After his family moved to Dubai in 1999, he established his first successful business enterprise, a tea brokerage, trading in Sri Lankan tea destined for Turkey. That company employed three people in Dubai for approximately three years. In 2002, Mr. Zarrab returned to Turkey, without his family, where he established a Turkish gold brokerage and currency exchange. Shortly thereafter, he purchased a majority partnership in a Turkish currency exchange house, which he operated for 13 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 14 of 22 approximately two years, employing five people. He sold his interest in that company in 2009. In 2008, Mr. Zarrab established a shipbuilding company in Istanbul named Royal Shipping. In 2009, Royal Shipping received an order from the Royal Radisson Hotel in Moscow for construction of five river-cruise ships. On the strength of that order, Mr. Zarrab assembled a team of naval architects and engineers, leased a shipyard in Istanbul, and commenced construction. Royal Shipping completed the project on schedule, and delivered the five vessels to the Royal Radisson Hotel in 2010. During the height of construction, Royal Shipping directly employed more than 100 people. In 2009, Royal Shipping also contracted to manufacture all heavy machinery for a start?up steel manufacturing company in Iran established by Mr. Zarrab?s father. That project had a value to Royal Shipping of approximately $30 million, and was performed over the course of approximately two years. Building on the success of Royal Shipping, Mr. Zarrab also acquired a share in a real estate construction company in Istanbul in 2010. Over the course of approximately two years, that company built two separate apartment buildings in Istanbul with a total of more than 60 apartment units. Mr. Zarrab began working in the gold and commodities trading business in 2012. 1. Mr. Zarrab Meets and Marries Ebru Gtindes In 2005, Ebru Gt'mdes, a popular Turkish singer, performed at the wedding of Mr. Zarrab?s brother. Mr. Zarrab, who had long been a follower of Ms. GUndes, was inspired by her performance, and he composed two songs in her honor. Mr. Zarrab then delivered those songs, through mutual friends, to Ms. G'Lindes, who was so impressed 14 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 15 of 22 that she asked to meet Mr. Zarrab. They fell in love and married in 2010. In 2011, Ms. G'Lindes gave birth to a daughter, their only child to date. Eventually, Ms. GUndes released professional recordings of both of Mr. Zarrab's compositions. Their marriage is a partnership, and Mr. Zarrab would not sacrifice that marriage and her career by becoming an international fugitive. 2. Mr. Zarrab is a Prominent and Well-Respected Philanthropist In addition to being successful at many different business ventures, Mr. Zarrab is also deeply committed to improving social conditions in Turkey. Mr. Zarrab has made numerous charitable contributions totaling in excess of $5 million (equivalent), including the payment of medical care for the needy, assistance to mentally disabled children, and providing access to quality schooling for residents in low?income communities. He also owns businesses in the non?financial sector, employing more than 80 full-time workers. Mr. Zarrab?s philanthropic activities had their genesis at a conference he attended in Istanbul in 2012, sponsored by Togem-Der, a Turkish non-profit organization focusing on early detection and education for the mentally disabled, tuition support for low-income families, vocational training programs, and general assistance to the poor. As the young father of a one-year?old daughter, Mr. Zarrab was touched by the organization?s work, and driven by his general concern for the underprivileged. Mindful of his own success, he implemented a personal assistance program that has included not only monetary support to Togem-Der and other organizations, but also his personal involvement in identifying and assisting needy individuals. 15 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 16 of 22 After attending the Togem-Der conference, Mr. Zarrab also pledged to provide financial assistance to that organization on a basis. Togem?Der also supplied Mr. Zarrab with a list of children from low-income families who were enrolled in various schools, but whose parents were having difficulty paying their tuition bills. Mr. Zarrab personally tasked his staff with the job of interviewing the families of each of the children, for due diligence purposes, after which he assumed the responsibility of paying the tuition bill for each student identified by Togem-Der, without exception. That practice continues to the present. Documentation of those payments is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. Mr. Zarrab has also contributed a total of approximately $2,300,000 (equivalent) to Togem-Der for construction of 11 new schools, primarily in the northern regions of Turkey, where winter conditions are often severe. New schools were greatly needed in those areas owing to an increasing number of students in need of education, the general lack of heating, and the poor physical condition of many of the existing school buildings. Photographs of those school construction projects, together with documentation verifying Mr. Zarrab?s payments, are attached hereto as Exhibit 3. He has also established a food kitchen for 5,000 Syrian refugees in Turkey at a personal cost of approximately $350,000 (equivalent) and has paid approximately $1,000,000 (equivalent) for the construction of a multi?story facility in Istanbul dedicated to early identification and education of mentally disabled children. A photograph of that facility, together with documentation verifying Mr. Zarrab?s payment, are attached hereto as Exhibit 4. 16 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 17 of 22 Finally, Mr. Zarrab has also supplied medical care for numerous financially? challenged individuals in Turkey. Mr. Zarrab has tasked his staff with the job of meeting the administrators of various government hospitals in Turkey to request lists of individuals under the hospitals? care who require treatment, but are unable to pay. Mr. Zarrab's staff has met individually with each patient identified by those hospitals and performed independent research into the financial means of those patients and their families. In more than 100 separate cases, where genuine financial need was verified, Mr. Zarrab paid the medical bills of those patients in full. In 2010, Mr. Zarrab also provided hundreds of new medical beds for use in a government-run retirement home named Darulaceze. Additionally, in six separate cases, Mr. Zarrab purchased motorized wheelchairs for patients who were not ambulatory, and he caused electric charging stations to be installed to power those devices, all at a cost to Mr. Zarrab of approximately $300,000 (equivalent). Documentation of those purchases is attached hereto as Exhibit 5. Mr. Zarrab?s charitable work in Turkey has been continuous and ongoing since 2008, interrupted only by recent his arrest and detention in the United States. His financial contributions to Togem-Der alone totaled approximately $850,000 (equivalent) in 2013, approximately $1,500,000 (equivalent) in 2014, and approximately $2,300,000 (equivalent) to date in 2016. 3. A Well Respected Employer and Business Owner In addition to his philanthropic activities, Mr. Zarrab is also a productive business owner. Mr. Zarrab, through his businesses, employs more than 250 people in Turkey and, in 2015, he was listed as the 56th largest taxpayer in Turkey. Notably, Mr. Zarrab 17 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 18 of 22 is also a productive business owner in the non-financial sector in Turkey. Since 2012, he has owned and operated a profitable furniture manufacturing operation in Istanbul named Royal Mobilya, which employs between 80 and 90 full-time workers. Attached hereto as Exhibit 6 is a brochure containing detailed information about Royal Mobilya. In sum, Reza Zarrab?s history and personal characteristics establish that he is a man of character, someone who has taken his civic responsibilities seriously and, accordingly, is not a risk of flight. What is also clear is that Mr. Zarrab has shown that he is deeply committed to defending himself against these allegations in order to clear his name and so that he may one day be re-united with his family. Finally, as we have said, any perceived risk of flight for Mr. Zarrab is, as a practical matter, eliminated by the stringent proposed conditions of release, specifically including home detention with 24-hour armed security. D. Nature and Seriousness of Danger to the Community The Second Circuit has not endorsed the position that ?economic harm? should be considered in evaluating whether someone is a ?danger to the community? under the Bail Reform Act. While courts have considered the concern about non-physical harm to the community where the charges fall under the enumerated felonies articulated in 18 U.S.C. 3142(f)(1), such as child pornography or drug trafficking offenses, s_e;e g9; United States v. Zaraqoza, 2008 WL 686825, at *3 (ND. Cal. Mar. 11, 2008), States v. Schenberqer, 498 F. Supp.2d 738, 742 (D.N.J. 2007), there is very little authority supporting the argument that a court should consider a defendant's propensity to commit further economic crimes as ?danger to the community? contemplated by the Bail Reform Act. In any event, this case certainly does not give the Court reason to take 18 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 19 of 22 such an expansive view of this clause in the Act. See United States v. Madoff, 586 F. Supp.2d at 254 is far too great an extension to reach from the cases presented by the Government that narrowly recognize the possibility of economic harm (and rarely conclude the economic harm presented rises to the level of a danger to the community for which someone should be detained) to such a conclusion based on the minimal evidence presented here by the Government?) The charges in this case do not support a threat to the community of continued economic harm. Furthermore, as a practical matter, Mr. Zarrab could not engage in the conduct alleged in the indictment if he is under house arrest in the United States. For these reasons, the issue of ?danger to the community? is not an appropriate concern when determining the ?least restrictive? conditions of Bail for this defendant. Mr. Zarrab?s Lack of Ties to the Community Mr. Zarrab is not a US. citizen and only came to the United States because he wanted to take his wife and five-year-old daughter to Disney World. The Government will argue that his lack of ties and his personal wealth make detention appropriate. However, there are several serious flaws in the Government?s anticipated argument in this regard. First, the proposed conditions make it virtually impossible for Mr. Zarrab to flee. With a perfect record for ensuring clients always appear in court when required, Guidepost has proven to be at least as effective as traditional incarceration. Second, when the Bail Reform Act identified certain classes of cases and defendants that deserved special consideration for detention, it created only two 19 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 20 of 22 presumptions of detention. Neither involved defendants from other countries, non-US. citizens, or more generally defendants with thin or no community ties. While these are factors among the many other factors listed in the Bail Reform Act, they are far from dispositive. Third, there is nothing in the Bail Reform Act to suggest that a wealthy defendant is more of a flight risk than a non-wealthy defendant. While the statute does indicate that financial resources are a factor the court may consider, those considerations go in both directions. Thus, it is clear that Mr. Zarrab has much to lose under the proposed Bail package should he fail to return to court, an eventuality counsel views as practically impossible, as noted. His family would lose the $10 million cash Bail; he would be responsible for the remainder of the $50 million on the bond and he would live the rest of his life as a fugitive instead of a successful, well-respected businessman and philanthropist. Furthermore, the defendant?s wife is, modesty aside, an international music star throughout the Middle East and elsewhere. It would mark the end of her very successful and public career if she was to be married to a fugitive. One of the considerations this Court often has in difficult Bail matters is how the defendant's potential flight would impact loved ones. Here, there is an added impact that simply is not present in the vast majority of cases that if the defendant fails to live up to his Bail obligations, he ruins the career of his wife. Even if it were possible for the defendant to flee under the proposed conditions, which we contend it is not, he would nonetheless not do so for fear of the terrible impact such a decision would visit on his family. For these reasons, we believe the Bail 20 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 21 of 22 proposal contained in this Application is more than sufficient to ensure that Mr. Zarrab returns to court when required to do so. Difficulty Preparing for Trial If Detained and Mr. Zarrab?s Personal Medical Issues Although not dispositive under the Ball Reform Act, we also note that Mr. Zarrab speaks limited English and, based on information and belief, a significant portion of the discovery is in Turkish or Farsi. Accordingly, for counsel to confer with Mr. Zarrab there must always be a third?party interpreter present who is fluent in Turkish and Farsi. In addition, we have been informed by the government that this case will involve voluminous discovery and, based on counsel?s preliminary investigation, it is clear that counsel will need to review years of additional documents and interview dozens of fact witnesses as the charges against Mr. Zarrab relate to a fundamentally legal series of overseas projects. To provide effective assistance, counsel would need to review these documents and interview these witnesses in Mr. Zarrab?s presence and with the benefit of technological assistance not available at the MCC. Were Mr. Zarrab to be detained, it would be difficult for counsel to defend this case properly. Finally, we note that Mr. Zarrab suffers from a series of medical issues. He suffers from intestinal polyps, a stomach ulcer, and tumor located near his kidney, all of which require periodic monitoring by physicians. He requires a special diet and medical supervision properly to maintain his health in the many months before trial, and while on Bail, those issues will be much easier to address. 21 Case Document 16 Filed 05/18/16 Page 22 of 22 Because Mr. Zarrab is not charged with a violent crime, is not facing any mandatory minimum prison sentence and is othenNise eligible for Bail, we urge this Court not to detain him simply because he is wealthy and lacks ties to the United States. Our bail proposal removes any possible concern of flight We look forward to further addressing these issues at a hearing before this Coun. Respectfully submitted, Benjamin Brafman Marc Agnifilo, Of Counsel Joshua D. Kirshner Attorneys for Reza Zarrab Brafman Associates, P.C. 767 3'0' Avenue, 26?? FL New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 750-7800 Fax: (212) 750-3906 cc: AUSA Sidhardha Kamaraju (via email) AUSA Michael Lockard (via email) All counsel (via ECF) 22 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 1 of 52 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK S1 15 Cr. 867 (RMB) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - against REZA ZARRAB Defendant. BAIL APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF REZA ZARRAB APPENDIX BRAFMAN ASSOCIATES, P.C. By: Benjamin Brafman, Esq. Marc Agnifilo, Esq. Joshua D. Kirshner, Esq. Attorneys for Reza Zarrab 767 3ml Avenue, 26?? FL New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 750-7800 Fax: (212) 750-3906 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 2 of 52 United States v. Reza Zarrab Docket No.: S1 15 Cr. 867 (RMB) Exhibits: 1-6 mj Transcript of Bail Hearing Exhibit 2 Togem-Der Tuitio_n_Bi l Payments Payments for Togem-Der School Exhibit 3 Construction thbit 4 Payments for Togem-Der Foog Kitchen Payment to The Spinal Cord Paralytics Exhibit 5 Association of Turkey _Exhibit 6 Royal Mobilya Brochure Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 3 of 52 EXHIBIT 1 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 4 of 52 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. 15 CR 706 (VSB) NG LAP SENG, Defendant. New York, N.Y. October 22, 2015 1:48 p.m. Before: HON. VERNON S. BRODERICK, District Judge APPEARANCES PREET BHARARA United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York DANIEL RICHENTHAL JANIS ECHENBERG RAHUL MUKHI Assistant United States Attorneys BRAFMAN ASSOCIATES, P.C. Attorneys for Defendant BY: BENJAMIN BRAFMAN JACOB KAPLAN ?and? THE LAW FIRM OF HUGH H. MO, P.C. BY: HUGH H. MO ALSO PRESENT: JOHN LAU, Cantonese Interpreter MICHAEL JONES, Pretrial Services SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 5 of 52 MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, we're ready. THE COURT: All right. If at any point in time, Mr. Ng, something happens and you can't understand or can't hear, just let your attorney know and we'll stop the proceedings and we'll try and fix the problem. Okay? THE DEFENDANT: Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. All right. So let me just review for the parties what I have in connection with the bail appeal. I have the October 16 letter that Mr. Brafman wrote to Judge Fox, the October 21 letter of the government to me, the October 22 letter, earlier today, from Mr. Brafman which also attached a letter from the government dated September 29 that was filed in connection with Mr. Yin. I have the transcript from the bail hearing that occurred, both the bail hearing before Magistrate Judge Netburn, which I believe was September 21, and the bail hearing before Judge Fox on October 16. Are there any other documents that I should have in connection with today's bail argument? I have a copy, just so everybody knows, of the presentence services report which was prepared by Pretrial and updated to note the bail that was granted by Judge Fox. Is there anything else? MR. BRAFMAN: I don't believe so, your Honor. MR. RICHENTHAL: No. Those are all the materials I SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 6 of 52 think the parties submitted, your Honor. THE COURT: I do have some questions. Obviously, I've read through the transcripts. I've read through the parties' letters and looked at the case law that's been cited. In connection with the case law that's been cited, I know that, Mr. Richenthal, you had argued that the granting of bail was inappropriate as a matter of law and I think you had said that several times during the proceedings before Magistrate Judge Fox. And I just want you to clarify exactly what you mean by that because as I understand it, the granting of bail and the permitting of a defendant to retain private security for purposes of bail is something that isn't prohibited by the Second Circuit. My colleagues have gone both ways on this, so I just want to get a sense of exactly what the government's position is on that with regard to the legality. MR. RICHENTHAL: Your Honor, it's our view, and I think the Second Circuit has said what I'm about to say, that the Court need not even consider such an application but that the Court may. Then the question is does the Court have to. As I said, the Second Circuit essentially said the Court does not. It is our view that neither the Eighth Amendment nor the Bail Reform Act contemplates this kind of scenario and it does not require your Honor to consider it. That is what we meant by inappropriate as a matter of law. It seems fairly clear your Honor has the discretion to SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 7 of 52 consider it, although that issue was actually not joined in front of the Second Circuit. The parties didn't even argue that point. So even that I think is a little muddled. But our view is consistent with the several cases we cited that neither the Bail Reform Act nor the Constitution requires your Honor to consider it and never mind requires your Honor to grant it. THE COURT: But is it fair to say that what I am required to consider are issues that might ameliorate any concern that I might have that Mr. Ng might pose a risk of flight? MR. RICHENTHAL: Certainly, and that's our argument, your Honor, that Mr. Ng should be detained because the risk here is severe and cannot be mitigated. And our argument, as the Court no doubt is aware from reading the transcript, is that putting aside the interesting questions raised as a matter of law that this is simply inappropriate factually. The very few cases in which this has occurred are reasonably new. They're extraordinarily rare. They're readily distinguishable. This is not a case in which this is appropriate factually in any way, shape, or form, irrespective of how the Court may come out in what frankly appears to be a divide among various district courts both in this district and outside this district. THE COURT: Let me ask this, and I'll give you an opportunity, Mr. Brafman. Run through me the scenarios under SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 8 of 52 which you would see, assuming the conditions that have been proposed and approved by Magistrate Judge Fox, the scenarios in which you would see and envision that Mr. Ng would be able to flee. MR. RICHENTHAL: So I will, your Honor, but I also want to note one of the issues here and I think that our principal concern is we don't really know what's going to happen. This is a relatively new thing. It is relatively untested. It has happened in very few cases that are very different from this case. And let me give you an example of what happened in a particular case that shows why this is a special scenario and doesn't belong in this case, the Brooks case. This is one of the cases that Mr. Brafman analogized to his client. Among other things THE COURT: That's an Eastern District case? MR. RICHENTHAL: Yes, your Honor. It's an Eastern District case. In the Brooks case the defendant was released on conditions including that he be monitored by private security guards. Let me note the bond there was approximately $400 million, not 50. It was secured by approximately $50 million, not 48, excuse me, not 20 as in this case. And it had to be cosigned by, if memory serves, ten people, not zero. So it's actually a very different set of conditions from what SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 9 of 52 Judge Fox ordered. In the Brooks case the defendant was bailed under that set of conditions and he lived essentially under the monitoring of private security guards. And he managed to convince one of those security guards who he was paying, of course, that he was actually a good guy and not a flight risk and that security guard actually submitted an affidavit to the court and essentially became a member of the defense team seeking to change those conditions, which were in fact changed. That's an example of the kinds of concerns we have. These are not sworn law enforcement officers. THE COURT: Wait. Let's back up. I just want to make sure I have the facts right. So someone, a member of the security detail, first of all, what company was providing that security? MR. JONES: This is a case across the river. I only learned of it when I saw Mr. Brafman's letter and I don't recall. I don't recall if it was the same company or not, your Honor. I was only able to glean a brief amount of information this morning. THE COURT: As I understand what you said, in connection with that case, a member of the detail submitted an affidavit or a letter or something to the Court detailing facts about his I guess, well, detailing facts and as part of an application to change Mr. Brook's bail conditions. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 10 of 52 MR. RICHENTHAL: Yes. I have not seen the affidavit. I have only been told about it. But that?s my understanding, that it was part of an application to amend those bail conditions to remove the very restriction of which that member of the security detail was a part. I'm raising this because I think it's an example of how very thorny this is. These people are not federal law enforcement officers. If you assault them, we cannot prosecute it as assault on a federal law enforcement officer. There probably wouldn't be federal jurisdiction over that assault. If Mr. Ng were to escape THE COURT: Why wouldn't that be a violation of his bail conditions? MR. RICHENTHAL: It certainly would be, your Honor. But the point I'm making is there are lots of things that are very different in a private jail from a not private jail. One is these people are not federal law enforcement officers. Their salary, their livelihood, both the current one and the future one, depends in no small part on keeping the defendant happy. Brooks is an example of a case in which that went awry. THE COURT: When you say went awry, so the application was made and what happened with the application? MR. RICHENTHAL: The application I think was granted after extensive hearings and other litigation. THE COURT: I guess my question is when you say it SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 11 of 52 went awry, he provided an affidavit of some sort, but the affidavit I understand was presented to a court and the court modified the conditions? MR. RICHENTHAL: Ultimately, yes. After lots of back and forth and some hearings, apparently the court ultimately modified the conditions. I don't have all the details. THE COURT: Did Mr. Brooks violate? MR. RICHENTHAL: He then did and was remanded actually, yes. THE COURT: That would be going awry. Look, I don?t know the facts and circumstances surrounding the affidavitcould be that if the defense wanted to make an application to modify his bail, they could request that he be present and subpoenaed to testify. It may have been voluntary, I don't know. He may have made a friend. I know a little bit about the Brooks case and I doubt well, first of all, as I understand, Mr. Ng doesn?t speak English, so I'm not sure and I don't know whether any of the security folks at Guidepost speak Chinese. So that sort of an issue, I think to the extent it is an issue, I'm not sure would necessarily arise, in other words, where he's able to curry favor, at least in speaking to somebody as opposed to through monetarily. MR. RICHENTHAL: I'm not sure we agree, your Honorinterlocutors and a lot of interpreters all throughout our city and our country. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 12 of 52 THE COURT: But to the extent and I'm not saying that I would to the extent that any conditions would be set, I think it would be fair to have with regard to interpreters and people there. One thing I did note that was part of the package is you have people who are security there and there was no provision for having someone there who actually speaks Mr. Ng's language, which I think is something, A, that would be needed, and, B, it wouldn't certainly be somebody that would be at his choosing. So I understand the concern and the access concern also, but I'm sorry, I interrupted you. MR. RICHENTHAL: No, your Honor. What I was going to say is at a minimum, yes, there should certainly be something like that. But on the present package, anyone can come and go to the apartment, anyone, and that's exactly the point. It would be very easy for Mr. Ng to either offer financial incentives or any kind of other incentives to these people. The point I'm making about Mr. Brooks, and then I want to expand on my answer to your Honor's question, is it would be to say the least highly unusual for a BOP employee to engage with a defendant the way that plainly occurred in the Brooks case and then to file an affidavit because these people are trained, among other things, about how to interact with prisoners who pose risks of flight. The people at Guidepost may well have had honorable law enforcement careers. We don't suggest otherwise. But that's not their training, that's not SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 80570300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 13 of 52 10 their experience, that's not their background. That's not the world they inhabit. They would be paid by these people. Let me expand to a higher level because that's one example of the Brooks case. Mr. Ng has literally more money than one can fathom and it's liquid and available to him in wire form and cash form. It would be all to easy and all too tempting for him to try to pay people off to look the other way. It would be very difficult to monitor that in realtime. Because, again, these are not federal law enforcement officers. They do not report to the United States government. They do not work for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. On the present package, not only can anyone come and go freely, Mr. Ng could have 25 cell phones, internet access, any other kinds of means of communication. He doesn't need to tell anyone about it. He doesn't need to give the phone numbers he's using. Anything can be brought into the apartment. And I don?t mean a weapon; 1 mean money. This isn't even a private jail. But even if a private jail could be constructed, there are all these unanswered questions about the legality of use of force against Mr. Ng if he tried to flee, the legality of the use of force against others were they to try to help Mr. Ng free. THE COURT: Let's take a step back because I had thought about this and this goes to the question I asked about what the scenarios would be. Wouldn't that be a danger to the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805a0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 14 of 52 community? Is there any evidence that Mr. Ng has utilized his wealth to hire people to injure others? MR. RICHENTHAL: There is no evidence that Mr. Ng has used his wealth to injure others. There's significant evidence Mr. Ng would use his wealth to get his way and advance his interest. His interest here is returning to China where we will never be able to get him back, ever. Not just because he's Chinese, although that is in and of itself the most severe problem because we do not have an extradition treaty with China. By his own representations, he is a member of the Chinese government. If he hits Chinese soil, he will never return. So the question is are there scenarios, as your Honor is asking, in which that's possible. The answer is yes. Mr. Ng may be able to convince someone to look the other way. Mr. Ng may be able to pay people to look the other way. Mr. Ng may be able to get people to do those things for him since, among others things, there's no restriction on who can visit him, no restrictions on who he can call. The amount of money he has at his disposal, the private planes he has at his disposal, the proven fact that he has purchased citizenship in a foreign country THE COURT: Now, you made that statement before. I want to hear the facts surrounding that. MR. RICHENTHAL: So various countries, some lawfully, SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 15 of 52 some not lawfully, have programs in which wealthy individuals can essentially purchase citizenship. Mr. Ng availed himself to that with respect to the country of Dominica. Mr. Ng was in the process of exploring that with the country of Antigua and Barbuda. Mr. Ng also has connections to the Dominican Republic, and Mr. Ng has a passport of Portugal. Specifically with respect to purchasing citizenship, there are countries that permit that, either legally or under the table, and Mr. Ng availed himself of those programs in the past. Given his extensive international THE COURT: Are you disputing that the money was given, even if he got citizenship on the basis of contributing the money, was the money used in connection with a storm that had occurred in Dominica? MR. RICHENTHAL: I don't have a ledger of how the money was used, but we can tell your Honor that the evidence indicates that it was a business transaction. Mr. Ng was engaged in what Mr. Ng is engaged in, which is real estate transactions and gambling transactions. At the hearing before Judge Fox, Mr. Ng painted himself as a philanthropist. That's not what the payments to Dominica were about. There may have been other payments. We don't have his bank records. One thing I wanted to comment on apropos of that, there's a reason we don't have them it's because they're in China. Mr. Ng could provide documentation to the Court about SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 16 of 52 his wealth, about his alleged inability to turn that wealth into liquid assets, which is one of the arguments he made to Judge Fox. He hasn't produced that documentation. We don't have that documentation. What we know is he owns a private airplane. He has access to private airplanes. He is deeply connected to one foreign government at a minimum, his own, and connected to multiple other foreign governments and will not hesitate to bribe people to do what's in his interest. We know he's worth more than a billion dollars and that wealth is in the same home country in which he's a member of the government. So the risk of flight is severe and the means to try to do something is there, whether it's bribery or influence or other kinds of things. Can we know for sure that that risk will materialize, of course not. We can't. Your Honor can't. But the question is can your Honor have confidence, reasonable confidence, to speak in the language of bail, that the proposed private jail will ameliorate those risks. No. In every single case in which that's happened, at least the cases I'm aware of, they are markedly different. They are either American citizens with American families whose assets were tied up. Bernie Madoff, let's use that as an example. Mr. Madoff confessed to his crime. He literally called up law enforcement and said I did it. That's a little different from a man arrested on his way to a private airplane. Mr. Madoff SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 17 of 52 was a American citizen. THE COURT: At the time he was on his way to the private airplane, was he aware that he was wanted in connection with this case? MR. RICHENTHAL: No, absolutely not. There were a lot of arguments made in front of Judge Fox that somehow Mr. Ng knew he was under surveillance. Unless he is very, very good at detecting surveillance, no, he did not. This was an entirely covert case. And to be clear, because Mr. Brafman made this argument before Judge Fox, the government didn't arrange for him to be arrested at the airport so I could stand up in front of judges and say he was at the airport. The reason he was arrested at the airport, it's a private plane. We get essentially no notice that someone is on their way out. And when we got notice he was on his way out, we went into action because we thought we'd never get him back. THE COURT: My question actually went to because you were equating the Madoff situation. I just want it to be clear, it wasn't like he was fleeing. He was just going to take his airplane back to China, I guess. MR. RICHENTHAL: Absolutely. I'm not suggesting he was fleeing. The point I'm making is there are a lot of facts that make, for example, the Madoff case very different. One is citizenship, the other is family, the other is ties to the United States, and the other is essentially coming to law SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805HO3OO Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 18 of 52 15 enforcement and saying I did it, charge me. This is a whole different universe. This is a man who literally has zero connections to the United States. Yes, he purchased an approximately $4 million apartment roughly four weeks ago. He then effectively gifted it to a coconspirator. THE COURT: Again, I saw the use of the term "effectively." What exactly was the transaction because I didn't see in the papers what that transaction was to Mr. Lorenzo. MR. RICHENTHAL: Mr. Ng purchased an apartment that remains in his name, which is why Mr. Brafman is right that technically it's his. He never lived there. He didn't do anything with it. Here's what he did. On September 18, 2015, so roughly a month ago, after wiring, as is his practice, millions of dollars to the United States from Macau, he purchased through codefendant Francis Lorenzo an approximately $4 million apartment in midtown Manhattan. It's actually two apartments and they combined them. It's a very nice apartment. Mr. Ng didn't appear at the transaction. Mr. Lorenzo did, allegedly as his agent. Mr. Ng did not sign the documents. Mr. Lorenzo did, allegedly as his agent. Mr. Ng didn't live there. Mr. Lorenzo did. Mr. Lorenzo decided the apartment, though nice, needed to be nicer. Mr. Lorenzo, in his own name, putting down as his address this apartment, then engaged a construction company to SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 19 of 52 do some work in the tune of approximately $125,000 to that apartment. It was gifted to him. As a formal matter, no, it was not. Mr. Brafman is right, the deed remains in the name Ng Lap Seng. As a practical matter, this was a bribe. September 18, 2015, is telling for another reason. On the same day, Mr. Ng THE INTERPRETER: I have a hard time hearing counsel. THE COURT: Look. I hesitate to say this we have time. Take it slow because I want to make sure that everything gets translated appropriately. MR. RICHENTHAL: I'll back up and, please, tell me again if I speak too quickly. September 18, 2015, was not a random date. Also on September 18, 2015, Mr. Ng and his codefendant, Mr. Yin, met with Francis Lorenzo here in New York and executed yet another agreement to pay Francis Lorenzo tens of thousands of dollars more a month, specifically $20,000 a month, as a consultant for Mr. Ng's company. On the same day, Mr. Ng and Mr. Yin also met with codefendant John Ashe and executed another agreement to pay Mr. Ashe tens of thousands of dollars a month, specifically, again, $20,000 a month. So in the same day, in the same meeting or meetings, Mr. Ng agrees to give Francis Lorenzo $20,000 a month, he agrees to give Mr. Ashe $20,000 a month, and he further agrees SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 20 of 52 to give Mr. Lorenzo a $4 million apartment. That's why we're saying it's effectively gifted. But even if your Honor were to ignore everything I just said, that is not a tie to the United States. That's roughly four weeks ago. THE COURT: You don't have to argue that. I'm not considering that as a tie. MR. RTCHENTHAL: Yes, but our concern about the apartment is this is ongoing THE COURT: Let me take a step back. When I say I'm not considering it as a tie, obviously, it would be a place where he could live. But I'm not considering it as a tie in terms of an anchor, as an incentive for him to remain in the country, no matter how nice the apartment might be. But I'm sorry. Go ahead. MR. RTCHENTHAL: Look, we agree. I think to be frank here, there is no reason for him to remain. Literally zero. $50 million bond is meaningless to him. $20 million is meaningless to him. A $4 million apartment that he never lived in and he used to bribe someone and is subject to forfeiture is meaningless. He has no ties here. He has no family here. He has business associates here who would love to see him flee because they're inculpated in some of these crimes. I think everything I'm saying, everything Mr. Brafman says and will say, literally all of this comes down to one thing, is your Honor okay as a matter of law allowing him to SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C- (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 21 of 52 buy his way out and, if so, as a matter of law THE COURT: Wait a second. The Second Circuit doesn't prohibit it, right? MR. RICHENTHAL: NO, but THE COURT: Yes, but has any other circuit prohibited it? MR. RICHENTHAL: I?m not aware of any circuit that prohibited it. THE COURT: Has the Supreme Court prohibited it? MR. RICHENTHAL: I don't think it's ever gone there. THE COURT: All I?m trying to get a sense of is what the law is. I understand your argument. But if the situation is that any defendant who has the wherewithal to place a certain amount of money up, because this happens every day in this courthouse, I guess you could frame it that he?s buying his or her way out, but they have the means to do that. But I'm sorry. Go ahead. MR. RICHENTHAL: That's right, your Honor, but our view of the Bail Reform Act is that's exactly what's contemplated by it and, frankly, the Eighth Amendment too. What these are about are restrictions on the government's ability to demand too much from a defendant. That's what the Eighth Amendment says, excessive bail. We can't demand too much. It doesn't require we give into his demands that because he can afford a private security guard, that?s okay, even SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 22 of 52 19 though they're not federal law enforcement, even though it wouldn't be escape from a facility, even though it doesn't remotely have bars on the windows. That's not what the Eighth Amendment requires nor does the Bail Reform Act. I think at the end of the day this argument can leave the legalities aside and the question is is someone with this incredible ability to flee, someone with this incredible incentive to flee, and someone who literally has no reason, no reason to stay, can we trust that the proposal that he live in a luxury apartment surrounded by guards he pays will keep him here and our view is no. The limited cases in which that has happened are cases in which that trust at least has some basis in fact like an American family, American citizenship, American property. So the Eastern District case that Mr. Brafman cites was a foreign citizen. I believe the man's name is Webb. That's true. He was a citizen of Cayman Islands and the United Kingdom, but we have extradition treaties in both those countries. And that individual had a home that he regularly lived in in the southern United States where he was required to live when he was released from the Eastern District. That's nothing like this case. This would be the most extreme example that one can possibly fathom of permitting this. We think it is so extreme on these facts it shouldn't be permitted factually. Put aside SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 23 of 52 20 the law. We cannot trust that Mr. Ng will return. That's especially true because there are no cosigners on the bond. There are no restrictions on who can visit him. There are no restrictions on communications. It's not even home incarceration. It's home detention. THE COURT: Look, I thought that what people were going for was in essence what would be house arrest. That's what I thought the idea was. It didn't seem like that is exactly what the wording ended up being, but that might be just I'm sorry. Go ahead. MR. RICHENTHAL: Look, if it were all the things I just said, restrictions on visitors, communications, a significantly larger bond, multiple cosigners, etc., it would be a way stronger package. My argument certainly would be weaker. It would be silly for me to pretend otherwise. But ultimately at the end of the day, even that cannot in our judgment reasonably assure and that's the standard the appearance of a man who has every means to flee, every incentive to flee, and no reason to remain. I want to be clear. It's not because he's wealthy. There are lots of wealthy people given bail. It's because he is wildly wealthy, connected to a foreign government, resides in a country with which we do not have extradition treaties, has already demonstrated an ability to purchase citizenship in other countries, even if it's lawful, simply the ability again. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 24 of 52 THE COURT: I was going to come back to that since you mentioned it again. Is there some citation to, in other words, in Dominica, what this program is called, do you know? MR. RICHENTHAL: I don't have it at my fingertips. There's a more stringent variant of it in the United States where you can invest a certain amount of money in a plant and make capital expenditures over time, you can get a green card. Obviously, if you comply with the restriction on a green card, eventually that can become citizenship. Our own country has a version of this, but it's far stricter, takes far more time, and I hope it's far better vetted. There are certain countries in this world where there are few, if any, restrictions. Essentially, write a check and a passport is yours. The truth is our real fear is not that Mr. Ng goes to Dominica. That's an example of his ability to buy his way around the world. Our real fear is he goes to China and he'll never return ever. There's no reason for him to return and there's every reason for him to go back. At the end of the day, like I said, I think this case boils down to one question. Put aside the law, put aside Dominica. Do we think he's going to come back if he sits in his apartment in Midtown under the present proposal or any proposal? Can your Honor be reasonably assured about that given no connections here of any kind, every means to leave, every incentive to leave, every resource to leave, SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 25 of 52 coconspirators, again, deeply connected to foreign countries, officials of multiple foreign countries, cash that still has not appeared, more than $4 million since 2013, only a very small portion of which we've seen. Mr. Brafman is probably going to stand up and tell you that cash went to gambling because in our letter in a footnote we told Judge Netburn, some of it appears to have gone to gambling. A very small percentage, yes. But Mr. Ng actually brought in more than $10 million in the past few years, more than $4 million in the past two years. We have no idea where that is. We recovered approximately $430,000. That's it. Where is that money? Our best guess, it's with coconspirators who are still here, who really want to see that man anywhere but at that table. The end of the day, our argument is very simple. There's no reasonable conditions that can assure his return to court except one, that he?s detained. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Brafman. MR. BRAFMAN: Yes, Judge. This is my first case with Mr. Richenthal and he was beginning to grow on me. But to be candid with you, Judge, I found part of his arguments today offensive. I found part of them just absurd, and I found part of them to be patently inaccurate. I don't want to make this personal. THE COURT: And actually, quite frankly, counsel, I'll SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page make it personal; MR. BRAFMAN: I'm not. THE COURT: To the extent the factual might upset Mr. Richenthal, that's just the nature of what we're up to. MR. BRAFMAN: I'm never in a personal fight with any prosecutor and I don't mean to make it personal. But I want to make it clear for the record some of the things he said, why I found them offensive. I'm very familiar with the Brooks case. The Brooks case to my knowledge never involved Guidepost. Guidepost is run by Bart Schwartz. Bart Schwartz is a former chief of the criminal division in the Southern District. THE COURT: I don't know Mr. Schwartz personally. I know of Guidepost. I know folks who have worked there. And so I have perhaps not the entire background, but I am familiar with Guidepost. MR. BRAFMAN: And Joseph Jaffe, who is a former assistant United States attorney in the Southern District of New York and is chief compliance officer, is present in the courtroom. And the argument that Mr. Richenthal makes in substance is how do you trust these guys and how, why are they are not bribeable. Well, you know, he says this is not a federal law enforcement officer in the Bureau of Prisons. And I actually saw your Honor wince because I've read every day SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 27 of 52 24 almost for the last two years how corrections officers on both the state and federal level are in fact corrupted on occasion and they allow people to get contraband, they allow people to do something. We can't guarantee absolute perfection in a prison. You had two prisoners escape from a maximum security prison upstate New York because they corrupted a prison official. So perfection, I can't offer you perfection. What I can offer you is Guidepost. Under Guidepost's watch, there has never been a prisoner who they have lost. You?re talking about getting him to China. He?s not going to be able to get to Madison Avenue without two armed law enforcement people. And they are not rentea?cops. They are all current federal or state law enforcement officers or retired federal or state law enforcement officers from either the FBI, Secret Service, Customs, or New York City Police Department. Each one is vetted, each one is bonded, each one is armed. Now, do I know if they have the legal authority to shoot Mr. Ng if he tries to overpower them? They have the right to use reasonable force to defend themself and reasonable force to keep him from escaping. I will also say, most respectfully, that when the conditions of bail were set by Magistrate Judge Fox, we agreed to stay the bail order because we knew he had to satisfy all of the conditions of bail before he hit the street anyway and we SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 28 of 52 25 wanted the argument that we would make before the Court that would have the case. This is a specious argument by Mr. Richenthal, quite frankly, because the government bears the burden of establishing risk of flight by a preponderance of the evidence. They have zero evidence. This is a defendant who each time he came into the United States in the last year carrying large sums of cash, he disclosed it to Customs. THE COURT: I understand that he disclosed it and that's fair. My understanding is the allegation is that some of the disclosure, some of it may have been accurate, in other words, what he was going to do with the money. Some of it may not have been. But you're right, he disclosed that he had a significant amount of cash. MR. BRAFMAN: Judge, if you're coming into the country for the purposes of bribing a government official, the last thing you need to do is expose yourself to Customs, who never searched his plane except on one occasion, and volunteer you have huge sums of cash. And the man is detained, quite frankly, because Judge Netburn, Magistrate Judge Netburn, at the first presentment was provided with facts that have proven to be patently inaccurate. And the lawyer who appeared before Magistrate Netburn on behalf of Mr. Ng, his principal experience was that he spoke fluent Mandarin and he didn't have a chance to do any investigation. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 29 of 52 And one of the things before Judge Netburn in a sworn affidavit was the argument that the money was claimed by Mr. Yin and Mr. Ng speaks no English, so it was Mr. Yin who spoke to the FBI, to Customs the argument was the money was for gambling and the FBI had him under surveillance and he never went to a casino. Later in the letter that your Honor has, eight days later, 10 and behold, they followed up the investigation. They find a receipt that shows that during the period they had him under surveillance, he actually went to a casino where he lost $300,000 or deposited $300,000. There are bribes that are alleged in this indictment total $500,000 and most of them are through wire transfer. If you look at the complaint, sir, and I know you have, the complaint which preceded this case tracks the wires. There are emails not by Mr. Ng, who doesn't speak any English whatsoever, and they detail the nature of the bribes that are being discussed. So the cash that he came into the United States with, we can't, we don't have the burden of establishing what was done with that. And the defendant certainly has shown complete candor to Pretrial Services, complete candor when he was interviewed and the wealth that he has as we've established or explained to Magistrate Judge Fox. And, your Honor, I want to say this with great respect for everyone in the courtroom. We had the same bail argument SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 30 of 52 before Magistrate Fox and I think Magistrate Fox recognized the following which I ask the Court to recognize as well. We?re not suggesting that he has a right under the Eighth Amendment to have private security guards. What he does have a right under 3142 is for the Court to fashion and see if he can fashion a series of conditions that will ensure the defendant's appearance when required. And Magistrate Judge Fox, after hearing the exact same arguments and more by Mr. Richenthal and our arguments in response, fashioned a series of very serious, stringent arguments. And what we've done in the last four or five business days is we've moved heaven and earth, quite frankly, to get these conditions satisfied. So we have proposed, subject to your Honor's approval of the bail package, to post $20 million with the clerk of the court by tomorrow, funds that are in Mr. Mo's escrow account. The apartment has been certified by Guidepost who went through it, videotaped it, made certain there's no way he could escape. The windows in the apartment only open 12 or 15 inches so they only open for fresh air. They're prepared to bolt those shut if that's what the government wants. THE COURT: Assuming we're able to reach a package, I think bolting them shut would create other issues. MR. BRAFMAN: Yes, it's a fire hazard. THE COURT: Go ahead. MR. BRAFMAN: We?re not talking about putting two kids SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 80570300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 31 of 52 in the apartment and giving them the responsibility. Guidepost has certainly guidelines. They have certain standards. They are very strict. There is a log maintained of every person who enters the premises. And to the extent that the government has a watch list and they want us to say these people should not come in, we?re willing to look at it. But we are able to bring witnesses in or to my office so that he can be present when they are interviewed. This is a massive case. It is virtually inconceivable to me as an officer of the court to try and imagine trying to actually investigate and defend this case if Mr. Ng remains remanded. And I don't think that's the primary consideration for a district court, obviously. The primary consideration is are you going to be satisfied that the conditions we have proposed will ensure that he will appear when required. And right now all they?ve got is he's rich and the rest is speculation. He could bribe someone. He could kill someone. He could overpower someone. Yes, and I could start the World Series for the New York Mets, but that's not going to happen. THE COURT: Let's hope not, Mr. Brafman. I'm not impugning your baseball skills, but I understand. MR. BRAFMAN: Actually, I was a pretty good pitcher when I was little. THE COURT: Fair enough. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 32 of 52 MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, I'm not trying to make light of it. I'm saying that whatever he can conceive of we can't address. The impossible is hard to predict. Could he escape from the MDC, sure. Could he escape from the apartment by killing the Guidepost people, yes. But there's zero violence in his background. The thing that's interesting is the cases the government cites are cases that are distinguishable on the facts either on the nature of the crime a child pornography case where Judge Bianco said that the house arrest with guards would not satisfy the potential risk to the community. In the Judge Pauley case, the Cilins case, the Court was concerned because in that case, the nature of the defendant's crimes were that he interfered with investigations, he made up things. He constructed obstructive behavior. THE COURT: And I also thought that I read that Judge Pauley was also concerned with the lack of candor that the defendant displayed in connection with his disclosure to Pretrial Services, I think. MR. BRAFMAN: And that's why the defendant Yin is remanded, even though he originally had bail, because they found out that he lied to Pretrial, apparently, or lied to the government about having extra passport. Mr. Ng, to his credit, and, quite frankly, I'm stunned by the candor, told Pretrial Services everything. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 33 of 52 30 I also want the Court to, again, I want to make the point that I made to I think Judge Fox who I think recognized it. When you talk about his wealth, when you look at the wealth, the wealth that's listed is primarily in the real estate and in antiques and art. These are heavily encumbered properties. And in terms of an incentive to resolve this matter and not be a fugitive, if Mr. Ng disappears, even if he gets back to China, if he is a fugitive from justice in the United States, all of the banks he deals with would not be able to deal with him. Even in China it is frowned upon to be a fugitive. They may not give you back, but they're not going to let you borrow billions of dollars. He has every incentive in the world to stay here and resolve this case. THE COURT: I apologize for interrupting, but I did notice that in your letter you did, or maybe it was in connection with the argument before Judge Fox, you did indicate that there would be ramifications to Mr. Ng were he to be a fugitive. MR. BRAFMAN: Correct. THE COURT: I guess my question is are there specific things I understand if someone is convicted. So in this country, if you are convicted, you might not be able to be part of the gaming industry, for example, of a felony. Is there something that you can point to specifically with regard to SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 34 of 52 31 being a fugitive that would somehow impinge upon his livelihood, his work? MR. BRAFMAN: I can only tell you from my own personal experience as a lawyer, who I think as an officer of the court prides myself on my honesty, I am dealing with people who are now fugitives who I'm trying to bring back who never were here, they just don't want to come back. And I'm dealing with them both in the country of Namibia, I'm dealing with people in Israel, and they have no banking relationships anywhere because of that. Banks will not deal with you. They don't need to deal with you and they can close your account under the banking act without giving you a reason and you get bounced from bank to bank to bank. So I don't have anything specific because I've never been to Macau. I didn't have the time between now and the last hearing to go there, and everything is in the island of Macau. Your Honor, we don't need to go there. We don't need to go there because of the following. Judge Fox fashioned a very serious bail package. The apartment was never gifted to Mr. Lorenzo. That's just fabrication. Whether it was one day going to be used by Mr. Lorenzo, my investigation indicates that he visited it, that he never slept there. I have a notarized power of attorney by Lorenzo that Mr. Ng gave to him because Lorenzo speaks English, he's here. Mr. Ng is in China, work had to be done. We have the deed. The deed is going to SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 35 of 52 be filed, if your Honor approves the bail package, in the clerk's office down the street in New York County. The only person listed as the owner is Mr. Ng. The value of the apartment is $4 million. But Mr. Richenthal said something which I agree with. You could make up a number and if you give to Pretrial Services, someone is worth a billion dollars, so a hundred million doesn't mean anything. 500 million doesn't mean anything. That?s not the point. The point is absent the security guard proposal, the electronic monitoring. If what your Honor wants to use is the word house arrest rather than home detention, that was not intended by us as sleight of hand. It might have gotten lost in the translation. THE COURT: I recognize that. MR. BRAFMAN: House arrest, electronic monitoring by itself the government generally thinks it's adequate. In this case it's not. We offered the security guard to the government before we came to Judge Fox. We met with them and said we would propose it. They ran it up the chain in the office, came back, said no. We picked Guidepost not because they were the cheapest and not because they were the most expensive, but because their reputation for integrity is just perfect and there is zero example. I also want to mention about the Brooks case because that's really a red herring. What Brooks did was after living SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 36 of 52 with these guards for a long time, there's a guy who thought Brooks was a nice guy. And having met Mr. Brooks, he speaks English, he's charming. And I don't want to get sued, but there are certain issues that he has that are unique to Mr. Brooks. Mr. Brooks was ultimately remanded. He didn't bribe his way out. He didn't buy his way out. There were allegations brought to my attention in that case that he also was being investigated by the government for trying to kill his own lawyers. So you're dealing with someone who think ultimately THE COURT: Hopefully you're not suggesting we're going anywhere near there. MR. BRAFMAN: I hope not. I hope not. But we're talking about someone when he was remanded, I believe the determination by Judge Seybert was not only that the bail conditions weren't adequate, but because of what the government was now investigating him for, they thought he was very dangerous. So I think that's what ultimately prompted him to be remanded. I'm asking your Honor to do something, quite frankly, that I think the law permits. And if the law didn?t permit it, then all of the judges who have granted it would have violated the law and I don't think for a minute you think that your colleagues did that. If you read the transcript, Judge, and I read it. I SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 37 of 52 was kind of stunned because I read it. I heard it at the time and I read it again. If you read the transcript, what Mr. Richenthal was implying to Magistrate Judge Fox, that if he granted bail and allowed him to construct a private jail, he was doing something that the law did not permit. And you can say what you want of how skillfully he said that, but he made it seem that that would be illegal. And if it was illegal, we wouldn't propose it and I wouldn't insult your Honor by suggesting that you do it and your Honor wouldn't do it. So everyone in this courtroom knows that you have the authority and the discretion to do this. The real question is does your Honor feel that by posting the bond, which we're prepared to do, by having them vetted the apartment. Pretrial has been called. They are prepared tomorrow morning to go to the apartment. They didn't want to do it until they knew that the bail conditions were affirmed, but we've been in touch with them. They will meet at the apartment. They will inspect the apartment. Guidepost not only inspected the apartment, they videotaped it in case the government had any questions. It's two apartments combined. But it's two armed officers there all day, all night. And to the extent that, like I said, people get into the MDC as visitors. The government has no right to exclude them. They have to fill out a form, and the government has no idea who many of these people are. So if Mr. Ng wanted people SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 38 of 52 to meet him in the MDC, so long as they're not on a government watch list or on separation, they get in to visit him so long as they don't have a criminal record. And if Mr. Richenthal wants to give us a list of people who they have identified as some connection to this case and if we look at that and that's good faith and these are not important witnesses that need to see Mr. Ng at his apartment, we'll figure it out. We're not going to look to foul this up once your Honor grants it. Guidepost on its own keeps a log of every person when they go in, what time they arrive, and they're not allowed to bring in weapons. They can be and often are subject to search. They are scanned. These people know what they're doing. And this is not a private jail, Judge. This is a private apartment where the defendant can't leave. And the only conclusion you need to make, sir, is whether the government has established by preponderance of the evidence the risk of flight. And all they say over and over and over again is a rich man shouldn't be able to do that and that's not the law. And as Judge Rakoff very aptly pointed out, your Honor, it's often because of a defendant's wealth that he or she is detained to begin with because if it wasn't for his wealth, he would have made bail already and they wouldn't be asking for his detention. And if you look at the original bail application, it was he's super wealthy, super wealthy, and while they didn't say it today, if your Honor reviews the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 39 of 52 transcript before Magistrate Judge Netburn, that was the implication the government left there that country on a private plane as if he was fleeing. I point out, sir, respectfully, he was in the United States five separate times back and forth in 2014. Each time Customs was informed of him being there, and each time Customs was knew when he was leaving. And what we learned from the complaint originally is that, well, whether Mr. Ng knew it or not, the government had him under surveillance. They could have arrested him the first time he left by private plane, the second, third, fourth or the fifth time. They choose when to arrest him. And the only change today from what happened before Magistrate Judge Fox is, one, we?ve established beyond question that the conditions have been met, hopefully, to the satisfaction of the Court. And government has added the money laundering count, which could have been in the complaint if they wanted to because the allegations are exactly the same. There are no new charges. That charge, I submit, was added to the indictment because it ups the ante, quite frankly, and whether it's appropriate or not could have been in the complaint and that was not the argument. He's 68 years old. Whether he's facing 15 years or 25 years, it's essentially a life sentence if he is convicted whether it's money laundering or bribery and conspiracy. So SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805*0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 40 of 52 the answer is there's no mandatory minimum, as was the case in many of the cases that the armed guards were not permitted. There's no risk of flight. There's no danger to the community, as was the case with Judge Bianco. The crimes that were defined in the Judge Pauley case are very different than the crimes here. And, Judge, this is a case where under normal circumstances, the defendants are granted bail, and under normal circumstances, there is no presumption about flight. There is no presumption against bail. And to the contrary, I think the only law that really matters is 3142. And I think one of the most experienced judges in this building hearing the same argument your Honor heard set very onerous conditions, the same conditions we propose to the Court with the added change that it be called house arrest as opposed to detention in the home. And if the Court wants Guidepost to maintain a log of who visits, we have no objection to that. We would ask, your Honor, that if in fact it becomes apparent to us that the log is essentially providing the government with a road map into the defense case and we need to modify that because we bring in experts, we bring in other dignitaries, we would then come to the Court for an application in that event to modify it. One last comment just so we take the mystery out of this buying a passport. He didn't buy a passport, A. B, the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 41 of 52 passport is expired, so it's worthless. Second, it's not the Dominican Republic. It's the island of Dominica. And it was given to him and I understand 2,000 other people as an honorary award, if you will, or as a medal or as you give a certain amount of money to the Olympics. They didn't give him money. What he agreed to do, and I stand corrected, is he agreed to build a $20 million development project in the island of Dominica because it was a storm ravaged area and he was being courted to build there because of his reputation for building in ravaged areas and his ability to bring large construction crews. And in order to incentivize him and thank him it?s not a bribe. It's like getting a plaque. When we were in the DA's office, what you wanted was something for your car so you could park on Centre Street. Is it wrong now, maybe. THE COURT: Probably. MR. BRAFMAN: But not then. Not then. Then everybody wanted it. And you got it if you were a star assistant in the office, which was obviously a very difficult discussion. THE COURT: Now, Mr. Brafman, hopefully there are not any former assistants who are here who didn't get the plaque because then they'll be upset. MR. BRAFMAN: I understand. They make it seem like he bought his citizenship. He didn't become a citizen. They gave him an honorary passport. And having dealt with an SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 42 of 52 international case a couple years ago involving the man who would have been president of France, perhaps, if not for an indiscretion on his part, he was courted by every country in the world who wanted him to be an honorary ambassador, if you will, as is the case with many of our own ambassadors. So there's no mystery about buying citizenship. And he's not going to buy citizenship from within Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, which is across the street from the U.N. and down the block from my office, and he's not going to be able to leave the apartment anyway. The Portuguese passport, the other passport, they have the passports. They have the passports. They have the passport from China, they have the Portuguese, and that's what we have. THE COURT: Okay. Just, Mr. Richenthal, you'll be able to speak. The only thing I ask is no repetition, if possible. MR. RICHENTHAL: It will not be, your Honor. THE COURT: I just need to check because I have another matter on. I'm sorry. It was on for 2:30 and they're probably waiting. Don't worry about it. We're adjourning that. We have all the time here. But, Mr. Richenthal, go ahead. But, again, please, no repetition to the extent you can avoid it. MR. RICHENTHAL: I'm just going to respond to a couple points Mr. Brafman made. I think this is a thoroughly argued SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 43 of 52 case. It?s been thoroughly argued previously. There's lots of paper and your Honor has to make the decision. But I do want to respond to a couple small points. First, Mr. Ng does not have to make it to China, although we fear he will. He just has to make it to the Chinese consulate. He's a member of the Chinese government. THE COURT: Let me ask you this. I have no idea; I haven't looked at the law on this. Could he agree to extradition? In other words, could he agree, A, agree, obviously, not to go to the Chinese consulate, but agree that he would agree to be extradited from anywhere he was in the world, but specifically from China? MR. RICHENTHAL: I'm sure Mr. Ng and his counsel could execute that agreement. I have no confidence it would be valid in foreign legal systems, particularly the Chinese system in which he's a member of their government. We can explore that. I can't answer it right now, but I think we would have a lot of concern that the Chinese government would recognize that and, frankly, would Mr. Ng continue to stand by it or would he say he was forced into it. We have no control. He is a member of a foreign government. 80 Mr. Ng could execute that. I don't think the Court should have confidence it would do the job. THE COURT: My initial thought was whether it would be legal here. And the enforceability of it in China, I completely understand. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 44 of 52 MR. RICHENTHAL: I think extradition to be distinguished from say immunity I think is waivable on a personal basis. So I think that the law here would permit Mr. Ng to execute that so long as it was knowing and voluntary and there would be a colloquy with him about that. But I think it would be meaningless or at least the Court can have no confidence it wouldn't be meaningless. The other points I want to respond to, but I want to start with that he doesn't have to make it to China. He just has to make it to the Chinese consulate and that?s only a few miles from where we're talking right now. In terms of defending the case, this is not the first case in which a white collar defendant may be detained and has to defend himself. It happens all the time in this district and in this country. Before coming here, we reached out to the Bureau of Prisons, specifically one of the in?house staff to ask about things like reviewing discovery on CDs, reviewing discovery on computers. We were told all of that is possible. THE COURT: Just to be clear, my decision is not going to be based on the inability and I understand Mr. Brafman's point. There's no question that having a client who is not detained makes it easier to prepare a defense. Having said that, I also recognize that there are many people who are detained in cases here all the time who speak another language and who are detained and their attorneys and their SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 45 of 52 representatives still have to prepare a defense. So I understand the difficulties. I understand the reason and the points that you made. But that is not going to be the thing that tips the balance because I'm not I guess just to put a finer point on it, to the extent that he is detained or anybody else is detained under similar circumstances, I don't believe it's a Sixth Amendment violation that they're detained and they have difficulty, it's more difficult for them to prepare their defense than it would otherwise be. Just to be clear on just that issue. So if you want to continue to that, I don't think I need to hear that. I understand it as an argument, but that's not something that's going to tip the balance here. MR. RICHENTHAL: Let me move on to a couple small points. Mr. Brafman is right, he didn't have a burden in this case at this stage, at this proceeding. We do. But the burden is not that hard to meet here. The burden is preponderance to show risk of flight. I don't think your Honor can seriously come to the view, respectfully, that we haven't shown it's at least more likely than not there's a risk that Mr. Ng might flee. I think the real question is are there conditions that can mitigate that risk. That's what this argument is really about in our judgment. THE COURT: I don't dispute that. I know there was an SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 46 of 52 argument before Judge Netburn and I think, quite frankly, based on the facts before Judge Netburn, I don't opine one way or the other concerning the attorney that was representing Mr. Ng at the time. I think it was an appropriate decision at that time that he be detained. And I understand that the issue is, you're right, I think, are there conditions that could assure his return here because without the conditions, I think clearly without conditions or with normal conditions, there is a risk of flight because of the lack of connections to the United States and otherwise. But, I'm sorry, go ahead. MR. RICHENTHAL: Let me make two points apropos of that. First, Mr. Brafman is therefore also right he doesn't need to tell your Honor where the cash is, but we know it's here and we don't know where it is. And it's not just he brought cash in. It's he brought cash in and then met with a man he was paying bribes to, Francis Lorenzo, and he did it repeatedly. And when we say he brought in $300,000 of cash, $500,000 of cash, $900,000 in cash, that is big and heavy. You don't do it unless you have a reason. And when on occasion you do it and immediately go to a meeting with a man you're bribing by wire, why not just pay him more by wire. The answer, of course, is wires can be tracked. And if you want to give him more than the $500,000 by wire, that's how you pay him. That is what we believe occurred here. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 47 of 52 It is true Mr. Ng also likes to gamble, except every time save one that we know about he also gambles using wires. He wires hundreds of thousands of dollars when he gambles. The cash he used on one occasion, it appears to have been a lark. THE COURT: It appears to be a lark? MR. RICHENTHAL: A lark. He decided to go gambling THE COURT: I understand what a lark is. I wasn't sure whether you were using that word. MR. RICHENTHAL: And the reason I say that, to be clear, it's not just because it's a funny term, frankly. It's because typically Mr. Ng gambles by wire. 80, for example, when he went to Las Vegas, we have records talked about in one of the complaints, he sent a couple hundred thousand dollars there, used a marker and gambled. When he decides on occasion to go gambling and he hasn't sent a wire, he uses cash. The night before his arrest, for example, he decided again on a lark to drive to Foxwoods in a limo and gambled to four in the morning and spent a couple hundred thousand dollars. That's fine. That's his right. That's not a crime. But the point is that's a very, very small percentage of the money he brought here. And on multiple occasions after he brought it here, he was surveilled in meetings with his coconspirator that he was bribing, the same coconspirator he effectively gifted the apartment to while retaining technical ownership of, the same coconspirator he executed a $20,000 a SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 48 of 52 month contract. We have that contract. That's not just a proffer, although we're entitled to proceed by proffer. So I wanted to respond to the cash point. Ultimately, let me also say, Mr. Brafman suggested on multiple occasions that while not a private jail, this is nearly as good. No, it's not. The BOP vets the people who visit. Yes, we don't get to say whether they get to go, but the BOP does. They run them. That doesn't happen under the present order. The BOP does not permit people to bring cell phones into prison. Not just weapons, they can't bring cell phones. You can't bring cash. That's not true under the present order. There are all kinds of things that occur when one is incarcerated that don't happen and, frankly, are difficult to happen, even if your Honor were to order them, because there's a huge one Mr. Brafman omitted from his list monitoring of Mr. Ng's phone calls and communications. There's a reason the BOP does that and it's not only for defendants deemed dangerous. It's for all defendants who are detained. And the reason they do it is because we worry that people who either are so dangerous or so likely to flee or both that they need to be detained may try to do things while they're detained. So we keep a log of their phone calls. We only permit one way they can email, through the BOP court link system, and it's monitored. They can't get attachments on that system. They SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 49 of 52 46 can't have cell phones. Mr. Ng can have as many cell phones as he wants. He can have internet access. His phone calls are not monitored. His communications are not monitored. These conditions are in fact things other judges have ordered in cases in which this arrangement was blessed, none of which were ordered here, all of which are absolutely appropriate. But they're not sufficient in our judgment. So I?m not going to repeat myself. I just wanted to respond to those points. THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHENTHAL: The risk is severe. It?s not equivalent to the BOP, nor can it be made equivalent to the BOP, and it's not appropriate on the facts of this case putting aside any legal argument. THE COURT: Okay. Briefly, Mr. Brafman. MR. BRAFMAN: You can never replicate nor should we be required to replicate the conditions in the BOP because we're talking about a defendant's right to bail on conditions that will assure his appearance. I've discussed with the BOP officials for 20 years why they have the rules concerning cell phones because it's contraband within a prison. And the reason they monitor phone calls is because they want to make sure that they don't have security risk concerning inmates who they perceive to be dangerous. But whenever you impose bail, in virtually every case SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 50 of 52 in which you impose bail, once they're outside of the prison, without any of the conditions we're agreeing to, they have a right to talk to who they want to because they're presumed innocent and because they're not risks to the community and I think that's a substantial distinction. The only thing that your Honor must fashion is conditions that will ensure that the defendant is here when he's required and will not flee. And I think what Mr. Richenthal is saying is we could never replicate, regardless of the conditions you impose, what the BOP and we're not supposed to even try because it's humanly impossible. And if that's what was required, then none of the people who have been granted bail in these cases in the past where they are satisfying the court that the security there will keep them here would ever have been able to get out. Thank you for your patience, sir. THE COURT: I'm going to take five or ten minutes because I'd like to organize my thoughts and I'll come back and give my ruling. Okay. Thank you. (Recess) (Continued on next page) SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 51 of 52 48 (In open court) THE COURT: Okay. Can you hear, Mr. Ng? Okay. Look, the government cites to Banki and I'm not sure if that's the way you pronounce where the Second Circuit said they were troubled by this idea that someone might be able to create a private jail and arguably gain their release. And while, yes, it may be troubling, they haven't prohibited it. And, in fact, as the government concedes, granting bail is within my discretion. So in connection with that, I do find that there are conditions that could be imposed to assure Mr. Ng's appearance at future court appearances. However, those are not the conditions that are currently imposed. So I'm going to list a series of additional conditions, then I'm going to open it up for the parties to hear from them about first comments about the conditions, the additional conditions I'm imposing, and with regard to the government, any other conditions you think that you would ask that I impose. Not that I necessarily will, but I just want to make sure there isn't anything that I've missed, as we've gone through a number of different options. First, Guidepost shall give a log of the visitors that enter the apartment. In addition, I think there was a reference in prior argument to a plan, or something, that Guidepost had prepared. Mr. Brafman, I can't remember if it was a proposal or SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805r0300 Case Document 16-1 Filed 05/18/16 Page 52 of 52 what it was. MR. BRAFMAN: It was the proposal which we submitted. The government has a copy, and it's the plan that they intend to enforce. THE COURT: Okay. And it may change somewhat, based upon what I'm about to say, but the videotape that Guidepost prepared, they should provide it to the government, a copy to the government, of the apartment. Visitors will be subject to search in order to gain entry to the apartment. And that's search by the Guidepost security detail. The government will be permitted to review the credentials of the security professionals that will be part of the security team. And whether that's six or eight or however many there are, the government will be able to review their CVS and actually review, to their extent, whatever research they want to do with regard to those individuals. And I should say that that process, in other words, the government's and obviously, to the extent there's some dispute about whether someone is adequate or not I hope that there will be some agreement, but if not, I'll break the tie, so to speak. And that condition, in other words, the vetting, I think, needs to occur prior to Mr. Ng being released. Now, with regard to airplanes, Mr. Ng is to provide all identification for the aircraft that he owns, that includes SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 1 of 52 the identification numbers that appear on the side of the aircraft, as well as again, I am not by any sense of the imagination an expert on aircraft, but the transponder numbers for those airplanes. To the extent that Mr. Ng has used in the past companies, in other words, leasing companies, private entities to arrange flights, he's to disclose those companies that he?s used in the past. Why don't we say in the past five years, the companies that he's used other than using his private aircraft. Mr. Ng is to agree and whoever is living in the apartment is to agree to random, unannounced searches of that apartment by Guidepost personnel with a representative of pretrial. Pretrial will determine the timing of those searches. But, again, they will be random, and they should be unannounced. And I saw as part of the conditions that Guidepost was going to provide a supervisory person or agent. Well, I think that it makes sense for and whether that's one or more than one person, it may be more than one person, that person will be the liaison between pretrial and the United States Attorney's Office, and they will be available 24/7. In other words, they will be the contact that pretrial and the government will have to Guidepost. And also to get a sense of scheduling and things like that, whatever issues that may come up, that person should be available 24/7. And by "available," just to be clear, they SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 2 of 52 51 should be reachable by phone and otherwise. Mr. Ng will not be involved or informed of what the composition of his security detail will be at any given time. So, in other words, whoever they are will be randomly assigned in such a way that makes sense. And a certain amount of this is going to be at the discretion of Guidepost. But Mr. Ng is to have no say in the timing or know who is going to be there at any particular time. Mr. Ng will have no cell phone. He will not have use of a cell phone. And although there can be a hard line in the apartment, it shouldn't have any features like call forwarding. And I was also contemplating that there would be a log of outgoing calls that are made. MR. BRAFMAN: Excuse me? THE COURT: Yes. MR. BRAFMAN: I didn't hear you. THE COURT: A log of outgoing calls that are made from that phone. There are a couple of these that I would like to hear from the parties on, because what I intend to do with regard to visitors is to do almost the inverse of what Mr. Brafman suggested, the government provide a list, and then those people will be persona non grata, so to speak. What I'm going to impose is that there be an approved visitor list, individuals who are permitted to visit Mr. Ng while he is there. And, SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 3 of 52 obviously, these individuals have to agree to be subject to being searched. What that means, though, Mr. Brafman, in connection with preparing your defense, is that I would anticipate that much of your preparation will occur in your offices. You're entitled to prepare your defense without the government, whatever defense that may be, necessarily being aware of the moves that you make. So, as a practical matter, most of your prep, I would imagine, would occur outside if outsiders are involved, would occur at your offices. The only appointments that Mr. Ng will be able to situation where Mr. Ng will be able to leave the apartment are for attorney visits and for medical appointments, all with the prior notice and approval by pretrial. Okay. So those are the additional conditions that I would impose that I feel are necessary to reasonably assure Mr. Ng's appearance here in the future. So, first, I'll hear from the government with regard I understand you have your objection is noted, so you don't need to repeat yourself. But I'll hear from you on those proposed additional conditions. MR. RICHENTHAL: Your Honor, may I have maybe two minutes just to confer with my colleagues? THE COURT: Sure. I'd like the parties to confer on this issue, because I wasn't sure about ?e the other issue I was going to say is computer access. And, in part, in this day SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 4 of 52 and age, to the extent that Mr. Ng is going to be somehow involved in his businesses, he has to have some means of communication. And so I'm looking for some limitation on that, and I don't know what that would be. If it's just he has to meet with people in person, then maybe thatrecognize that having access to a computer is like having access to a cell phone, almost, in particular since it would probably be a computer well MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor? THE COURT: Yes, Mr. Brafman. MR. BRAFMAN: Maybe before Mr. Richenthal steps out or confers, I could give the Court my initial reaction to most of these conditions so that you don't have to deal with those issues because I may be consenting. THE COURT: Did I mention the one thing I did want was that I think and I apologize if I did mention this I think there needs to be an interpreter there, an interpreter that is vetted by pretrial and the U.S. Attorney's Office, because I can't see how Mr. Ng can communicate with the security detail, and vice versa, without that being the case. MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, it was our hope, because she's present in the courtroom and she's going her plan was to live with her father, is Mr. Ng's daughter, who is mother of three children who are still in China being cared for by her in?laws and her husband, she intends to live there. She SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 5 of 52 54 speaks, obviously, fluent Mandarin and perfect English. And interaction with the detectives is going to be very minimal. He's not going to be able to leave. I don't think he's going to want to sit and engage them in conversation. But if your Honor's THE COURT: I'm sorry, go ahead. MR. BRAFMAN: If we could have the permission of his daughter to live there, serve as the interpreter between him and the detectives, in case they need to explain things to him. And Mr. Mo, who will be spending a fair amount of time there, also speaks Mandarin. I just think having an interpreter live there for 24/7 is an extraordinary expense. I don't think I can find someone who would want to do that. THE COURT: I don't know that it necessarily needs to be 24 hours. I thought about that also. But here's the issue. Guidepost is responsible for insuring that Mr. Ng not leave. I'm not willing to put the burden on his daughter for that, although, I understand, I think was she going to be a signatory on the bond? MR. BRAFMAN: Well, Judge Fox did not grant the government's request that there be a surety, given the size of the bond, unless you find someone who had their own independent substantial assets. She's happy to sign it, Judge. And she is his daughter. She has no criminal record. But if that's what your Honor wants, we'll have her sign a bond. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 6 of 52 THE COURT: Right. There's different reasons for having someone sign the bond. And I don't know what her financial situation is, but I would like her to be a signatory on the bond. MR. BRAFMAN: I think she has agreed to do that. Your Honor, I would also add, Mr. Mo explains to me that there is what is called a language line that you can call into an interpreter service, and they can talk to the police and that person can then talk to Mr. Ng. I'll get you more information on that and see if that works with her being in the apartment as well. THE COURT: Okay. I mean, I'll tell you that my initial reaction to that is that it be someone who is neutral. It doesn't have to be 24/7, but during the hours that folks are awake in the apartment, I don't know whether it's 8:00 to 5:00 or 9:00 to whatever it may be, because since Guidepost is going to be responsible for him and, as I understand it and you can confirm this if I'm wrong that Guidepost that many, if not most if not all, I should say, of the security officers don't speak and I apologize, Mr. Hg, is it Mandarin? MR. BRAFMAN: Mandarin. THE COURT: Mandarin. MR. BRAFMAN: Judge, I think the government's argument was you don't want him to be in a position where he can SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 7 of 52 compromise a security person. If he can't speak to that person, it's very hard for him to engage in a compromising conversation. My suggestion is that we figure out a way that they can be able to communicate to him, because the communication is really going to be only if he has to leave to go to a doctor or a lawyer's office, because otherwise it's fairly simple. An interpreter could show up, say these are the agreements. He hears them now. You can't leave. And I'm not certain what other communication they need to have with him. THE COURT: The reason for me imposing this is that Guidepost needs to know if he's on the phone, on the hard line, sort of what is he saying. In other words, is he saying, I'll meet you on the corner of whatever and whatever? Look, if the parties can work out something else, because I understand the compromise issue. Quite frankly, that is not for me a concern with regard to the folks at Guidepost if the government is able to vet these individuals. These are people who, I imagine and some of them sound like they're active, current law enforcement; others are people who are former law enforcement. There may be a situation where, for whatever reason, the government reviews someone's background, and they decide that maybe that's not the right person. But having that in place, I think, for me at least and, you know, I could be proven wrong, and that's what I get paid for. Not for being wrong, but for making a decision. And if turns out I've SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 8 of 52 57 miscalculated, so be it. I'm sorry. Go ahead. MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, I'm sorry. I'm trying to save the Court some aggravation on this issue. Perhaps we can talk to Guidepost; we can see what they suggest, how they would handle this. I'm certain they've guarded other non?speaking ?e non?English?speaking people in the past. Let me see what they suggest. We'll confer with the government. If we agree on this, we'll agree. If not, we'll come back, tell your Honor what the proposal is. I just don?t want to have to have a stranger, who's an interpreter, live in the apartment 24/7. THE COURT: That's fine. Do you understand my I'm sorry. You don't have to stand. MR. BRAFMAN: This is Janet Ng. She's going to be living there, but she's his daughter. THE COURT: Okay. And I'm fine, just to be clear, if she lives there. But, again, she has to be subject to the same restrictions. Well MR. BRAFMAN: Yes, I understand. THE COURT: In other words, her restrictions, she's subject to search. MR. BRAFMAN: Yes. THE COURT: But with regard to her coming and going, obviously, she can come and go as she pleases. But as to the other restrictions, she's got to agree that there can be searches SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 9 of 52 MR. BRAFMAN: Yes. THE COURT: which will include any items that she has in the apartment at any given time. MR. BRAFMAN: We understand. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BRAFMAN: Judge, if I could go through the extra conditions that your Honor raised THE COURT: Yes. MR. BRAFMAN: and tell you which I think, sir, are not going to be difficult. We do not oppose Guidepost's having a log of the visitors. They have a videotape of the apartment which I will have them turn over to the government either today or by tomorrow, but before the defendant is released. We understand that the visitors will be searched, and we will notify any visitors who want to go that they are going to be searched. We will work out some type of a mechanism where Guidepost I assume they schedule these things in advance will e?mail the curriculum vitae or background of the proposed guards to the government before they show up so that they know, for example, this week these are who the people are going to be. And I think on a rolling basis we would have no problem getting them that information. And Mr. Jaffe, their chief compliance officer, tells me that's not a problem. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 10 of 52 I want to get back to the aircraft for a minute, because that's complicated. I believe that we are agreeing that whoever lives in the apartment can be searched by Guidepost or pretrial randomly, without THE COURT: And it's not only I apologize. It?s not only the individuals who are there, but it's the apartment itself. MR. BRAFMAN: Yes, I understand. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BRAFMAN: That the place can be subject to random search by Guidepost or pretrial. I will leave it to Guidepost to indicate who the supervisory personnel will be and also vet them through the Southern District. And how they liaison with pretrial, I'll leave that to them. I believe that the security personnel who will guard that apartment are going to be assigned by Guidepost and not at the request of the defendant and that we will play no part in picking and choosing who these people are. I see no reason for us to want to do that. I will accept the condition without discussion that the defendant will not be permitted to have a cell phone. I believe that having a hard line in the apartment is going to be necessary, without the call forwarding feature. They can have a log of outgoing calls. I?d ask if the call is to counsel that it be as if it were even in the prison, a SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 11 of 52 privileged call. THE COURT: Yes. MR. BRAFMAN: As long as they establish it's either to my office or Mr. Mo's office, that it not be a recorded conversation. THE COURT: Mr. Brafman, I don't mean to in any way suggest that this might occur, but I want to just be clear that, you know, when there are such calls, no forwarding from your office. MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, I'm familiar with the procedure. I've been tested 500 times by inmates, and I've never failed at this. THE COURT: No, I just wanted to be clear. MR. BRAFMAN: I don't intend to do it at this point in my career. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BRAFMAN: And I have no problem that the people who visit being vetted. And, again, if there is a disagreement over whether they can and cannot visit, we will either work it out with the government or go to pretrial or go to the Court if it's someone we think is important. THE COURT: Yes. MR. BRAFMAN: I accept, Obviously, that he will be escorted by Guidepost if there are attorney visits. I'd like the record to reflect that Mr. Mo '5 office is downtown; my SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 12 of 52 office is midtown. And because he speaks Mandarin, there's going to be a lot of the meetings between Mrhimself a former law enforcement person having worked as an assistant District Attorney. So I just want the government to know that we will give Guidepost two offices because I can't be I also have a trial schedule that I need to deal with. I may not have to be at every one of the meetings when they're speaking Mandarin to each other. I feel like an exhibit at those meetings anyway. So I will provide both addresses to the government and pretrial. Your Honor, the defendant operates businesses which, by the government's own suggestion, are massive. He employs over a thousand people in Macau. It's going to be essential that there be a computer in the apartment, and it's going to be essential that he be able to he has bank loans totaling over $100 million that he needs to address, needs to monitor, and I don't think we want those businesses to fail while he is still presumed to be innocent. And I think we need to figure out a way for him to be able to have a computer, and I'll discuss it with Mr. Richenthal and see if we can fashion something that's acceptable to them. I want to go back to the airplanes, because I think your Honor is imposing on us a task that may not be doable. If the defendant and I need to verify this if the defendant personally owns any airplane, we will provide the government SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 13 of 52 62 with the tail number, which is, I think, what your Honor asked for THE COURT: Yes. MR. BRAFMAN: what the transponder numbers are and the location of the aircraft. If it's not in the United States, we will let them know where it is and where it remains. There are times when he came into the United States not on his own plane. It was a private plane, but it was not a plane he owned, to my knowledge. And to the extent that it is a leased plane, we will attempt to, through the particular leasing company in question, try and find the identification of the planes in question. But, Judge, I want to also, as a practical matter THE COURT: Actually, I think I made the distinction. For purposes of his own planes, in other words, planes that he owns, transponder/tail number. For purposes of leased airplanes, in other words, because as I understand it, unless it's a long?term lease MR. BRAFMAN: No, it's a trip lease. THE COURT: A company that he contracts on an individual basis, you just have to provide the name of those companies. MR. BRAFMAN: Okay. THE COURT: And if you can, to the extent possible, the name of the companies and the approximate dates he used SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 14 of 52 63 those companies. MR. BRAFMAN: Well, I don't have a problem identifying the names of the companies if the concern is that he not be able to contract with them to do this again, to the extent that he ever did. THE COURT: I know what you're about to say. MR. BRAFMAN: But to give them a roadmap THE COURT: No, I understand. I understand. MR. BRAFMAN: If they want to subpoena those companies THE COURT: Hold on, you know, because I'm about to rule in your favor. I understand what you're saying. And it had not occurred to me that there may be some evidentiary value to that, his comings and goings, that would be useful or could be useful or the government might think might be useful. So what I'm going to require, though, is that you disclose the names of the entities that he utilized for purposes of aircraft flights. MR. BRAFMAN: He will do that, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BRAFMAN: And to the extent he owns any planes that are his, we will provide the identifying numbers. I think the other and Janet Ng will be here when conditions of bail are satisfied, and she will cosign the bond as a suretor if that's what your Honor requires. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 15 of 52 THE COURT: I do. MR. BRAFMAN: And I ask the Court, with the exception of these conditions and assuming the government doesn't convince you to add any others, although it's inconceivable to me that there might be others the other conditions set by Magistrate Judge Fox remain the same? THE COURT: Yes. Let me just take a quick look. Obviously, there will still be monitoring. I think the restrictions on Mr. Ng?s movement are, I think, more limited than what the magistrate put. Yes, I don't think there's anything inconsistent with that, with what I've said. So all of those other conditions would remain, but let me just for a moment take a look. Actually, I think it's probably set forth in a little bit more detail MR. BRAFMAN: It?s in the pretrial services report. Your Honor, I could hand it up. THE COURT: It says travel restricted SDNY, EDNY. Is there any reason why Mr. Ng would need to go to the Eastern District? MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, I think you can leave that out. I think the only movement that we were under the impression he was entitled to with Guidepost was for legal visits, approved medical visits, and to court. THE COURT: That's coming out. Just that travel SDNY, whatever, and it's supplanted by what I just said, in other SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 16 of 52 words, court, visits to you or Mr. Mo, and medical visits, all with disclosure to MR. BRAFMAN: Pretrial. THE COURT: notice and disclosure to pretrial. MR. BRAFMAN: Yes, sir. MR. JONES: Your Honor? THE COURT: Yes. MR. JONES: Michael Jones from pretrial services. THE COURT: Yes. MR. JONES: I just want to clarify. Generally, when somebody's under pretrial supervision, they're required to report to our office. Are we going to exclude that? THE COURT: We are going to exclude that, yes. I mean, obviously, to the extent you feel it's appropriate or your office feels it's appropriate, when Mr. Ng is present for a court appearance, if you want to meet with him about something, feel free, obviously, to come to court. I don't think it's necessary, though, that he come to your office. It seems that would create, logistically, a little bit of an issue. But your contacts will be with the folks from Guidepost concerning his comings and goings, and the like, and he will still have the electronic monitoring. MR. JONES: Okay. THE COURT: Right? MR. BRAFMAN: Yes. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 17 of 52 THE COURT: I understand you need a hard line for that anyway. MR. BRAFMAN: Yes, pretrial has notified us and, I think, also Mr. Richenthal that they intend to try and take care of that tomorrow morning by inspecting the apartment and putting in the landline or making sure it's there. THE COURT: Okay. And, obviously, if pretrial wants to is it possible for purposes of urinalysis I see that was the subject of is that something that you could go to his apartment to take a sample, or no? I'm just not sure, quite frankly, if it's necessary at all. MR. BRAFMAN: He?s 68 and he's a diabetic, suffers from hypertension, takes a great many approved medications. There's never been any suggestion that he uses drugs. THE COURT: Yes, I'm going to not require that. MR. BRAFMAN: Thank you. THE COURT: I think it's typically part of the standard requirement; but in this case, I don't think it's necessary, especially in light of the fact that Mr. Ng's going to be essentially under house arrest. Okay. That's covered. I think all of the other conditions, I think, Mr. Brafman, that I've just taken a look at with the noted ones that I?ve removed are fine, in addition to the ones I've just added. Okay. Anything else, Mr. Brafman? SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 18 of 52 MR. BRAFMAN: Just, your Honor, if the Court or the government could order Mr. Ng to be produced tomorrow, in the unlikely event that I'm able to get all of the conditions satisfied by tomorrow? THE COURT: It's just that I apologize, Mr. Brafman. It may not have been clear with regard to what we need to do first, though, is that the detail I understand it's fine to let the government know who is going to be on the detail. But what I'm saying is in advance of Mr. Ng being released, the government should get the CVs, and they should vet and I think this should be done in short order. So, in other words, there will be a time frame that the government has the individuals who will be part of the security detail prior to Mr. Ng being released. MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, Mr. Jaffe, who's from Guidepost, says to me that they've had this on their computer system, that they could get it to the government by tonight, by tomorrow morning. I also represent to you we're not going to offer them anyone who has any type of a checkered history or past, because we're not looking for this to fail; we're looking for this work. THE COURT: I understand that. And, again, I don't know who the individuals are, and I don't know what the government might be able to uncover. And I?m not suggesting that any of them have "checkered pasts." SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 19 of 52 MR. BRAFMAN: Right. THE COURT: But there may be issues with regard to certain of them that the government has concerns about. Obviously, they can't unreasonably withhold in other words, this is purely just to eliminate people they have concerns about MR. BRAFMAN: Right. THE COURT: for whatever reason. So I do think that if they get them tonight, I don't know, I think by close of business Monday, they need to have done whatever vetting they need to have done. And failing that, failing that, and absent some extraordinary circumstance, Mr. Ng can and meeting the other conditions, can be released. MR. BRAFMAN: Can we order him produced on Monday, then? MR. RICHENTHAL: We'll order him produced if the conditions appear they'll be met on Monday. MR. BRAFMAN: I understand that. But if we have a disagreement whether you're withholding your agreement unreasonably, we need to produce him to discuss it with the Court. And he's already been detained for a month, and my hope is to have him released once the conditions are met. My expectation is that we will have all of these conditions met within the next 24 hours, if humanly possible, certainly by the end of the day Monday. And I'd say 90 percent of the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 20 of 52 conditions your Honor has asked us to agree to are available, essentially, tomorrow morning, when we will get whatever additional information we need. I understand the tight window to do this tomorrow, but I would like that your Honor order him to be produced Monday. At worst, if he doesn't meet the conditions, he won't get out; but at least if he meets the conditions, we're not dealing with another day. THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHENTHAL: We have no problem with Mr. Ng being produced on Monday. But as the marshals, no doubt, would tell your Honor, it's not a small task to be moving people around. If Mr. Ng looks like he's not going to meet the conditions, he doesn't need to be brought here. MR. BRAFMAN: If I thought he was MR. RICHENTHAL: Excuse me, Mr. Brafman. I'm still speaking. THE COURT: Wait. Wait. First of all, you talk to me; you don't talk to each other. Okay. And just one at a time. All right. We?ve been here for a while. So I'll hear from you, Mr. Richenthal, then I'll hear from Mr. Brafman. Go ahead. MR. RICHENTHAL: I'm sorry, your Honor. THE COURT: That's Okay. MR. RICHENTHAL: We don't have a problem, in principle, producing Mr. Ng. We're not going to throw SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 21 of 52 bureaucratic delays for the sake of bureaucratic delay. My only point is, particularly in light of some of the concerns that we'd like to express about some of the conditions or amendments, it may well be he simply can't meet them by Monday. And I don't know that the marshals should be moving people around unnecessarily. As a principle matter, of course we have no problem producing Mr. Ng. If he meets the package, he should be released forthwith. That's the Court's order. We'll comply with that. THE COURT: Let me hear from Mr. Brafman and then hear what additional things the government may have to say. MR. BRAFMAN: Well, unless the government withholds reasonable consent to the conditions that your Honor has proposed, we expect that we will meet those conditions by Monday. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BRAFMAN: While I don't want to unnecessarily impose on the marshals, it's not an easy feat for him to be produced either. He gets up at 4:00 o'clock in the morning, and he doesn't get back till 8:00 o'clock at night. So we're not doing this just for practice. I think we'll meet the conditions by Monday, and I think they'll be met to your Honor's satisfaction. And my hope is that he would then be released. Otherwise, he gets housed for another 24 hours, and those days count. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 22 of 52 THE COURT: Okay. Obviously, if he does get released on Monday, it will be Guidepost and Guidepost security personnel and the Guidepost vehicle that will be used to transport him. MR. BRAFMAN: We will arrange for two of the Guideposteapproved people to be in the courtroom, and they also provide an approved driver and their own vehicle to handle all of these movements, just like they were marshals doing it for the court. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Richenthal. Thank you, Mr. Brafman. MR. RICHENTHAL: Your Honor, I have a couple things in mind, but if it's okay, can we have maybe two minutes just to sort of confer? Would that be all right? THE COURT: Yes. You can have two minutes to confer with your colleagues or confer with Mr. Brafman also if you think well, why don't you do this: Confer with your colleagues, and if there are additional things, confer with Mr. Brafman, see if you can agree on some of them. And if you can agree, we'll add those; and if you can't agree, I'll break the tie. All right. Thank you. Just knock when you're ready to go, but I'm just going to step back. (Recess) THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Richenthal. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 23 of 52 MR. RTCHENTHAL: The good news, your Honor, we have several conditions the parties agree on. THE COURT: Okay. MR. RTCHENTHAL: The bad news is you?re going to have to split the tie on two of them. THE COURT: That's fine. MR. RTCHENTHAL: There's more that we agree on than we don't agree. THE COURT: By what, three to two? MR. RICHENTHAL: No, it's a significant ratio. THE COURT: All right. Go ahead. MR. RICHENTHAL: This is in no particular order, your Honor. This is just the order in which the parties talked about them. It's our understanding that the following conditions are agreed upon between both sides: First, that the hard line, that is, landline telephone, that Mr. Ng will have in the apartment, he will execute paperwork for what?s colloquially known as a consensual or consensual Title that is, the phone calls will be recorded and monitored. The government will ensure and the paperwork can reflect that there is auto?minimization of any and all calls with counsel. That his counsel will provide us their office phone numbers, and whatnot. And those will be auto?minimized, that is, not recorded. THE COURT: Okay. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 24 of 52 MR. RICHENTHAL: Second, it's our understanding from speaking with pretrial that the following is technologically possible, and the parties agree on it. The defendant will be permitted to have a computer with Internet access. However, that computer will be loaded with what I think is known as monitoring software which will log all Web sites that he goes to. And the defendant will provide to the government and then to pretrial a list of, essentially, approved sites, which we understand will be sites known to contain his legitimate businesses. THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHENTHAL: We don't have that list at present, but it's our understanding pretrial can essentially make that work. MR. BRAFMAN: I have one question. THE COURT: Mr. Brafman, you have something to say on that point? MR. BRAFMAN: Just want to ask a question on this particular one. I consent to it, but what I'd like to just work out, because I don't know how pretrial does this physically, if we satisfy all of the other conditions of bail except this, could we have an understanding that he would get released but that he wouldn't have access to a computer until that site was approved by pretrial? MR. RICHENTHAL: If I'm understanding the proposal, SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 25 of 52 it's that he can be released without the setup, provided there's no computer? MR. BRAFMAN: Yes. MR. RICHENTHAL: Yes, we have no objection to that. THE COURT: That's fine. Okay. All right. MR. RICHENTHAL: Third and I think this is a nuance to what the Court already ordered it's the government's understanding that most of the private planes are actually owned by Mr. Ng's company, as a technical matter, and he's agreed to give us the tail numbers of those, not simply the ones he personally owns. THE COURT: Well, look, yes, and I would have, had I thought about it that way e? look, I mean, I've never owned my own plane, so I don't know how it works. But, yes, that makes sense that if they?re owned by the company, they're effectively, in my view, owned by Mr. Ng. Go ahead. MR. RICHENTHAL: I think I'm up to the fourth. THE COURT: Yes. MR. RICHENTHAL: The defendant does not object to the government receiving the log that's kept of visitors, not merely that the log be let me back up. THE COURT: Oh, receiving the log of the visitors. MR. RTCHENTHAL: Actually receiving the log without being asked for it. Essentially, on a regular basis. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 26 of 52 THE COURT: Yes. MR. RICHENTHAL: We would propose daily, but we?re open to something reasonable. That the log be something transmitted to us and not simply something we have to ask for and occasionally get. Fifth, visitors to the apartment cannot bring to meetings with Mr. Ng phones, cash above a de minimis amount. Your Honor can define de minimis. We, essentially, just don't want large sums of cash. And travel documents. MR. BRAFMAN: Judge, what I agreed to is that since everyone is subject to search when they enter, that they will give the Guidepost people their phones who will keep custody of it. So, as if you're coming to a courthouse, you'll get it back when you leave. And to the extent that all they have is personal money for you know, whatever it is people carry around with them, that they will simply show Guidepost what they have. Guidepost will hold it until they leave if it's more than, you know, $200. I don't think they're worried about somebody coming in with $80. I think they're worried about a suitcase. THE COURT: Yes. MR. BRAFMAN: Second, Judge, just so the record should reflect I don't think the government objects there are other family members, daughter?in?law and godson, who live there now; and they will continue to live with him, because SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C- (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 27 of 52 they have no place else to live, and they want to help take care of him. I don't think they care about that. There are four bedrooms in the apartment, and they live there now. So, in addition to Janet Ng, these other family members, with the permission of the Court, would live there. Guidepost understands that, and it?s his daughter?inelaw and young man who's present in the courtroom who Mr. Ng has helped raise. We'll give you the full names and background. None of them have any criminal records and MR. RICHENTHAL: Just a couple comments. We also think that Guidepost should hold on to any travel documents not in the names of the residents. In other words, we don't want someone coming in with some sort of identification document in Mr. Ng's name or various aliases that he's used. MR. BRAFMAN: Any travel documents that they come in with will be deposited with Guidepost until they leave. THE COURT: Yes. I mean, however Guidepost wants to do it, I think that makes sense. Let me just ask. Obviously, anyone who lives there is going to be subject to the same conditions as we discussed with regard to Mr. Ng's daughter; in other words, there are going to be random searches. They've got to consent to the searches that will be of the premises and also of their belongings that may be in the premises. MR. BRAFMAN: Yes, your Honor. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 28 of 52 THE COURT: So as long as that's the case and, obviously and perhaps, just to be on the safe side, perhaps requiring the execution of some document that memorializes that would make sense. MR. BRAFMAN: We could just put it on the record now to save time, and I can we'll get the government something in writing. THE COURT: Here's the thing. I suspect that to the extent pretrial is being is conducting these searches of others, other than Mr. Ng and the premises where he lives, in other words, of people's personal items, I think that they would want to have that; and I actually think Guidepost might feel a little bit better if they had something along those lines. MR. BRAFMAN: We'll get a document prepared, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. RICHENTHAL: This is actually a good segue to the final thing I think parties agree on, which is we think that also, frankly, to give Guidepost comfort and the government comfort, Mr. Ng should agree that reasonable force may be used against him to prevent his flight. THE COURT: I'm sorry. Yes, I apologize. There was an agreement and Mr. Brafman had agreed to and I don't remember the language, Mr. Brafman, but in connection with the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C- (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 29 of 52 7 8 argument before Judge Fox and that is one thing, I apologize, I did forget is that there would be that understanding that you know, reasonable force to prevent him from fleeing. MR. BRAFMAN: Yes. THE COURT: Or whatever the language might be. MR. BRAFMAN: I think what I said was that Mr. Ng consents and understands that Guidepost is permitted to use reasonable force to keep him from fleeing or otherwise violating the conditions of bail. And he has agreed to that before Judge Fox, and he's prepared to tell you, sir, through his interpreter, that he agrees to that as well. THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHENTHAL: And then, finally, I think the two issues the parties do not agree on THE COURT: Okay. MR. RICHENTHAL: So, first, the government respectfully requests your Honor to order there be cosigners beyond Mr. Ng's daughter. So, at a minimum, we think everyone living in the apartment should sign the bond. We're now being told there's at least three people living there. We think they should all have to sign the bond. But, your Honor, we think others should sign the bond, too. I mean, the risk of flight is so tremendous. Mr. Ng has represented he is a man with great philanthropic and business SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 30 of 52 activities. He should be able to find cosigners in the United States. To be clear, the cosigners do not have to have $50 million in assets. Financially responsible does not mean $50 million in liquid assets; it just means financially responsible. And the purpose of that, of course, is for Mr. Ng to understand that should he choose to flee, people who he cares about or people who he has connections would suffer financially. That's completely appropriate. It's ordered regularly in this courthouse. We don?t think it should not be ordered here. We think it should be ordered here. We don't have a particular number in mind. Pretrial recommended four cosigners. We're not tied to the number four. But we think there should be people independent of his family members, particularly given that his family members are not American and, to our knowledge, have no assets that are not, in fact, his assets. THE COURT: All right. MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, we do not oppose the signing of the bond by Mr. Ng's daughter, his daughterwin?law, and the young man who he has raised who lives in the apartment. He has spent the entire day telling you that Mr. Ng has no ties to this community. We could fill the courtroom with suretors who are now in Macau and China and who have no interest in flying here to become involved in the case where the government would then, you know, subject them to God knows SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 31 of 52 what. So we don't have anybody in the United States as a suretor. But the principal reason I think your Honor correctly, in your discretion, has agreed to these conditions, as has Magistrate Judge Fox who denied their request for suretors, is because of the Guidepost conditions. And we ask your Honor not to make us try and find someone, because we don't have anybody. We've tried. We have a daughter. We have a daughter?in?law. We have Mr. Ng. And he's not going to become a fugitive and make his daughter liable for $50 million, because although she doesn't live in the United States, she does have three children; she did go to school in Canada. We don't have anybody else to offer you, and we didn't have anybody else to offer Judge Fox, and Judge Fox said no. He didn't ask for any additional suretors. THE COURT: Let me ask this. And, Mr. Brafman, you weren't representing Mr. Ng at the time. My recollection was that there were and it may be that the offer was actually people who are involved in this case now officials from the United Nations who I understood that prior counsel had represented, and it may be that you've tried that, and that's impossible. MR. BRAFMAN: It's impossible because, you know, everybody at the UN who would come in here to offer to work as a suretor is, in the whole universe of things, potentially SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 32 of 52 81 suspect because their position is he bribed the head of the UN. There are hundreds of people from the UN who travel to Macau. The young lawyer who was here, just so your Honor understands, he really didn?t know Mr. Ng. His family found him because he was in Queens and he speaks Mandarin. He's not a criminal lawyer. When he came here, he introduced himself to Mr. Ng; and, in words of substance, Mr. Ng says, I know very important people. I can't offer them as suretors. I don't know who he was referring to. But to the extent he was referring to Mr. Lorenzo or Mr. Ashe, I'm not certainly going to propose them as suretors. And there isn't anybody, Judge. Trust me, if there was, I would have just proposed it. And I think the fact that someone else signs is not the incentive that you need. The incentive that you have is that he can't go anywhere, and I think we've crossed that bridge. MR. RICHENTHAL: I just want to respond briefly, your Honor. THE COURT: Sure. MR. RICHENTHAL: First of all, there is a UN person who signed a bond for a codefendant. So it's not the case people were unwilling, and it's not the case we're unwilling to approve them. But it's also not the case that Mr. Ng doesn?t have business connections in the United States. First of all, he's represented that he does. But we also have contracts with SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 33 of 52 82 multiple people I don't just mean Mr. Ashe and Mr. Lorenzo 1_ as recently as last month, in which Mr. Ng's U.S.?based foundation, called the San Kin Yip Group, agreed to pay people different sums of money for different tasks, not all of which are unlawful, for example, help them to set up a Web site, be a consultant for various things. We don't know everything about these people, but he certainly seems to have, at a minimum, independent contractors in New York who might be willing to sign a bond for him. Whether they are or not, I don't know. But we don't think it's the case there's no one in New York City who he has any connection to whatsoever. There are people he has connections to. I don't think it prevents him from wanting to flee. That's why we're arguing about it. But I think, certainly, there are people he could find willing to sign a bond. I don't think they're going to have $50 million, but I can represent to your Honor, that's not going to hold up to the process. We just think there should be others on the bond. (Continued on next page) SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 34 of 52 83 MR. BRAFMAN: If they don't have $50 million, the signature is not worth anything unless they're very close to Mr. Ng and he cares about them. There are no such people in the United States who I could refer now to you, sir, as suretor or to Judge Fox without spending a significant amount of time understanding the relationship and whether or not they themself have any exposure, whether they themselves need lawyers. We've crossed that bridge. The issue is really whether or not you trust Guidepost and this issue, and I think your Honor does or we wouldn't be having this discussion. And when they asked Judge Fox about this, I think they had a similar, and Judge Fox just turned them down. So what was said at the first bail hearing, both by the government and by that defense lawyer, was just inaccurate in part. THE COURT: Okay. Let me ask this. The individuals who currently live in the apartment, what is their citizenship? MR. BRAFMAN: One of the young men is a citizen of the United States. I've talked to him about being a suretor. His family has some assets. He doesn't have any personal assets. THE COURT: I hear what you're saying, Mr. Brafman, about not being able to find additional people. I do think there's not going to be a suretor I think it would be very difficult to find a suretor who would actually be able to make good on the bond. And the simple fact is that's oftentimes the case in cases. And to the extent that some, if they are able SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 35 of 52 to make it, it?s really something that will probably bankrupt them. And there's no question this is going to probably bankrupt somebody. MR. BRAFMAN: So we will have the three people who live in the apartment. THE COURT: I think it will be is it three or four including Mr. Ng's daughter? MR. BRAFMAN: Three people and Mr. Ng. THE COURT: All right. I'm going to require that. I'm not going to require any additional people. But, look, just to be clear, and I'm sure that this will be explained to them. What that means is for the people who are going to be signing the bond is that although you won't owe any money, you don't have to put any money up, all you have to do is sign a piece of paper; but that piece of paper means that if Mr. Ng violates the terms of his release and that could be in a big way, it could be in a relatively small way you could be liable for the full amount of the bond, which in this case is $50 million. And, obviously, you may not have $50 million, but the government can come after you for any portion of that and any assets you may have. MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, I discussed this issue with them in the event that the Court would require suretors. I was hoping you wouldn't, but they agree. They understand. They will be here and sign the bond when the bond is executed at the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 36 of 52 magistrate's office. THE COURT: There was one more issue, as I understand it, or is there another wrinkle to the cosigners issue? MR. RICHENTHAL: If the cosigners are going to be the residents of the apartment and they intend to stay, would your Honor consider asking Mr. Ng's daughter to surrender her passport? MR. BRAFMAN: We offered that at the initial bail hearing and it wasn't enough. THE COURT: To the extent the people who are living in the apartment have passports and travel documents, they should surrender them. However, if they have travel plans in the future, I will hear about getting them back their travel documents so they can take whatever trips they're going to take. But they should surrender their travel documents when they come to sign the bond. MR. BRAFMAN: That's fine, because one of them has young children who she may have to travel to and would it be we'll surrender all the passports, your Honor. THE COURT: Look, Mr. Brafman, I'm not looking to if there are, you may speak with them and you may know that there are specific times when they already have travel plans, in which case it can be arranged that they get their travel documents back. But to the extent that there's going to be travel to China, for example, I would expect there would be SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 37 of 52 86 some planning with regard to that so we should be able to get them their travel documents back. MR. BRAFMAN: Thank you, sir. THE COURT: Obviously, the travel documents I'm looking over towards Pretrial would be held by Pretrial. MR. BRAFMAN: Yes, sir. THE COURT: All right. MR. RICHENTHAL: The final condition on which the parties don't agree is we conferred with Pretrial briefly, which is very helpful, about this distinguish in characteristics between home detention versus home incarceration and we're informed these have different meanings within Pretrial's world. The former, which is detention, permits what I think your Honor is contemplating which is that Mr. Ng be permitted to have meetings with counsel outside his apartment. The latter does not. The latter is closer to what's happening now Mr. Ng is incarcerated, he can meet with counsel there, they can call him, but they can't be together in a third spot. To the extent that what your Honor wants to do is replicate to the extent possible the current conditions of incarceration, we respectfully request your Honor consider home incarceration, meaning if they want to meet with him, it will be in his apartment. They are free to speak with him telephonically or video conference. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 38 of 52 87 THE COURT: No, and here's the reason why and it's something I think we had discussed earlier. You're going to be receiving a log of people who come and go, which I can understand the government wanting, but there will be times when they may be meeting with people who are going to be witnesses for them or who may not be witnesses in the future, but that is part of any defense strategy which you?re not entitled to. The defendant at trial, obviously, doesn't have to do anything. So, and I also think with regard to that, this is something that Mr. Brafman and his firm and Mr. Mo, it's on them as attorneys and officers of the court that they're not going to have Mr. Ng knowingly visit with people who are going to assist him to flee the country. So with that understanding and with that in mind, I'm not going to order that all of the visits occur in the apartment, not to mention which, since there are so many people in the apartment, I'm not sure and there is an issue about privilege. I think it would be very difficult to it could complicate things about having privileged conversations without possibly waiving any communications. Okay. MR. RICHENTHAL: I think the only issue left then is one of the interpreter. The parties I think need to speak further and I think maybe speak with Guidepost and figure it out. We were told Guidepost may well have a Mandarin speaker, but not necessarily one that can be available around the clock. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 39 of 52 88 I think that's something we can work out, so we would ask the Court to kick that one down the line. THE COURT: That's fine. Just let me know. Obviously, I'm going to review the transcript and we?re going to be preparing the conditions of release and have it in place, and perhaps we'll even share it with the parties in advance to make sure that we've included everything, but have it in place in case the parties are able to have everything in place by Monday. MR. RICHENTHAL: And is it then the Court's intention that provided the money is posted, the property is posted, the bond is signed, and the Guidepost officers are vetted, Mr. Ng may be released even if there are conditions Yet to be fulfilled? Because the one we would like in place before he is released beyond monitoring is the consensual T3. THE COURT: The consensual T3. MR. RTCHENTHAL: We'd like that paperwork executed so we can serve it on whatever phone company they're using for the landline. MR. BRAFMANus, we'll have it executed. And if we can have Mr. Ng present on Monday, we think we can satisfy the primary conditions. And to the extent we can't satisfy all of them, it will be understood that he's not going to be able to do any of the things the conditions would prevent him from doing. For example, the computer log. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 40 of 52 89 He won't use the computer until we've set up with Pretrial how they would be able to enforce that. THE COURT: I also think that to the extent there is I don't know whether computers are already in the home, in the apartment. MR. BRAFMAN: Judge, we will not burden you with having to figure this out. We will try and figure it out. THE COURT: I don?t know why, Mr. Brafman. I was planning on making a home visit myself. MR. BRAFMAN: Your Honor, if you spoke Mandarin, I got a fulletime job for you, in addition to the full?time job. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BRAFMAN: Thank you for your patience, your Honor. MR. JONES: Your Honor, I want to clarify some conditions, the wording of it. Home detention monitored by GPS, is that what you're putting on the bond? THE COURT: That's correct. MR. JONES: And also just to clarify, Pretrial, we cannot conduct the search ourselves. It will need to be conducted by Guidepost. It can be in the presence of Pretrial. THE COURT: That's fine. MR. JONES: I want to make sure the wording on the bond reflects that. THE COURT: That's fine. And now that you mention that, I think that when I've seen searches before, it's usually SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 41 of 52 90 with somebody else. That's fine. MR. JONES: Okay. MR. RICHENTHAL: The devil is always in the details. I think the language shouldn't be home detention. I think it should be home incarceration with the following permitted re attorney, medical because I think home detention means more is permitted. Your Honor may inadvertently be permitting more than the Court intends. MR. JONES: The way our electronic monitoring department is going to want it worded is home detention monitored by GPS, allowed to leave the residence for medical or attorney visits. MR. RICHENTHAL: We obviously defer to Pretrial. THE COURT: That's the way we'll word it. I don't want to create problems. MR. BRAFMAN: Thank you, sir. MR. RICHENTHAL: Nothing further from the government. THE COURT: All right. So if anything does come up, I am reachable tomorrow, but it may take a while for me to get on the phone. And anything comes up, obviously, you all have, since I did email you, as Ms. Echenberg can attest to, I don't necessarily have a problem with people emailing me if something arises. MR. RICHENTHAL: I think the only thing that will have to arise is your Honor has to sign the consensual T3 or the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 42 of 52 91 phone company won't execute it. We'll do that properly. If your Honor isn't available, do we have permission to bring that to the Part I judge? THE COURT: Yes, but there may be ways we can do it, but yes. Okay. Thank you. 000 SOUTHERN REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805?0300 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 43 of 52 EXHIBIT 2 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 44 of 52 GRANT _1 No Date Donated Payment Account 1 1/ 19/2012 Darulaceze Health Bene?ts 2 1 2013 Students Education Aid 3 2 1 2 013 Students Education Aid 4 3/1/2013 Students Education Aid 5 3 /2 5 2013 The Spinal Cord Paralytics Association of Turkey Health Bene?ts 6 4/ 2 2013 Students Education Aid 7 4/19/2013 Trauma Association Health Bene?ts 8 5/2/2013 Students Education Aid 9 5/15/2013 The Spinal Cord Paralytics Association of Turkey Health Bene?ts 10 6/7/2013 Students Education Aid 11 6/7/2013 Meltem Medikal Health Bene?ts 12 7/1/2013 Students Education Aid 13 7/24 2013 The Spinal Cord Paralytics Association of Turkey Health Benefits 14 7 24 2013 Gul BaseGmez Health Bene?ts 15 8 6 2013 Students Education Aid 16 8/22 /2013 Police Uncle Association Health Bene?ts 17 9/ 3/ 201 3 Students Education Aid 18 10/1/2013 Students Education Aid 19 10 10 [2013 (TogemderJ-Social Development and Education Association Social Aids 20 10 10 /2013 Kilyos Police School Social Aids 21 10 11 2013 (Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Social Aids 22 10 /2 3 20 13 Students Education Aid 23 11/1/2013 Students Education Aid 24 11 1 5 2013 (Tegv)-Educational Volunteers Foundation of Turkey Social Aids 25 11 1 5 2013 Besiktas Police Services and Association Social Aids 26 11 19/2 013 Ministry of Economy Education Aid 27 11 2 1/ 2013 The Spinal Cord Paralytics Association of Turkey Health Bene?ts 28 11 2 5 2013 Ministry of Economy Education Aid 29 11/2 8 20 13 (Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 30 11/2 8 20 13 (Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 31 11 2 8 2013 (Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 32 11 2 8 2013 (Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 33 12/1/2013 Students Education Aid 34 12 /4/2013 (Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 35 12 4/ 2013 (Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 36 12 4/ 2013 (Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 37 12 2013 (Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 38 12 4/ 2013 (Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 39 12 /4/2013 [Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 40 12 9/20 13 (Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Social Aids 41 12 16/2013 (Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Social Aids 42 1/ 16/ 20 14 Students Education Aid 43 1/16/2014 Ministry of Economy Education Aid 44 1/ 20 20 14 Ministry of Economy Education Aid Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 45 of 52 45 2 4 2014 Students Education Aid 46 2/19/2014 Ministry of [Economy Education Aid 47 2/2 5/2014 Ministry of Economy Education Aid 48 3/3/2014 Students Education Aid 49 4 3 2014 Development and Education Association Education Aid 50 4/3 2014 Development and Education Association Education Aid 51 4 3 2014 [Togeinder]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 52 4/ 3 2014 (Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 53 4 3 2014 (Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 54 4 3 /2014 [TogemderJ-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 55 4/ 3/2014 {TogemtlerJ-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 56 7/ 10/2014 [Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 57 7/ 10/2014 [TogemderJ-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 58 7 1 0 20 14 [Togemde r] -Social Develop me ml and Education Association Education Aid 59 7 10 2014 [TogemderJ-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 60 7/1 0 20 14 ['I?ogem tied-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 61 7/ 10/201 4 [Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Social Aids 62 7/ 17 2014 {Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 63 13/11/2014 [Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 64 8/27/2014 [Togen1der}-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 65 9/ 15/2014 {Togemder}-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 66 9/ 17/20 14 Fetih Qura Course Social Aids 67 9/24/2014 [Togenider]?Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 68 10/13/2014 Turkish Transplant Foundation Health Bene?ts 69 10/3 1 /2 0 14 ['l?ogemde r] -Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 70 11/21/2014 Development and Education Association Education Aid 71 11/22 20 14 Fetih Kuran Kursu Social Aids 72 11/28/2014 [Togemderj-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 73 12 29/ 2014 Fetih Quran Course Social Aids 74 12/30/2014 {Togemderjl-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 75 1 2 7 2015 Fetih [18 ran Course Social Aids 76 1/ 9 2015 [TogemderJ-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 77 2/1 3/2 0 1 5 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 78 2/ 1 7 20 15 [Togemder] -Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 79 2 2 7 /2015 [Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 80 3/20/2015 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 81 3 2 7 201 5 (Togemder]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 82 4/ 6/2015 The Spinal Cord Paralytics Association of Turkey Health Bene?ts 83 4/ 15/ 2015 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 84 4/28/2015 [Togernder]-Social Deveiopment and Education Association Education Aid 85 5 9 2015 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 86 5/18/2015 Fetih Quran Course Social Aids 87 5/29/2015 [TogemderJ-Socinl Development and Education Association Education Aid 88 6/11/2015 Fetih Qnran Course Social Aids 89 6/1 8/2015 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 90 6 /30 201 5 [Togemder)-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid 91 7/3 0/2015 [Togemtler]-Social Development and Education Association Education Aid? 92 3/ 2015 Mehmet Beyazgul Health Bene?ts Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 46 of 52 93 8 17 2015 Mehmet Ozkul Social Aids 94 8 /3 1/ 2015 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 95 12/17/2015 Hospitals Health Bene?ts 96 12 18/ 2015 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 97 12 18/2015 senay Katar Health Bene?ts 98 12 /2 2 2015 The Work of a Mukhtar Social Aids 99 12 2 5 [2015 Zehra sahin Health Bene?ts 100 12/29/2015 The Work ofa Mukhtar Social Aids 101 12 3 0 2015 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 102 12 /3 1 2015 Murat BayramoGlu Health Bene?ts 103 1/ 14/20 16 Hilal Karakeci Education Aid 104 1 14/ 20 16 Songul Batan Social Aids 105 1 2 7/2016 Fetih Quran Course Social Aids 106 2/2/2016 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 107 2/24/2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 108 2 /29 2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 109 3 /7 /2 016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 110 3 /14/2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 111 3/17/2016 Sedef Arim Health Bene?ts 112 3 17/2016 Sedef Arim Health Bene?ts 113 3 2 1 2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 114 3 28/2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 115 3 28/ 2016 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 116 4/4/2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 117 4/11/2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 11B 4/ 18/2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 119 4/2 1 2016 Ozcan Karakas Social Aids 120 4/25/2016 Burak Duvenci Health Bene?ts 121 4/25/2016 Fetih Quran Course Social Aids 122 4/27/2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 123 5/2/2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 124 5 9/2016 isa Ozturk Health Bene?ts 125 126 Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 47 of 52 PAYMENT '1 Payment Account Royal Denizcilik Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Royal Denizcilik Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Royal Denizcilik Riza Sarraf Volgam Gida Royal Denizcilik Royal Denizcilik Royal Denizcilik Riza Sarraf Volgam Gida Volgam Gida Volgam Gida Volgam Gida Royal Denizcilik Royal Denizcilik Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 48 of 52 Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Volgam Gida Royal Denizcilik Royal Denizcilik Volgam Gida Royal Denizcilik Royal Denizcilik Volgam Gida Volgam Gida Volgam Gida Volgam Gida Volgam Gida Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Royal Denizcilik Royal Denizcilik Royal Denizcilik Royal Denizcilik Riza Sarraf Royal Denizcilik Volgam Gida Riza Sarraf Royal Denizcilik Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Royal Denizcilik Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 49 of 52 Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Riza Sarraf Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 50 of 52 1 Explanation Muka Bed-Sickbed-{ZO Power Bed +16 Medical Bed+18] 8 Students January Scholarship 8 Students February Scholarship 8 Students March Scholarship Battery-One rated Wheelchair Donation 8 Students April Scholarship Trauma Association - Donation 8 Students May Scholarship Battery-Operated Wheelchair Donation 10 Students lune Scholarship 1 Battery-Operated Wheelchair Donation-Meltem Medikal 10 Students luly Scholarship Battery-Opera ted Wheelchair Donation 1 Battery-Operated Wheelchair Donation -Teknopor 10 Students August Scholarship Police Uncle Association 18 ticket 750 tl Children with Disabilities Tarkan Concert 10 Students September Scholarship 10 Students October Scholarship Metro Shopping Center~[Product and food) Kilyos Police School Donation and Revenue Department Payment -Cash M.Aslan Metro Shopping Center-[Product and food] 51 Students 250 TL 1 month -0ctober 10 Students November Scholarship Metro Shopping Center-[Product and food)-500 Packages Donation 100 Students 150 2 months of Economy [latte ry-Dperated Wheelchair Donation 51 Students 250 TL 1 month -November Togemder-Scholarship-[l50 *300 TL: 12 Months]-100X12X300 TL *300 TL: 12 Months} 50X12X300 TL Togemtler-Statloneryr Equipment Donation-Mardin Togemder?Clothes Donation-umraniye 10 Students December Scholarship Togemder-AHM ET MESUT GARDEN-Rime/Pazar-Volgam Togemder-MEHMET GARDEN-Kilis-Volgam Togemder-BAYiR Bayir Beldesi-Volgam Togemder-iSTiKLAL nazilli Togemder-TOKI GARDEN-mardin kiziltcpe Togemder-MiSAK-i GARDEN-mardin nusayhin For Togem 5 rams+5 calfs-Dilek Butcher Metro Shopping Center-[Product and food] 10 Students [anuarsr Scholarship 100 Students 150 2 Months ?December-]anuary Scholarship -Ministry of Economy 51 Students 250 TL 2 Months -December-]anuary Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 51 of 52 10 Students February Scholarship 100 Students 150 1 Month -February Scholarship -Ministry of Economy 50 Students 250 TL 1 Month -February 10 Students March Scholarship Togemder-14 GARDEN [5 CLASSROOMl-balikesir altinova Togemder-PRiVATE SCHOOL TURGUT MAH.AKER SK.1410 PARSEL-sultanbeyli Togemder-PRiVATE SCHOOL MEVLANA MAH.SEFA CAD.3534 PARSEL.-gaziosmanpasa nazilli Togemder-TOKi GARDEN-mardin kiziltepe Togetnder-MiSAK-i GARDEN-mardin nusaybin 38661 ADA 1 DERSLiK)-izmir Togemder-AHMET MESUT GARDEN-Rize/Pazar-Voigam Togeln tier-M MET ign n1 Togemder-BAYiR Beldesi-Volgam 38661 ADA 1 CLASSROOM)-izmir-Volgam Togemder-ZOO Students 100 TL Glad Rags -Riza Sarraf's Account Togemder-Metro Shopping Center-250 Packages Food Donation-Riza Sarraf?s Account Togemder-PRiVATE SCHOOL TURGUT Togemder-PRiVATE SCHOOL MEVLANA MAH-Gaziosmanpasa Togemder-PRiVATE SCHOOL Pre-schooi-Giresun Togemder?umraniye Private School-istanbul umraniye Cemal Hoca-Quran Course-Ramadan and Holy Night Sacri?ce of an Animal-Cash Togemder?umraniye Private School-istanbui umraniye Donation Scholarship-(10 Months 102 Students 350 TL)-October Tugemder-umraniye Private School-istanbui umraniye Cemal Hoca-Quran Course-Cash Scholarship-(10 Months 102 Students 350 TL)-November Dilek Butcher-Sacri?ce of an Animal Hoca] Scholarship-(10 Months 102 Students 350 December Cemal Hoca-Quran Course-Cash Scholarship-[10 Months 102 Students 350 January For Cash Donation-(Aid, aims. tip etc.) Togemder-umraniye Private School-istanbui umraniye Scholarship-(10 Months 102 Students 350 February For Cash Donation-(Aid, aims, tip etc.) Scholarship-[10 Months 102 Students 350 March Wheelchair charging station -(10 Pieces X13.000 TL) For Cash Donation-[Aid aims, tip etc.) Scholarship-[10 Months 102 Students 350 April For Cash Donation-(Aid, aims, tip etc.) Cemal Hoca-Quran Course-Cash Scholarship-(10 Months 102 Students 350 May Cemal Hoca-Quran Course-Cash For Cash Donation-(Aid, aims, tip etc.) Scholarship-(10 Months 102 Students 350 Scholarship-(10 Months 102 Students 350 1 Battery-Operated Wheelchair Donation-Carmen Medikal Case Document 16-2 Filed 05/18/16 Page 52 of 52 Mehmet Ozkul Holy Pilgrimage aid for 2 Persons 10.000$ For Cash Donation-(Aid, aims, tip etc.) For the Public Hospital] isa Ozturk?Muitiple Sclerosis Patient-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment Ms. senay-Ankara Leucemia and dialysis patient- She has got 2 children Chemotherapy and Hire pm?ch: Esin Shopping Center-100 Food packages 150 TL Zebra sahin-17 years old-blind and disabled -Physiotherapy payment Dilek Butcher-4 rams+1 calfs Sacri?ce for an animal-R.Sarraf For Cash Donation-(Aid. aims, tip etc.) For his child Physiotherapy payment-[Per week 600 TLX52 weeksX 3years)-since 2013 llahiyat Fakultesi OGrencisi-l Yillik Masra?ari icin Songul Batan- For general expences- Financial aid Cemal Hoca-Quran Course-Ramadan and Holy Night -Cash For Cash Donation-(Aid, alms, tip etc.) isa Ozturk-Multiple Sclerosis Patient-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment isa Ozturk-Multiple Sclerosis Patient-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment isa Ozturk-Multiple Sclerosis Patient-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment isa Ozturk-Multiple Sclerosis Patient-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment For the musician health bene?t -(By Ms. Sedef) For hospital patient -[By Ms. Sedet) isa Ozturk-Ms Adem Hastasi-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment isa Ozturk-Ms Adem Hastasi-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment For Cash Donation-(Aid, aims, tip etc.) isa Ozturk-Ms Adem Hastasi-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment isa Ozturk-Ms Adem Hastasi-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment isa Ozturk-Ms Adem Hastasi-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment For Cash Donation-(Aid, alms, tip etc.) Burak Duvenci-Cancer Patient (Ms. Ebru brief) Cemal Hoca-Food, Sacri?ce of an Animal and Alms Payment isa Ozturk-Multiple Sclerosis Patient-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment isa Ozturk-Multiple Sclerosis Patient-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment isa Ozturk-Multiple Sclerosis Patient-Darusafakka Physiotherapy Payment Total TL Total Total Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 1 of 48 Payment Payment Amount Rate Bank 100,000.00 TL Cash 4,200.00 TL Bank 4,200.00 TL Bank 4,200.00 TL Bank 12 5,000.00 TL Bank 4,200.00 Bank 10,000.00 TL Bank 4,200.00 TL Bank 200,000.00 TL Bank 7,000.00 TL Bank 2,800.00 TL Bank 7,000.00 TL Bank 240,000.00 TL Bank 2,400.00 TL Bank 7,0 00.00 TL Bank 13,500.00 TL Bank 7,0 00.00 TL Bank 7,000.00 TL Bank 10,000.00 TL Cash 4,050.00 TL Bank 10,000.00 TL Bank 12,750.00 TL Bank 7,000.00 TL Bank 17,786.00 Tl- Bank 200,000.00 TL Bank 30,000.00 TL Bank 240,000.00 TL Bank 12,750.00 TL Bank 360,000.00 TL Bank 180,000.00 TL Bank 100,000.00 TL Bank 250,000.00 Tl- Bank 7,000.00 TL Bank 100,300.00 TL Bank 100,300.00 Tl- Bank 100,300.00 TL Bank 100,300.00 TL Bank 100,300.00 TL Bank 100,300.00 TL Bank 40,000.00 TL Bank 20,075.00 TL Bank 7,000.00 TL Bank 30,000.00 TL Bank 26,000.00 TL 1 3 BLOIJDH 15 01ml: 2 m- 1 ?.0110? I ?1513i"! 1 I I-IIJ um LEM: I 1?11 um: 15.11.10]: 23.1 ?tlildl] Ihll'llnli Ml?l? 15 Illf?l?ll ?107.10?. [ll-M30?. 11.034004 Hil?l?J?-H SIM-220 I4 I30 l?l?lz? 21.012?! BEINRME 10:00.30? I5 EILIUIE annals. I5 1131.101 I 11.01116? 11001016 rrp?- nwhfum-mw II 'll?dll?llr Illnuam{ hrdmum hr?Imr-n 'I'unlmL-n Yard-mun ?alum-In (IL-ml Huc- Iu 1'0 In ?:1qu In Imam ?ll?lk 2016 1536 Oin? ?Min I I lh?l?'f mu Sulul' I In: Sarral' I'hl'rlMIrmnl um! Run Sarnl 1? Rlu Sarnl' MIMI Shniuf?' Tun hrral nun Elana"! Eliza Sarraf 16:10.00 alunmm Barr-f MAI Btu Ind ?Ill San-if 150111 lI 'Jll? In; del ?lth mra Sarnf Elna San-If \Iu' [link-1mm.? lluu than-ml 20000.00 1' I 1551 I lun?dmul limnuml 1 61d: II I ?l??llel ummudu Harm-Hill" 00.000." Ian Knullhl Dim? Hall: Tndil-l ?ail-all IRMIJI Inn hm! mu nrrl'l' I'lzlh ?rnli Tudlil Imll numlr-mM-m Flalk'l'n?uvl I T?pli?n TL J1 Inna-05,00 11. I (i 0.90: I I Toplam [1 0,00 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 3 of 48 EXHIBIT 3 OKUL VE BURS YARDIMLARI 11-1192 Adet Okul AdI-igerik (VOLGAM GIDA) (ROYAL DENizciLiK) 2013 i 2014 2013 2014 Toplam ?denen AI-IMET MESUT YILMAZ 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 KiLis MEHMET 103ch 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 MUCLAIBAYIR BAYIR 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 TLKOKULU 100,300.00 100,300 .00 200,600.00 M1111 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 KARABACLAR 38661 ADA 1 206,500.00 206,500.00 413,000.00 1.1 (5 206,500.00 206,500.00 413,000.00 TURGUT REis MAHAKER SK.1410 PARSEL 472,000.00 472,000.00 944,000.00 OZEL MEVLANA MAH.SEFA CAD.3534 PARSEL. 472,000.00 472,000.00 944,000.00 Hollmd'mxol?xooChS: GEL -Sonradan Have oldu 200,600.00 200,600.00 12 CJZEL -Som'adan Have oldu 2,301,000.00 2,301,000.00 13 TOGEMDER 150 *300 TL: 12 360,000.00 180,000.00 540,000.00 14 Togemder-Klrtasiye Baglgx?Mardin 100,000.00 100,000.00 Toplam 1,174,200.00 814,200.00 1,424,600.00 3,646,200.00 7,059,200.00, Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 4 of 48 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 5 of 48 THE PROJECT OF SCHOOL LEFT WITHOUT NURSERY It is aimed to provide the student who cannot go to the pre-school education institution because of the ?nancial impossibility and absence of pre-school-nursery class in their region with free pre-school education by the different education models. It is also aimed to popularize the conscious of pre-school education for the families whose socio-economic levels are inadequate. The families who reside in the most migrant-receiving place and cannot send their Children to pre-school because of the ?nancial impossibilities have been determined as target group. Within the scope of the project; Support related to the child development and intra-family communication is given the parents of the children participated in the education in order to popularize the pre-school education and make the cooperation of school-family stronger. The project is carried out with the common education, nongovernmental organizations and benefactors on reaching the pre-school education to the large masses. game . s, 2.. 33min i . Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 6 of 48 GZEL PROJE 944.000 TL pf 31 ~91 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 7 of 48 OZEL PROJE 944.000 TL . . I, I 7' ?23:1th w" Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 8 of 48 PAZAR AHMET MESUT YILMAZ PROJE 200.600 TL Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 9 of 48 PROJE 2.551.000 .rru. ..- 1.. . Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 10 of 48 MEHMET PROJE 200.600 TL Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 11 of 48 BAYIR LU PROJE 200.600 TL Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 12 of 48 MAH. iBN-i PROJE 200.600 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 13 of 48 PROJE 200.600 TL Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 14 of 48 PROJE TL Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 15 of 48 izwnR KARABAGLAR PROJE 413.000 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 16 of 48 14 EYLUL PROJE 413.000 TL Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 17 of 48 PROJE TL Case Document 16-3 Tu'rklye F?dnsu? DEKONT IJrul 4m? 21an um MIHCILII Mill! I Mumm- $1an mum: IUSIOEKE l? Ill. MHCIUHLIR 15m Ilr'lh em Mum I: ??ll 0020 WOO 3500 '31 mg: no 1 1350626052 ?Hill will [mraml Milli ?mills!? Wu Io [mt Sun Id: ?lm ?it nun! Filed 05/18/16 Page 18 of 48 TK in muse/3490M nm? um I: ?44 2 2 ?010581 I [7.03.2615 l2: 5 . $23 mum-n Sum IL MSW VE sum: ?Will All? OHM uu mum? GELISII It? Vt 505th um lanlu Human Io rm Ml 5-001 5800 7100 15? 2 Earn Sub: 50m I0 101? v?ucaklm turnip Ham mm. mm 5 Mm wmim mum?a 5' Li 90001 [in Hill? SWIM lil?? ?5.00:0 "011m, 0.00' 93mm? 10.03.1014 0.034 11003.10? 0.001 mm: -., 10.00.30? mam-:1 Lmi-mmummamd?mm i I m_ nglm. 1mg? 1.001 9.0! yuan: {10.01.1010 lung-01 110074014 {lib?5 : . aw: [liar?50:?; MT pg ?16-31; Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 DERNEK GELIRLERI 35m 1 ALINDI BELGESI . . curl-91:1; SIRA N: 000047 M. 01111113111 mam Korma-Din; Mama Selma?: Man wmw. Ho. 5m! KWM 34- 1154.111? Pm'furnn . mamn' MP1 5.41.1 mix! vt? Lumnd-A It: Franklin 1M - w'mm 13mm' 11'. 1'3?0411'4 459.131qu- [11' (5111? a) SQ if. 3.13113 ?in 1.1410911? 1154.941; 51611111111. I 519501 TL 101 un?n?u?r?tgeum ?Saar \kjnk??zilu 05 mun-Id m?l?num Winn" DERNEKGEUHLEBI 551:1? ALNDIBELGESI . mm; sm N.- 0060415 no. mammal mm: 34-15011? . ?Rm 061E513- 415? mun-nun: (Mt! ?133m1m11. nit-hwy! Micktl L3 8 Mn: I12. 1:31.. ramp-mummy) . GEURNGEW Il- KR .?j'thSaALg . .. 1.1.1.1. 2.35.11. 1.1qu .hhtn Elihu-Lu *1 Ym3quLj?lm .. KR Imam. I'm scam: Adam 11014 391.4195 11"" 01.1mm? I 19- nmumuumm mm?: Page 19 of 48 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 DERNEK GELIRLEFII EU ALINDI BELGESI SIRA 000044 YDPLUHSAL EOITEM v2 301mm emu-cw mama! [roam-Dem mu Scum-um mm 110.50% mm: Yum-n 'MnSovIdu (Pal. (WM 1" '3 1.0mm vaI" - {?051 Li .613qu Mu' . $.th a rawmmw-wmmr my.? If (coup ?no.?L turh 11'th '1 TL . KR I ?5:1 EDENN ~3an Amuadousqq u?un-umuntumvamuiwa END. ?m KIY u?W DERNEK seal A ALINDIBELGESI A ??lm am 000048 macaw mm; 34-15011? may 'Mwsm P. WLLENI n?Iqt- immuh Tn. mm It? .013" ?xz' ?Sidnh?? madman Medinpc?i ?3.15 610:; 3.149'1ql Lu.? Ltd-{f LET not-u 4,1,,an chum?mumm-um ?mum mm Wont; . m- L: 1 r: wily mug-1:111- TI. le6' (311:. *1 ma [kw TL PNMYI TAHSLEDEM: Mum: ?ab r: mantra-mammalian .-. Page 20 of 48 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 21 of 48 DERNEK GELIRLERI A ALINDI BELGESI canal. sum N: 000086 nun-ah .l TDPLUMSAL Edi-nu vs 8051'?. (room Mmu :Smmnuan. mum-mm in 1841-11? ?Mwwmia WI. to f2. 'Ymm?fl?: (Ls; _?ala 13 ISIL, 3 ?as (.fz Mahdi? cam cam gag (Mw??mF? r- rmwijul??-umtsb?d TL 13" vaI met. snemu- 1'3 Mum Mam .4912!?qu 2441 03720 ?1 ?Will __Iu1r_. aml? if}? -1. mm n53 mums . w_ no any; man my QWIWWMME ?int." Tuna mmMum__ mm anl up 3 MI nutm- on . Im' 171m mu . m. wins amt! mammnmanmmv: .. om Inna. ans 4mm I mini? miss- 5 11-- CH .. nib-Ili- Innis? no} Inn: nun 1:503an . 1m. Inn: 3:93? mm an} mn- 3 - uiu' 533' . .-. 321.3311 "1h ?H?j ?it; awn-3% 3375314 din m2 17mm 0400* 262.570 ?if: 15.09.1034 Ml 1905ng 1mg: ELM W131: 7 mi m; ?w [gamma 3 wIns i on mad-I? ?mu mom Mi I - hum? no I mm: um: 1' 0.003 m] m: Inu- 1mm mm] mm? mn- Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 22 of 48 uulucunun bdu?lwuu-v - ml HOL 2011112011 200143 00101100 m? 3011101311- 400.000.00 0.00 010,714.31 4m .L-TOPLUIISAL ems- 2011112013 20111111 KIRTASIYE 3416101 mom-11. 0.00 100000.00 430.1140? 104400010001000070 mum-010011 ?11 blunt-Hon pun-1702430- 2011112013 200110 ROYAL DENIZCILIK ENOUSTRIYEL 0.00 3.00 400,711.11 amine VE .m.L-1001.uu501. 001.10. 2011112011 20011111 GORENCI BURSU-H- 0.00 100,000.00 250311.11 11 FINANS Subo 50m. vaLom 0100 010 00.1.1040. map 110 :11-2000003-1 011m uURuosumNE 60.0912"? 3.020.011 ls 10sz 11030110? KAT: 0011001 011111201: 1011112010 1 51411101011 FATIH lsrmauulsrmam Rap-0m A1011 2m 1.1.100 :212-0140110 2126149106 Bun 1011012010 11211 000" 0111mm 101001110 110011;: (TL) 110000 1010112150! 0.11: Baldy. . 100.00 101201 02101211, mm! mm 11.100010000200000? 1111112010 200110 YmqunO-m 04000 0.00 700.30 1 Ku'ruuculm 105 Iowan 100.0 1011112010 .20004 Emu? 0.00; 000.10; 121.14. . 70000000200112000000200004 1110000 Ham-00mm 00111100 [1115410041 201111201: 200140 Mammal am 010 1101100". 000,000.00 0.00 i 000,121.10 - {000000 . . . err-101ml 40.011 .0100me 001.10. 2011112013 20011.! 0009101 Ems-H- 000' 000,000.00? 121.14 111 . EFT :0020011-01110: W- I 0011212013 lam Turaa'ra WW 1 101,000.00 0.00? 401,021.14 . Ian-1911111 -m 0000 . 0011212011 1 000.10 11121: ILI Pm 11.000110: Yam 000 100,000.00 1 001,021.14 . 0111.11. 010000 i .0100me 001.10. . 0011210011 17.00.10 ?mm 000000010 11% 0.00 10000000! 200,721.14 I m. . 1; 00010 i 0011210011 . 200.10 101.10 We? 1mm OKUL 000001 0.00 100,000.00 100,421.14 1 I err-100111] .L-TOPLUIBAL 0:110- 001121201: 100.10 00mm 11mm ILculua 7mm 0.00 100,000.00 121.14 I 01101. 011000! . 4' 1'0an 701,040.00! 701,000.10! 121.14 1 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 23 of 48 -- . mh?unl?l . T?myerin??s DEKONT . mam Eula-n Hukclletier Hi we was?! Inf-2 J. "2 Li} fwaemyen .1 [.4th meow '05 :2 2; m) "Wham: (5 mm mm I: HULLEE to 45m: W's. eulmn Is I: usoom: I as :3 2o? 1?:24123 MIIH left an; ?i INJC TWI- {000 .5102 0069 1506 1:144:12? min im- voLsar 510A N5, Hr, $11 1315- Yer: New; In - Tular 100.100 am ad? SuHmMIan Sube 9am [insi IL Mm! - 0 TL 95TH Isa 5,2? Hm ?ank: 0001': 9 lamina?: lo 595? Ohm mm 3801' TEL 5-71") 56 Largl Sub! ?(3001 INN HEHU SUEESI ?argu HQ ?1002? i . r: nun?: ?t?rlnu f?HiN?? UIUL Oh?t'il EGITIH 31MB. HELLR i 1' I 13' mm. ma mumfarm SIM LTD 3? - min-1mm lsim m: 1 1am? inn. mum: {Us 115413233 mm min 13mm . Mama Ru '1 mama-?12m? 1m -mw??m ?9200616191141 . - Very} Nb mamas! . . . I airman mm ., 1" lsie? cm on "5.119.511901mm: 8th Mt??Imam scum 5121 W15 :mom - TAIMTMIH mum um. um mum: 9m 6mm mm mm ?mum: 9m Inn-rum? Mud mi; Huh. Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 24 of 48 I - - 17v" .-.DEKONT B?yuk nakamqg: No: 090053300 EFT 5 Sayzn YULGFIH Elm 01$ Hm:- n?unleyen 1 min 1500020; ,1 05.12.20? 12:25:00 CD 801MB. l? n0 m. 7 I Hrih 7 ?007032 1? 05.12.2053 12:20:02 I i ISTANBUL Referans Nu - 20151205-11-19959 mm 1950 0020 am mm mm me In . Verql H1) - 4250454230 Isu VBLGAH slim 01$ Hr LID Isle: mi - Sultanhml subs Nasap Ho 20N963-1 Iutar 100,500.00 $ube Ml - Suit?annual Subs 06011 Cinsi IL Hasraf - a no 1L DETAY lsil - IDPLU-HSRL HE K8051 Bank! 00015 - TURKIYE Bh?l?Sl No 000] 5001 5800 130] 572? 00 larsl $ub? 90001 - ?nrgu Ho 1110022 FX 1:55; Him: HUFLA 1L1 B??fl? YAPILACAI OHCESI BIFIHI ENQAATIHM mvmmumwunma mun-mustMama-1m rkfya Farms DEKONT 0000!: no; 0630060870 mm I mun cm on Human. D?lanlmn i mih moms Ms 12.2615 1232,3500 I wwosunnirt CD is N0: ?51107 I Turin ?00103? I 05.12.2013 12:23:39 FMIW Ialsrans H0 20131205'll'l??19 ":50 0020 6000 110:7 0060 1.500 0i Viral Ho -. tummy: men lsil Slim DIS ?Mm Yeti sub. ?esap Ila zooms-n rum l00,300.00 Sub: - svltanhml 06051 aim TL mm 0.0011; 05m 215: lawman 3mm HE lam Bank: 00015 - 7001(th mum mus] La 0 I law/Hem Io 0001 5001 5800 1301 5729 16 um 50b: 1 9000i - mu . Sorgu Ho moon TN I Tul'lr ?151- -Tl I Amim - mi mama mPlLacaI. owL onus: ?01m: mm Insamnna mu mum-Mn. OKUL VE BURS YARDIMLARI ?-ilge Adet Okul Ad1-1gerik (VOLGAM GIDA) (ROYAL 2013 2014 2013 2014 Toplam (")denen AI-IMET MESUT YILMAZ TLKOKLIU 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 11mm 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 MUCLAJBAYIR BAYIR ILKOKULU 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 TOKI 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 MISAK-I 100,300.00 100,300.00 200,600.00 KARABACLAR 38661 ADA 1 206,500.00 206,500.00 413,000.00 14 EYLUL (5 DERSL1K) 206,500.00 206,500.00 413,000.00 SULTANBEYU 157.131. TURGUT KEYS 510410 PARSEL 472,000.00 472,000.00 944,000.00 GZEL MEVLANA MAH.SEFA CAD.3534 PARSEL. 472,000.00 472,000.00 944,000.00 GZEL -Sonradan have oldu 200,600.00 200,600.00 OZEL -Sonradan Have oldu 2,301,000.00 2,301,000.00 TOGEMDER 150 ?300 TL: 12 360,000.00 180,000.00 540,000.00 Togemder?Klrtasiye Bag1?1-Mardin 100,000.00 100,000.00 Toplam 1,174,200.00 814,200.00 1,424,600.00 3,646,200.00 7,059,200.00 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 25 of 48 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 26 of 48 EXHIBIT 4 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 27 of 48 DIAGNOSIS, EARLY Main purpose; distinguishing the children developing differently in 0-36 month early childhood and 37-66 month pre-school period between the determined months, bene?ting from the services of edu?ational evaluation and identi?cation between the determined months and being directed to educational institution consonant with inability Purposes within the scope of the project; providing child with disability to be accepted by spending the phases encountered after having a child without any problem to the families of the children made diagnose of the person affected by mild mental de?ciency between 0?66 month. It is aimed to provide the participation in social environment at earlier ages and adaptation of children who participate in the social life at older ages with effect of socio-economic, cultural, parental and environmental factors and were affected by the de?ciency. Within the scope of the project; The special education pre-school has been performed for normal and disabled people. 0 The whole schools, family health centres and directorates of the village headman in Sultanbeyli and Gaziosmanpasa districts have been visited and informed in respect of this matter. 0 Seminars and workshops have been carried out for families in Sultanbeyli and Gaziosmanpasa. 0 Information seminars including senior local management and district national education directorates in Sultanbeyli and Gaziosmanpasa have been organized. 0 Screen test has been performed to 200 children in company in Sultanbeyli and Gaziosmanpasa with diagnostic tool and two and 80 children have been directed to counselling and research centers. Schools built with the support of benefactors within the scope of this project Istanbul Gaziosmanpasa TOGEMDER Special Education Pre-School Istanbul Sultanbeyli TOGEMDER Special Education Pre-School Istanbul Umraniye TOGEMDER Special Education Vocational Education Center TOGEMDER has opened the vocational education centers being in the special education pre- school and high school position in our country and presented to education. The special education primary and secondary schools are used for children with mild mental disabilities. However, the children who had education in special education pre-schools and have been taken to inclusive classes has continued to take the same education with the children of the same age Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 28 of 48 by continuing the inclusive education in primary and secondary schools because of not being suf?cient. Thus, they will not be separated from their peers in their childhood period, they will be more productive individuals in the name of the public and themselves with the elite education taken in high school and they also will have the healthful childhood period by providing education with higher quality in high school period. Istanbul Umraniye TOGEMDER Special Education Vocational Education Center The students, who take education as inclusive in primary school, take the high school educations in Vocational Education Center in Istanbul, Umraniye. As from 14 age, the students, who have not passed from 23 age, have education in these schools for a period of four years to 27 age and it is ensured to provide them with occupation for their oncoming lives. Thus, these children can work in the speci?c business lines as intermediate staff after their education taken and internships done in these schools after education life. Therefore, they can maintain their life by standing on their own legs. There are classes, vocational workplaces, music and picture workplaces, individual classes and performance house and also washrooms, kitchens, dining hall, multi-purpose hall and extension, administrative rooms in the school including 25 classrooms in total. The capacity of the school, which has 60 students in total now, will be gradually increased in every year and will present the education and training for minimum almost 200 students in total. Our workplaces opened and planned to be opened have been titled as decorative handicrafts, furniture and indoor technology, housekeeping, kitchen and service. Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 29 of 48 Istanbul Gaziosmanpasa Sultanbeyli TOGEMDER Special Education Pre-School The ground ?oor has been planned as kitchen, dining hall, gymnasium room, game room, storehouse and washroom in the special education pre-schools in Gaziosmanpasa and Sultanbeyli, Istanbul. First ?oor has been planned as Manager Room, 3 Inclusive Classes, Interview Room for parents and washroom. The inclusive classes are for 20 students, but they are planned for 17 students. The children making progress in the special education class are Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 30 of 48 taken to the inclusive classes on the downstairs and their follow-up is provided. Now there are 51 students in the inclusive class. The teacher?s room, washroom, 5 special education class, of?cer?s room and administrative room are in 3 ?oors. There are 40 students in the special education classes. Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 31 of 48 EXHIBIT 5 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 32 of 48 FA 1 THE SPINAL 0012?0 .1 PARALYTICS ASSOCIATION 9F TURKEY Vi" Our institution was founded in 1998 in order to contribute the solutions of medical, vocational, financial and social problems of the people who has spinal cord paralysis and prevent occurrence of new spinal cord paralysis. Since 1998, Turkey Spinal Cord Paralytics Association has been working on the solutions of medical, vocational, ?nancial and social problems of people with spinal cord paralysis particularly. However, TOFD serves not only Spinal Cord Paralysis but also all people with orthopedic disabilities in national and international areas. Due to The Spinal Cord Paralytics Association successful and widespread works, by the council of ministers? decision dated 03.05.2004 and numbered 2004/7252 has been contributed as a?Non-pro?t Institution?. Our institution has initiated and applied many projects for precise and e??ective participation of disabled people in the social life. One of the primary objectives of our institution is preventing occurrence of permanent disabilities and to give information about this topic to the society It is presumed that there are more than 150.000 people with spinal cord paralysis in Turkey. 90% of them have to live with wheelchairs and dependent to another person. Mainly tra??ic accidents, falling down height, diving headfirst into shallow water, ?rearm injuries, occupational accidents, disease (spinal tumors, spinal infections, soft tissue disease) rutured interverbal disk cause to paralyisis. Both lack of rehabilitation and enviromental conditions (architectural barriers, transportation problems) con?ne to the people with wheelchairs, prevent them active contribution to social and economic life. With the intention of giving hope and freedom to the people with wheelchairs and their integration to the social life, on behalf of Riza Sarraf and Royal Denizcilik, it has been donated to our Association the amounts mentioned below. BATTERY OPERATED WHEELCHAIR Date Grantor Amount Bank ETA REF.N0 26.03.2013 RIZA SARRAF 25.000,00 GARANTI 53 26.03.2013 ROYAL DENIZCILIK 100.000,00 GARANTI 53 15.05.2013 RIZA SARRAF 200.000,00 GARANTI 63 24.07.2013 RIZA SARRAF 240.000,00 ZIRAAT 282 21.11.2013 ROYAL DENIZCILIK 240.000,00 ZIRAAT 391 TOTAL 805.000,00 BATTERY - OPERATED WHEELCHAIR 335,42 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 33 of 48 THE AMOUNT OF 10 CHARGING STATIONS Date Grantor Amount Bank ETA REF.NO 06.04.2015 RIZASARRAF 130.000,00 85 Riza Sarraf also made a donation for the establishment of the charging stations with the amount of mentioned above. Locations of the charging stations: Rumeli hisar onu bebek-Ispark, Bebek parki-Ispark Nisanta31 - Sisli Vali Konagi cad. Ispark, Abdipekci caddesi NisantaSI ?Ispark, Taksim Akm yam Ispark, Kazhcesme Marmaray ac1k otoparki Ispark Sirkeci Gar.onu Ispark ,Yenikapi spor ve kultur merkezi Bostanci ac1k Bostanci Ido iskelesi yani, Atasehir bulvart -- Turgut Ozal bulvari Atasehir bulvari kesisimi Ataturk mahallesi Atasehir Bakirkoy ido iskelesi onu bostanci mahallesi Bagdat caddesi gilnaydin et restoranti onu buyuk alan With the mentioned donations, 335 Battery Operated Wheelchairs has been delivered to the needers all around Istanbul and Turkey. Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 34 of 48 EXHIBIT 6 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 35 of 48 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 36 of 48 OUR FACTORY There are plenty of new and technological machines, such as one sizing machine with single axis, five-dimension processing centres and a highest technology product painting and drying line in 32 meters? length in 6000 m2 production plant of Royal Mobilya. Recycling is benefited in maximum manner by taking into the consideration the environment sensibility in all of the production processes within the boundaries of the factory, where the highest standard and effectiveness at their peak. Providing furniture solutions in line with the requirements of the customers without making any sacrifice from quality and sensibility with its qualified technical team and computerized programming system are the motto and principles of Royal Mobilya Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 37 of 48 ABOUT US Royal Mobilya, which has been founded within Royal Holding in 2013, has made a rapid entry into the furniture sector by combining latest technology, master hand workmanship and design in its facilities, established in an area of 6300 m2. Royal Mobilya, which presents solutions on project basis, has been the representative of "Boutique Furniture Business? understanding in the sector with its customer focused service principle. Royal Mobilya, that presents solutions to the furniture requirements of its customers in every area, has the necessary production ability and latest technology equipment in its production facility, required for its practice. Royal Mobilya, which accepts a production, that respects environment and people as a principle since the first day of its foundation, documents its production understanding. Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 38 of 48 OUR CERTIFICATES Royal Mobilya has created a difference in its sector with its modern style products, which combines distinctively designed models, functionality and elegancy, produced in international quality standards. Royal Mobilya, that has brought a difference to the sector in the issue of quality and design, has important certificates, such as ISO 14001, ISO 10002, OHSAS 1800012007, ISO 9001:2008. qua-.4 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 39 of 48 OUR VISION AND VALUES Royal Mobilya targets to present untimely furniture solutions without making any sacrifice from quality, aesthetic and comfort as it appeals to the taste and eyes; gives importance to the distinctions for the purpose of adding innovation and values to the locations, where you live. Royal Mobilya aspires to sustain customer satisfaction while it identifies its name with the quality, being unrivalled in furniture sector with the most modern, innovative and professional designs. Royal Mobilya, which produces boutique solutions in furniture sector, presents products ahead of its time with its people focused approach based on customer satisfaction, its specialist work force and the production facility, equipped with highest technology. Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 40 of 48 OUR COMPANY POLICY Royal Mobilya is an institution, which supports the highest standards in management and the best applications, is strongly stuck with principles, such as honesty, responsibility and transparency. These corporate management and transparency principles are essential elements in reaching to its vision and becoming a leading brand in furniture sector by providing the highest quality and service standard. Royal Mobilya, which is in endeavour of reaching the perfection in its products, sustains its activities in a safe and responsible manner against environment with its employees and production partners. Environment, Occupational Health and Safety Policy Quality Policy. Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 41 of 48 WITH 55 VALUABLE EMPLOYEE AND HIGH TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTION MACHINES ROYAL MOBILYA KEEPS GIVING HIGH QUALITY SERVICE TO THE CUSTOMERS OUR FACTORY no OJ. HBIH DNIAIE) SHNIHDVW GNV SS Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 42 of 48 :0 I mam?20.530 62.26 momma. 10.: 024 mm 1.23 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 43 of 48 Case Document 16-3 SHHWOLSFD EIHJ. O.L HEDIH DNIAIE) SENIHDVW HBIH CINV 318VITIVA SS Filed 05/18/16 Page 44 of 48 8 no no SHEIINOLSFD EIHJ. OJ. HEJIH BNIAIB Sd33) SEINIHDVW A901ONHDEIJ. HSIH CINV SS Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 45 of 48 Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 46 of 48 OUR ENVIRONMENT CONSCIOUSNESS Royal Mobilya studiously carries out its responsibilities in the name of providing a safe and healthy environment to its esteemed employees, using energy more effectively, protecting the environment and natural resources in compliance with European standards at each stage of its production process for sustainability of life with an approach that cares for the people and nature. Environment Mission Notice Royal Mobilya is determined to be a responsible representative of the environment. This determination reflects to the products and services, presented to its customers; operation and designing of its plant and machines; which conditions its employees work under and finally its interaction with its business partners. Royal Mobilya, which has adopted to be the responsible environment volunteers of working environment, its employees and neighbours as a principle and believes sincerely that it has assumed all the tasks that have fallen down on it, has determined that creating a difference is the final goal for itself. Leaving a liveable world to the next generations will continue to be the focus point of Royal Mobilya, which continues to increase its productivity. Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 47 of 48 QUALITY MANAGEMENT Royal Mobilya, which has adopted to carry out its activities without making any sacrifice from quality understanding at each stage of production as its main principle, gives the highest level visual pleasure and physical comfort to its customers with its innovative and modern designs and realizes its production in this direction. The main principles of our quality management are based on the basis of customer focus, sustainability in quality and renewability. Royal Mobilya believes that quality is ?a selective element? in the world, where the competition has increased in large scale, all countries are drawn together and the quality is determined in market conditions. In line with this belief, Royal Mobilya has adopted; .to be the pioneer in quality all around the world, .to turn all focus to the customer satisfaction and to bring all its projects into the life by designing them in this direction .to blend the latest technology products with its specialist cadre .to be an integrated company with its employees by supporting its policies, which have been formed on satisfaction of its esteemed workers, with personnel training and culture increasing works. .to carry out the requirements of management and production systems for the purpose of keeping them at their highest level and increase their effectiveness continuously, as its quality policy. Case Document 16-3 Filed 05/18/16 Page 48 of 48 Case Document 16-4 Filed 05/18/16 Page 1 of 2 BRAFMAN ASSOCIATES, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 767 THIRD AVENUE. 26TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NEW YORK IOOI7 TELEPHONE: IEIZI 750-7800 FACSIMILE: 750?3906 E-MAIL: BENJAMIN BRAFMAN MARK M. BAKER OF COUNSEL ANDREA MARC AGNIFILO JOSHUA D. KIRSHNER OF COUNSEL ADMITTED IN N.Y. AND N.J. JACOB KAPLAN SPIRO May 18, 2016 VIA ECF 8. HAND DELIVERY Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: United States v. Reza Zarrab, S1 15 Cr. 867 (RMB) Dear Judge Berman: As your Honor is aware, this firm represents REZA ZARRAB in connection with the above-captioned Indictment. We respectfully enclose a formal Memorandum in support of our application for Bail on behalf of Mr. Zarrab. As your Honor will note, we have proposed quite extraordinary bail conditions that counsel believes will provide this Court with absolute assurance that Mr. Zarrab will appear in this matter whenever required by the Court and will otherwise fully comply with all of the conditions of bail to be set by your Honor. Thus, in addition to all of the other conditions cited in the memorandum, we agree that the Defendant is to be confined under house-arrest to an apartment in Manhattan with electronic monitoring and that he is to be supervised at all times by armed personnel under the supervision of Guidepost Solutions. Despite your Honor's suggestion at the Defendant's Arraignment that the parties "try and work these issues out", we regret to inform the Court that the Government persists in its position that the defendant should be detained until trial and refuses to consent to any Bail package, including the conditions outlined herein which in our judgment, completely remove any risk of flight, the only concern a District Court should address under the very unique facts of this case as applied to this defendant. As we more fully discuss in the Memorandum, Mr. Zarrab has no prior criminal record and is a very prominent and successful businessman in Turkey with a long Case Document 16-4 Filed 05/18/16 Page 2 of 2 ASSOCIATES, P.C. history of lawful employment, and extraordinary philanthropic work. Furthermore, Mr. Zarrab's wife is one of Turkey's most well known, successful professional singers with a world following and Mr. Zarrab's extended family is considered one of the most respected and independently successful in the region. Mr. Zarrab has retained experienced counsel who believe that the charges in this matter are very defensible and have so informed him. Finally, we note that the complicated White Collar nature of these allegations are document intensive and accordingly, it will impose extraordinary hardship on the Defendant and counsel if required to address these matters from within a maximum security prison, especially when in this case we are presenting the Court with severely restrictive conditions that will virtually guarantee the defendant's appearance throughout the duration of these proceedings. We have copied the Government on this letter and the enclosed materials and are respectfully requesting that your Honor schedule a Detention Hearing and oral argument on our Bail application at the earliest possible time convenient to the court and all parties. Respectfully, Ben Brafman cc: Sidhardha Kamaraju (Sidhardha.Kamaraju@usdoj. gov) Michael Lockard (Michael.Lockard@usdoj. gov)