Inner City Press





In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYTAzerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .



These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis
,



Share |   

Follow on TWITTER

Home -

These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis

CONTRIBUTE

(FP Twitterati 100, 2013)

ICP on YouTube

More: InnerCityPro

BloggingHeads.tv
Sept 24, 2013

UN: Sri Lanka

VoA: NYCLU

FOIA Finds  

Google, Asked at UN About Censorship, Moved to Censor the Questioner, Sources Say, Blaming UN - Update - Editorial

Support this work by buying this book

Click on cover for secure site orders

also includes "Toxic Credit in the Global Inner City"
 

 

 


Community
Reinvestment

Bank Beat

Freedom of Information
 

How to Contact Us



In SDNY Pakistani Extradited From Nigeria Pled Guilty On Heroin Now Sentencing Qs

By Matthew Russell Lee, @SDNYLIVE

SDNY COURTHOUSE, April 22 – A Pakistani man accused of trying to import heroin into the US and just extradited from Nigeria was arraigned on April 29, 2019 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Magistrate's courtroom, presided over for the week by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox. Inner City Press was present in person and reported on the presentment, which was not otherwise announced.

In the courtroom that day, along with Inner City Press as the only media, were several heavily bearded US agents. This shacked defendant Muhammad Khalid Khan, with the same genial Pashto interpreter as in the a recent SDNY Taliban case covered by Inner City Press, pled not guilty. His Federal Defenders lawyer did not in this proceeding seek bail, and later conferred with the also FD lawyer in the Taliban case.

  Now more than a year later, this on September 7: "Dear Judge Broderick: I represent Muhammad Khalid Khan in the above referenced matter. Mr. Khan’s case is currently on the Court’s calendar for September 15, 2020. With the consent of the government, it is respectfully requested that the case be put over for a two-week period. It is anticipated that Mr. Khan will enter a plea of guilty at the next appearance, however, counsel needs additional time to make certain that he understands the plea offer extended by the government. I am advised by chambers that September 29, 2020, is a convenient date for the Court.

  On September 24, Khan's lawyer wrote in to ask for another four weeks, citing an eye infection and COVID quarantine requirements.

  On November 10, Judge Broderick held a lengthy change of plea proceeding, with consecutive interpretation. Khan pled guilty to importing heroin to the U and to money laundering. He asked a number of question, for example on what papers Judge Broderick was asking if he'd read. Judge Broderick patiently answered, and accepted the plea.

On February 8, two weeks before the February 23 sentencing, Khan's counsel has written in for another four to six week delay, citing COVID and the Pre-Sentencing Report.

Now on the eve of sentencing, Judge Broderick as is his way has published his questions: "ORDERED that the parties shall provide the following requested documents prior to sentencing and shall be prepared to discuss/answer the following topics and questions either at sentencing or prior to sentencing: 1. The Government shall provide a copy of any report and/or notes taken during Defendant’s safety valve proffer. 2. On page 5 of the defense submission it states “Since his incarceration, Mr. Khan’s mother has suffered a stroke and her health is declining rapidly.” What is the basis for this statement? Is there any other location in the defense submission with the stroke is discussed?

 Do Defendant’s medical records support the assertion that medical professionals proscribed medication for Defendant that were not filled by the Bureau of Prisons? If so, how many times did this occur? 4. Does Defendant and/or his family own Bismillah & Co (“B&C”)?

a. What was the gross and net annual revenue of B&C in 2020? b. Does Defendant and/or his family operate the branches of B&C? c. What was Defendant’s salary in 2019 from the work he did at B&C?. 5. What is the support for the assertion that Defendant lied during the instant offense about his ability to obtain and transport narcotics and/or his ability to launder money? 6. What is the evidence that Defendant was not lying during the instant offense? 7. Does the Government have Defendant’s passport? a. What countries does the passport indicate Defendant traveled to between 2017 and 2019? b. What countries does the passport indicate Defendant traveled to prior to 2017? 8. Did the Government seize Defendant’s cell phone? a. Did the Government obtain Defendant’s cell phone records? b. Did the Government search the contents of Defendant’s cell phone? If so, was there any proof of his narcotics trafficking and/or his money laundering on his cell phone? 9. During the instant offense Defendant claimed to have access to 150 kilograms of “opium” for sale in Toronto, Canada.

 a. What is the proof that this was a true statement? b. Is there any information that confirms that Defendant had access to 150 kilograms of “opium” in Canada? 10. In the Summer of 2018 Defendant was arrested in Nigeria and eventually extradited to the United States. a. At the time Defendant was arrested in Nigeria was he offered the opportunity to cooperate? b. According to the Government’s sentencing submission, on June 29, 2018, Defendant told UC-2 that he had 200 kilograms of heroin in a country in East Africa. Does the Government have any evidence that confirms Defendant’s assertion? Does the Government have any information concerning where in East Africa the 200 kilograms of heroin were located? 11. On page 5 of the Government’s submission the Government discusses Defendant’s proffer sessions with the Government. To the extent the Government is permitted to comment on Defendant’s proffer sessions, a. Did the Government believe Defendant’s statements during the proffer sessions? b. Did the Government believe Defendant was minimizing his involvement in narcotics trafficking? c. Did the Government believe Defendant was minimizing his involvement with money laundering?

 d. The Government states that “Unfortunately, the Government and the DEA assessed that the information Khan provided was limited, and insufficiently specific and actionable to provide substantial assistance in the foreseeable future.” What does “insufficiently specific and actionable” mean?" Inner City Press will continue to report on this case.

 The case is US v. Khan, 18-cr-830 (Broderick).

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540



Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2019 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for