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


(FP Twitterati 100, 2013)

ICP on YouTube

More: InnerCityPro
Sept 24, 2013

UN: Sri Lanka


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"




Bank Beat

Freedom of Information

How to Contact Us

In Tom Barrack Trial As UAE Agent He Says He Was in SDNY But EDNY Says Waters Too

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell book
BBC - Honduras - CIA Trial book - NY Mag

EDNY MEDIA ROOM, Oct 23 – Thomas Barrack and Matthew Grimes, indicted for illegal lobbying for the United Arab Emirates, were arraigned on July 26, 2021 before U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York Magistrate Judge Sanket Bulsara. Inner City Press live tweeted it here (and podcast here)

On October 21, the defense called as a witness Brady Cassis, an associate at Paul Hasting in DC. He was present and took laptop notes at the June 20, 2019 DOJ interview of Barrack. But the US immediately opposed admission of the notes that he took. Judge Brian M. Cogan sent the jurors to the jury room in order to hear argument.

At 2:22 pm, Judge Cogan said he would be admitting the notes, and allowing cross-examination on the issues. Then it was said, We are not getting to Mr. Barrack's testimony today.

On October 22, Barrack through counsel wrote: "Dear Judge Cogan: We respectfully submit this letter to alert the Court of exhibits upon which Mr. Barrack will rely in response to the government’s venue argument, as articulated for the first time during oral arguments regarding Defendants’ Rule 29 motions on the afternoon of October 20. During oral argument, it became apparent for the first time that the government’s entire venue theory is dependent on a novel application of the “contiguous waters doctrine,” which is both factually and legally erroneous. We intend to address this more fully in our forthcoming briefing on Rule 29, but we wanted to immediately alert the Court that we have identified a very small set of new casein-chief exhibits that squarely refute the government’s “proof” of venue... counsel discovered documents establishing that, while Mr. Barrack was in EDNY during part of the day on July 1, 2016 (a day on which the government alleges he sent Mr. Al Malik an email related to the alleged agency agreement), Mr. Barrack was actually in the Southern District of New York when he sent the relevant messages. The Court’s instruction on case-in-chief exhibits is clear. However-" full letter on Patreon here.

On Sunday October 23, the US Attorney's Office shot back: "Dear Judge Cogan: The government writes in response to defendant Thomas J. Barrack’s letter, filed on October 22, 2022, that attempts to justify yet another untimely disclosure of exhibits. Barrack claims that this disclosure—made in violation of multiple oral and written court orders regarding the disclosure of exhibits to the government—was necessary because of the government’s “novel application” of venue that was “articulated for the first time…on the afternoon of October 20.” These claims are wholly inaccurate. Counsel for Barrack has known for nearly three months that the government would assert venue based on (among other things) the waterways surrounding the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York. On August 5, 2022, the government filed its proposed jury instructions, which included a venue instruction. See Request No. 12, Gov’t. Requests to Charge (ECF No. 147). The proposal included (among other bases for venue), an explanation that 'the Eastern District of New York includes the waters within New York and Bronx Counties, which include the waters surrounding the island of Manhattan that separate Manhattan from the other boroughs of New York City and from the State of New Jersey, as well as the air space above the district or the waters in the district.'" Full letter on Patreon here.

Watch this site.

Order on Patreon here.

US filing on Patreon here.

On FARA, full order on Patreon here.

Analysis: Because of the possibility of (success) appeal to any conviction under Section 951, on a claim that the jurors confused it with FARA, the attempt is made to keep FARA out of testimony as much as possible. But what about the jury instructions? Watch this site.

  Watch this site - and this Sept 30 vlog, and Twitter Space here. Oct 4 vlog here.


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]
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: 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 2006-2022 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at]