For
Extortion of Fire Victims Jatiek Smith Pro
Se Found Guilty US Wants 25 Years He 66 Mo
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell
book
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
May 28 – The lead
defendant in a criminal case
alleging gang extortion in the
field of clean-up services to
properties damaged by fire
asserted his Speedy Trial Act
rights.
On
September 9, 2022, U.S.
District Court for the
Southern District of New York
Judge Jed S. Rakoff held an
in-person arraignment and
detention or bond proceeding,
with the defendant's family
and supporters filling half of
the courtroom gallery. Inner
City Press was there.
On the
request to move up the
scheduled May 2023 trial to
October, Judge Rakoff said he
will speak with Judge Analisa
Torres about changing the
schedule of her US v. Tim Shea
(We Build the Wall) trial.
We'll see.
On
detention or release, the
Assistant US Attorney recited
from audio recordings of
threatens, saying "N-word, I'm
gonna kill you."
The defense
lawyer, retained from Staten
Island, pointed to those in
the gallery and called the
threats hyperbole. Judge
Rakoff said the defendant
clearly had supporters, but
was a danger to the community.
He was ordered
detained.
Afterward by the
elevators, supporters said of
the prosecutors after they
left in a separate elevator,
"They lie."
Jump cut to March
27, 2023, when Judge Rakoff
convened a Curcio hearing on
the lead defendant. In short
order he ruled, there is no
conflict, and adjourned the
proceeding. Ten days prior,
Judge Rakoff had denied this
request to suppress the
forensic copy of his phone,
taken after he was denied
entry into Jamaica and was
found with $10,000 upon his
return.
Back on September
13, Judge Rakoff held a
proceeding with co-defendants.
The lead defendant Jatiek
Smith applied to move his
trial from October 17 to
November 28 was granted, and
three co-defendants were
allowed to join him for trial
beginning that date, one with
a new lawyer. The others
remain for trial on "5-1-22,"
which we take to mean May 1,
2023.
On April 27,
Jatiek Smith appeared before
Judge Rakoff, seeking to go
pro se. His CJA lawyer, it was
said on the record, collapsed
in the subway; Inner City
Press is voluntarily not
report further medical
details.
Jatiek
Smith said he is tired of
waiting for lawyers; he said,
"You view me as an animal, so
I'll just do it myself."
Judge Rakoff
pointed out that the first CJA
counsel's sickness was not his
fault.
Then
Jatiek Smith asked for the
courtroom to be cleared to
speak about his experience
with his lawyers. Inner City
Press did not contest the
sealing; it stood by the
elevators with six AUSAs and,
separately, supporters of
Smith. When summoned back in,
it was put on the record that
Smith will communicate by 5 pm
on May 1 if he wants to go pro
se - in which case trial would
start May 8 or 15 -- or
continue with another CJA
lawyer, or two, on August 14,
moved up in the sealed session
from September 19.
It emerged that
3500 material and other
discovery cannot be shared
with Smith on the same
timeline as other defendants,
which would impact his ability
- and Constitutional right -
to represent himself. It was
unclear how or if this was
addressed in the sealed
session.
Thing became
clearer on May 1, when the
trial date (and
representation) were set:
"ORDER as to (22-Cr-352-1)
Jatiek Smith. On 4/27/23, the
Court held an in-person
conference with Jatiek Smith,
his then-primary counsel
Thomas Nooter and co-counsel
Jill Shellow, and prospective
counsel Andrew Patel, as well
as counsel for the Government.
See 4/27/23 Hr'g Tr. As
discussed further on the
record during that proceeding,
severe and unexpected medical
setbacks that had very
recently arisen affecting Mr.
Nooter's health meant that Mr.
Nooter was no longer able to
try this case... following an
on-the-record (but sealed)
colloquy regarding the risks
of going prose, Mr. Smith
asked for some time to further
consider the issue. He has
since written the Court (in a
letter that has been docketed
separately, see dkt. 211)
stating his preference to
remain represented by Ms.
Shellow (as primary counsel)
and Mr. Patel (as co-counsel)
and proceed with an August 14
trial date."
On July 11, the
US Attorney's Office asked for
at least 60 months for Hasim
Smith.
On July 19, Inner
City Press went to the
proceeding for Jatiek Smith to
fire his lawyers and go pro
se. Judge Rakoff ordered
everyone out of the courtroom
except outgoing counsel and
two associates in the
courtroom gallery.
After more than
half an hour, the press and
public were allowed back in.
Judge Rakoff said he had had a
cordial talk with Smith and
that he would be appointing
now counsel, to meet with
Smith by July 24. A week after
that, Smith is to write in
whether he wanted to keep
these new counsel and see his
trial pushed back, or go
forward pro se with the trial
starting August 16.
Docketed on July
27 was Jatiek Smith's letter
from the MDC, that he will
take CJA counsel and see his
trial delayed.
On July 28 his
brother Hasim Smith was up for
sentencing, and got 30 months.
Inner City Press was there, thread:
Inner City
Press noticed the late -
today - defense sentencing
submission
Defense lawyer
says he was late because his
client is being "sentenced for
things he didn't do."
Judge Rakoff
thunders, You brought this on
yourself.
Hasim Smith says
Parole recommended he go to
work in his brother's company,
"chasing fires at night... I
did not assault anyone."
Judge Rakoff:
This defendant is articulate,
even eloquent. I sentence him
to 30 months.
On August
16, 2023 a pre-trial
conference for Jatiek Smith
was on the schedule for 11:30
am. Inner City Press went but
found the courtroom door
locked. A woman by the
elevators with a young child
also asked why it was locked.
Hours
later into the docket went a
letter from the prosecutors:
"this morning, due to reports
of the defendant's
noncompliance with the U.S.
Marshals at the courthouse,
the Court adjourned the
conference until September 6,
2023."
On September 25
Judge Rakoff docketed this
laptop access order - to be
contrasted with that, for
example, Sam Bankman-Fried's
lawyer continue to demand:
"ORDER as to Jatiek Smith. The
trial of Jatiek Smith was
previously scheduled to start
on August 14, 2023. By Order
dated May 1, 2023, the Court
found that numerous
security-necessitated
lockdowns in the MDC were
preventing Mr. Smith from
having access to a computer to
meaningfully review his
discovery and adequately
prepare for trial, and the
Court accordingly directed
that Mr. Smith be provided
access to a computer
notwithstanding the lockdowns.
See Dkt.214. The trial of Mr.
Smith has since been
rescheduled and will now
commence on November 27, 2023.
Accordingly, the Court's May
1, 2023, electronic access
order (Dkt. 214) is hereby
vacated and the following
Order substituted. It is
hereby ordered, on consent of
the parties, that, regardless
of lockdowns in the facility,
MDC shall permit Mr. Smith to
have access to a computer to
prepare for trial for no fewer
than seven hours per day every
day starting on November 6,
2023 and continuing until
November 27, 2023, and after
the trial begins to have
access to a computer for no
fewer three hours per day on
days when Mr. Smith's presence
is required at the courthouse
and no fewer than seven hours
per day on days when Mr.
Smith's presence at the
courthouse is not required.
(Signed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff
on 9/25/2023)." Watch this
site.
Then one of
Jatiek Smith's co-defendants
was sentenced, with a medical
facility recommended: "as to
Kaheen Small (4), Count(s) 1,
Dismissed; Pleaded guilty to
Count(s) 2, Imprisonment for a
total term of Twenty Four (24)
Months. Supervised release for
a term of Two Years. The court
makes the following
recommendations to the Bureau
of Prisons: Incarceration in a
Chronic Care 3 Facility such
as FCI Butner Low, Butner,
North Carolina or FMC Devens
Low, Ayer, Massachusetts. The
defendant shall surrender for
service of sentence at the
institution designated by the
Bureau of Prisons before 2pm
on 11/28/2023. Special
Assessment of $100 which is
due immediately. (Signed by
Judge Jed S. Rakoff on
9/26/2023)."
On October 10,
Judge Rakoff docketed: "ORDER
as to Jatiek Smith: The Court
has received two prose filings
from defendant Jatiek Smith,
dated September 28, 2023, and
October 6, 2023. Mr. Smith,
although offered the
opportunity to proceed prose,
has chosen to be represented
by appointed counsel, Jonathan
P. Buza. Accordingly, the
Court has warned Mr. Smith
that such prose filings are
not permitted and all
applications must be made
through his counsel. As a
courtesy to Mr. Smith, the
Court will forward copies of
his submissions to his counsel
so that Mr. Buza is apprised
of these improper filings.
(Signed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff
on 10/10/2023)." And he set a
pre trial conference for
October 23 at 11 am.
Inner City Press
went, and found the Assistant
US Attorney's waiting out in
the hall. Later, it went in as
Judge Rakoff authorized a
paralegal to act as Jatiek
Smith messenger, but not to
provide any legal advice. Then
"Defendant's motion to proceed
for trial pro se and have
standby CJA counsel appointed
granted after a Faretta
hearing proceeds. The trail
date remains 11/27/2023."
On November 3,
Judge Rakoff docketed that
Smith may be shackled for
trial, for anger management
issues - so a bench trial is
being briefed.
On November 15,
of the SDNY prosecutors'
objection, a bench trial was
ordered: "MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
as to Jatiek Smith. The Court
remains mystified why the
Government has refused to
consent to a bench trial in
this case. It cannot be that
the Government has a policy of
never consenting to criminal
bench trials; indeed, this
judge has in recent years
conducted such trials with the
Government's consent,7 as have
his colleagues. The Court is
not yet forced to the
conclusion that the Government
simply wants to parade Mr.
Smith, with all his
troublesome tendencies, in
front of a jury, knowing it
will prejudice him and make
conviction more likely. But
even if this is not the case,
the Court finds the
Government's unexplained
insistence upon a jury trial
in this case both striking and
troubling. See generally
United States v. Allen, 644 F.
Supp. 2d 422, 431 (S.D.N.Y.
2009) (noting the "special
role" prosecutors have in our
system of justice "not solely
to advocate for the guilt of
the defendant" but also to
seek "truth and fairness"). In
any case, it is the Court's
duty to guarantee Mr. Smith a
fair trial, and thus, for the
forgoing reasons, the
defendant's request for a
bench trial is hereby granted,
the Government's objection is
overruled, the defendant's
latest request for an
adjournment is denied, and the
trial will go forward, as
scheduled, beginning on
November 27, 2023 as a bench
trial."
Inner City Press
went on November 27. Smith pro
se cross examined an agent
about the taking of his phone,
and what the agent called a
"ruckus." Judge Rakoff noted
that he had previously ruled
on the phone, albeit on a
motion by one of Smith's prior
counsel.
On November 28,
cooperating witness Jackson
described his work for First
Response, running to fire
sites to sign up the
homeowner, then violence
against competitors, including
going to AES' warehouse in
Ozone Park and assaulting the
company's workers. Exhibits,
including video of punches
thrown in through a car
window, were offered. No
objection, Smith said. At one
point he objected to a line of
questioning as irrelevant to
the RICO charges, but Judge
Rakoff overruled. The trial
continues.
On November 29,
Smith cross examined Jackson
about his work for EFS, and
threats by other chasers. The
AUSA objected, calling it
outside the time frame of the
conspiracy. Jackson was
deadpan, as he explained this
own threats to Carl Walsh.
On November 30,
the re-direct of Jackson
involved an audio of Jatiek
Smith predicted the level of
charges for a beat down,
adding "none of us will escape
the conspiracy." Then the US
put on a Staten Island police
officer, but Smith effectively
objected to hearsay about a
lost ID. Then another
cooperator, who said he got
punched in the face.
On December 4,
with notably fewer people in
the courtroom, subpoenaed
victims testified. Peter
Rafferty testified about
showing up to a fire scene
with First Response and being
gripped, hard, from behind
while his employer was being
yelled at by First Response.
Then
Benjamin Vargas, owner of a
ServPro franchise on the Upper
West Side, described being
told to pay $1000, then $2000,
a week in order to be let in
to "the rotation" of fires by
Smith. He described the
raising of the price over a
lunch at Peter Luger's
steakhouse, and threats to
woman and children.
On December 5 on
re-direct, Vargas said
clearly, he only joined the
"rotation" because of the
threats to his family, and
that there was no way to make
money in the rotation. Records
of payments from Vargas to
Smith, $1000 then $2000, were
shown (though not on the video
monitor facing the courtroom
gallery).
The defense Rule
29 motion was denied.
On December 6
Jatiek Smith was on the stand,
being questioned by his
standby counsel. The AUSA
repeatedly objected, mostly
successfully, to hearsay. But
Smith got his story out - he
had been the first one
threatened by a gun or grip at
a fire scene, and had gripped
up after that. Alongside the
Peter Luger's meeting with
Vargas, he had another
meeting. And when asked to
name a person who told him
something, Smith declined,
saying he had to live in jail.
So what was said, was not
admitted in to evidence.
On December 7,
Jatiek Smith was being cross
examined by the AUSA. For ten
minutes the courtroom was
ordered sealed; there was
discussion in the hall. While
the evidence will wrap up on
December 11, then there will
be briefing as closing
arguments.
Back inside the
courtroom, the AUSA again
played the audio of Smith
saying "the only thing none of
us will escape is the
conspiracy." Judge Rakoff
stopped and asked Smith about
it.
The AUSA
asked Smith about calling
Eddie a coward, but saying he
didn't look afraid. Smith said
Eddie didn't want to look like
a coward. When asked if he was
scared when they went to the
AES warehouse, Smith said he
didn't know how to answer
that.
On December 11,
another fire mitigation
veteran testified by video,
questioned by Jatiek Smith and
Judge Rakoff. He acknowledged
that he had not been
threatened by Smith, and
praised him for his ideas.
Given the video's audio, it
was not always possible to
hear what his lawyer beside
him was saying. He was the
last witness - now a briefing
period, and perhaps more.
On December 12,
Judge Rakoff partially granted
Smith's motion, on evidence
tampering: "ORDER as to Jatiek
Smith. Following conclusion
yesterday of the taking of
evidence in the bench trial of
this criminal case, defendant
Jatiek Smith timely moved for
a judgment of acquittal
pursuant to Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 29. Count I
of the indictment charges
Smith with racketeering
conspiracy in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 1962(d) and Count II
charges Smith with extortion
conspiracy in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 1951. In support of
Count I, the Government
alleges the conspirators
agreed to engage in a variety
of predicate criminal acts,
including, inter alia,
evidence tampering in
violation of 18 U.S.C. §
1512(c)(1), which makes it a
crime to "corruptly...
alter[], destroy[],
mutilate[], or conceal[] a
record, document, or other
object, or attempt[] to do so,
with the intent to impair the
object's integrity or
availability for use in an
official proceeding." At the
close of trial, the only
evidence the Government had
presented to support the
predicate act of conspiracy to
violate 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(1)
was the alleged attempt by
Smith to break one of his two
cellphones when confronted by
an FBI Agent with a warrant
for its production. (Smith
later turned over the phone).
For the reasons already
largely stated on the record,
see Dec. 11, 2023, Trial Tr.,
the Court concludes that no
rational trier of fact could
find beyond a reasonable doubt
that the alleged attempt to
break the phone (which Smith
denies) was pursuant to an
agreement between Mr. Smith
and his alleged
co-conspirators to engage in
conduct of a kind that would
constitute a violation of 18
U.S.C. § 1512(c)(1). See
United States v. Jackson, 335
F.3d 170, 180 (2d Cir. 2003).
Accordingly, with respect to
the alleged predicate act of
conspiring to violate 18
U.S.C. § 1512(c)(1), the
defendant's motion pursuant to
Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 29 is hereby
granted. In all other
respects, the defendant's
motion is hereby denied.
(Signed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff
on 12/12/2023)."
On January 9,
2024, Smith's standby counsel
submitted a closing argument
including that the court
should not credit Benny
Vargas, zeroing in on
inconsistencies on when and
why he moved his wife and
family to Florida and back.
On February 14,
2024, Judge Rakoff found
Jatiek Smith guiltys of Counts
1 and 2, concluding that "the
Court concludes that Smith is
guilty of participating in a
RICO conspiracy to commit
extortion and fraud, but not
obstruction."
On March 5,
stand-by counsel conveyed to
Judge Rakoff points from
Jatiek Smith in the SHU
without access to the law
library, nor to his family: no
pens in SHU so "BP 8, 9, 10
etc" rejected. Walls not
cleaned in Z03-2 Cell, no
grooming equipment, "mail is
not being sent out by staff."
On April 1,
stand-by counsel returned and
asked to be appointed
sentencing counsel - and noted
that Jatiek Smith wants more
than five hours of law library
per week, to preparing for
sentencing and appeal and for
his Section 2231 petition in
EDNY in connection with the
BOP's "decision to strip him
of social visits for a period
of three years."
Docketed on April
8, a handwritten letter from
Jatiek Smith, asking Judge
Rakoff to contact MDC where he
says "my medication have still
not been refilled, Medical has
still not seen me. If I start
kicking the door and yelling
then I am an animal. And get
more time in the SHU, fed a
bag meal, placed in paper
clothing to freeze, shackled
to a bed by my arms and legs.
Please help me in this
matter."
Jump cut to May
28, when Jatiek's Smith's
counsel asked for 66 months -
while the US asked for 25
years. Sentencing is set for
June 3.
Jatiek Smith
himself in his letter said
among other things "My sister
was murdered. I could have
waged war in the streets... I
didn't! I was shot in my face
and leg. Again, I could have
turned multiple communities
into a war zone. I, ME, Tiek,
Bad Blood, made the decision
to make everyone stand down."
Watch this site.
The
overall case is US v. Smith,
et al., 22-cr-352 (Rakoff)
***
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
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 2006-2024 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|