Luca Trippitelli Pled Guilty
to Extorting an Ex Prominent Health Provider
In & Passport July 10
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell
Book
SDNY MAG COURT
EXCLUSIVE, May 25 - In
the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New
York on December 28, 2022 a
guilty plea was taken by
Magistrate Judge Kathleen H.
Parker from a man charged with
blackmailing a "prominent
health care provider whose
practice is located in
Manhattan and Chicago."
Luca
Trippitelli, the defendant,
had a romantic relationship
with the health care provider
until November 2019.
When it ended,
the blackmail began. According
to the complaint,
Trippitelli demanded payment
for his new apartment, his
cell phone service and
utilities or he would ruin the
health care provider's
business and marriage. In July
2021 he added the demand for
$5000 a month.
All told,
Trippitelli extorted at least
$130,000 from the health care
provider.
Inner City Press
was present in the morning as
the only media in the Mag
Court. Related
Mag Court live-tweeted
thread (more on Patreon
here)
vlog here
Now on the
guilty plea - to a reduced /
stripped down charge in a new
Information, threatening to
portray the health care
provider as wrongfully
disclosing individually
identifiable health care
information in violation of 42
USC 1320d-6 - Trippitelli has
a sentencing submission due on
May 5, for a May 9 sentencing
not before a District Judge,
but Magistrate Judge Parker.
On May 3,
Trippitelli's Federal Defender
wrote to Judge Parker asking
for a non custodial
sentencing, quoting
Trippitelli that "[REDACTED]
and I were once very much in
love and I am truly story for
the harm I caused him."
On May 5, the US
Attorney's Office wrote to
Judge Parker asking for a
sentence of three months.
On May 9,
Magistrate Judge Parker
sentenced Trippitelli to 60
days in prison: "Minute Entry
for proceedings held before
Magistrate Judge Katharine H.
Parker: Sentencing held on
5/9/2023 for Luca Trippitelli
(1) Count 1. Defendant
appeared in courtroom
17D...Victim Impact Statement
by Daniel Alonso. Sentencing
for guilty plea to Count One
of the Misdemeanor Information
that was taken by Judge Parker
on 12/28/2022. Defendant
sentenced to 60 days
imprisonment /one year
supervised release /75 hours
community service / $25.00
special assessment/ $131,049
restitution paid to the victim
through the court. Defendant
shall report to the prison to
which he his assigned within
60 days - 07/10/2023 Probation
will notify the Defendant of
the facility to which he is to
report."
On May 25, Judge
Parker issued a detailed
decision on Trippitelli's bid
to get his passport back
before he surrenders: "ORDER
as to Luca Trippitelli.
Defendant Luca Trippitelli
requests the return of his
passport from the United
States Pretrial Services. For
the reasons set forth below,
Trippitelli's motion is
granted in part and denied in
part. On December 28, 2022,
Trippitelli pleaded guilty
pursuant to a plea agreement
to one count of blackmail. On
May 9, 2023, the Court
sentenced him to 60 days of
imprisonment recommended in a
minimum security camp,
followed by one year of
supervised release and
restitution of $131,049. The
Court also ordered Trippitelli
surrender by July 10, 2023.
The Government opposes the
application on the basis that
the Probation Department
informed the Government that
it is not in its practice to
return passports for
defendants sentenced to a term
of incarceration prior to the
defendant's surrender date.
(Letter from AUSA Matthew R.
Shahabian, ECF No. 41). Rule
41(g) of the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure states that
a person aggrieved "by the
deprivation of property may
move for the property's
return." Where "no criminal
proceedings against the movant
are pending or have
transpired, a motion for the
return of property is treated
as [a] civil equitable
proceeding[ ]." Mora v. United
States, 955 F.2d 156, 158 (2d
Cir. 1992). Courts consider
the Government's interest in
retaining property when
deciding whether property
should be returned to a
defendant. See, e.g., United
States v. Beras, 2003 WL
21136727 (S.D.N.Y. May 15,
2003) (finding the Government
may retain seized a passport
when it has possible
evidentiary value or where the
defendant was undergoing
exclusion proceedings); United
States v. Sarna, 2009 WL
2633153, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug.
26, 2009) (denying return of
passport where defendant was
under supervised release and
terms of supervised release
required prior approval from
the Probation department to
travel out of the country).
Additionally, passports may be
returned after sentencing.
United States v. Dominguez,
2009 WL 2245064, at *1
(S.D.N.Y. July 27, 2009)
(passport allegedly returned
after sentencing). Here, the
Government objects to
returning Trippitelli's
passport because it is not
Probation's practice to return
passports until after a
surrender date. The
Government's interest in
holding his passport until
Trippitelli's surrender date
is reasonable to ensure
surrender. Therefore,
Tripitelli's motion is
granted, but not as to timing
of the return. Probation is
ordered to return Tripitelli's
passport to him immediately
after Trippitelli surrenders
on July 10, 2023. By July 12,
2023, Probation shall file a
letter with the Court
informing it that it has
complied with this Order. SO
ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate
Judge Katharine H. Parker on
5/25/2023)."
More on this
case, & Trippitelli, on
Patreon here
The case is US v.
Trippitelli, 22-cr-707
(Parker)
***
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 2006-2022 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|