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

After Funding Brothel in Chinatown Stasior May Not Be Allowed To Withdraw Second Circuit Appeal

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - The Source

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Dec 11 – David Stasior was sentenced on October 23, 2018 for financing a brothel on Henry Street in Chinatown, a few short city blocks from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

    SDNY Judge Lewis A. Kaplan sentenced him to a year and a day of incarceration, allowing for "good time," and to four years of Supervised Release during which he was to perform 20 hours of community service per week.

   On December 11, Stasior's lawyer Harry Sandick took his appeal to a panel of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals but met with what during the argument he called a "hostile" reception.

    When Sandick asked for time to decide whether his client wanted to withdraw the appeal, Circuit Judge Robert D. Sack said he wasn't sure that withdrawing the appeal would be possible.

    Assistant US Attorney Danielle Sassoon, nearing the end of a murder trial before Judge Kaplan, said that Stasior is engaged in gameplaying and should not be allowed to withdraw his appeal but rather face a plenary remand as inquired into by Circuit Judge Denny Chin.

      Sandick said that it would make no sense for his client, as a price for seeking to get the erroneously imposed four years of Supervised Release reduced to four, to subject himself to the risk of Judge Kaplan imposing an additional year of incarceration.

    But, AUSA Sassoon argued, all portions of the sentence were and are interrelated. The four years of Supervised Release may have been erroneous, but it was on that basis that Judge Kaplan only imposed a year and a day of jail.  

Circuit Judge Barrington D. Parker said he found the year and a day a "shockingly low period of incarceration," and asked Sandick about his client having linked a woman's sickness to him having sex with her and then giving or lending her money. 

  I'm not defending that conduct, Sandick said. But he was told that was how his brief had been read. The decision will be forthcoming. The case is US v. Stasior, 18-3339. 


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