IRNewswires Public Corruption Task Force

Ulysses T. Ware, Esq. Innocence Project-2020

Harold Morey, Executive Editor, Alan Reitman, JD, Ph.D., Esq., Public Corruption Investigative Reporter
October 28, 2020
New York

How to Report Unregistered Convertible Debt Lenders or Penny Stock Dealers and Earn an SEC Whistleblower Award

By Jason Zuckerman and Matthew Stock
Last updated: September 14th, 2020

SEC Targets Unregistered Convertible Debt Lenders and Penny Stock Dealers

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is targeting convertible debt lenders and penny stock dealers that are operating as unregistered securities dealers. Under the federal securities laws, a convertible debt lender must register as a securities dealer when they engage in the regular business of buying and selling securities for their own account, through a broker or otherwise. See Section 3(a)(5)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act). In these circumstances, a convertible debt lender’s failure to register as a securities dealer with the SEC is a violation of the mandatory registration provisions of the federal securities laws. See Section 15(a)(1) of the Exchange Act.  By failing to register, a convertible debt lender avoids regulatory obligations governing dealers, including regulatory inspections and oversight, financial responsibility requirements, and maintaining books and records.

On February 26, 2020, the SEC brought its first-ever enforcement action against a convertible debt lender for failing to register as a securities dealer. According to the SEC’s complaint, the convertible debt lender engaged in the business of purchasing convertible notes—a type of security—from penny stock issuers, converting the notes into newly issued shares of stock, and selling those shares into the public market at a significant profit. Since the enforcement action, and as detailed below, the SEC has brought two additional enforcement actions against unregistered convertible debt lenders. In total, the SEC alleges the defendants in the three enforcement actions generated nearly $85 million in profits.

The SEC Whistleblower Program was created to incentivize whistleblowers with information about federal securities laws violations (e.g., unregistered convertible debt lenders) to report to the SEC. Since the inception of the program in 2011, the SEC has received more than 33,300 whistleblower tips, some of which have enabled the SEC to recover more than $2.5 billion in financial remedies from wrongdoers. In exchange for these valuable tips, the SEC’s Office of the Whistleblower has paid more than $500 million in awards to whistleblowers to date.

If you have original information that you would like to report to the SEC Whistleblower Office, contact the Director of our SEC whistleblower practice at mstock@zuckermanlaw.com or call our leading SEC whistleblower lawyers at (202) 930-5901 or (202) 262-8959. All inquiries are confidential.

SEC Whistleblower Program

Under the SEC Whistleblower Program, the SEC will issue awards to whistleblowers who provide original information, including information about unregistered convertible note lenders, that leads to successful enforcement actions with total monetary sanctions in excess of $1 million. A whistleblower may receive an award of between 10 to 30 percent of the total monetary sanctions collected. If represented by counsel, a whistleblower may submit a tip anonymously to the SEC.

In its short history, the SEC Whistleblower Program has had a tremendous impact on securities enforcement. In fiscal 2019, the SEC received over 5,200 whistleblower tips, representing a 74% increase since fiscal 2012. The largest SEC whistleblower awards to date are $50 million, $50 million, and $39 million.

SEC Enforcement Actions Against Unregistered Convertible Debt Lenders and Penny Stock Dealers

• On February 26, 2020, the SEC charged John D. Fierro and his company, JDF Capital, Inc., with failing to register as dealers with the SEC. See Securities and Exchange Commission v. John D. Fierro and JDF Capital, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-2104 (D.N.J. February 26, 2020). According to the SEC’s complaint, Fierro and JDF purchased convertible notes from more than 20 separate issuers and sold more than 6.5 billion shares of newly issued penny stock into the market, generating over $2.3 million in profits. At the time of this conduct, the SEC alleges that neither Fierro nor JDF were registered as securities dealers, in violation of the mandatory registration provisions of the federal securities laws.

• On March 24, 2020, the SEC filed charges against Justin W. Keener d/b/a JMJ Financial for buying and selling billions of newly issued shares of penny stock without registering as a securities dealer. See Securities and Exchange Commission v. Justin W. Keener d/b/a JMJ Financial, No. 20-cv-21254 (S.D. Fla. March 24, 2020).  The SEC’s complaint alleges that for approximately three years, Keener purchased convertible notes from more than 100 separate penny stock issuers, converted the notes into newly issued shares of stock, and sold more than 17.5 billion shares of newly issued penny stock into the public market, generating over $21.5 million in profits. Keener demanded and received highly favorable terms for these notes, including deep discounts on the converted stock from the prevailing market price. The majority of Keener’s profits resulted from the discounted prices at which he acquired shares from the issuers to sell into the market.

• On September 3, 2020, the SEC brought charges against John M. Fife and companies he controls for buying and selling more than 21 billion shares of penny stock without registering as a securities dealer with the SEC. See Securities and Exchange Commission v. John M. Fife, Chicago Venture Partners, L.P., Iliad Research and Trading, L.P., St. George Investments LLC, Tonaquint, Inc., and Typenex Co-Investment, LLC, No. 1:20-cv-05227 (N.D. Ill. filed September 3, 2020). The SEC’s complaint alleges that for approximately 5 years, Fife and his companies were in the business of purchasing convertible notes from penny stock issuers, converting those notes into shares of stock, and selling the newly issued shares into the market at a profit of $61 million. And the complaint avers that the convertible notes that Fife and his companies bought from the issuers entitled them to receive issuer stock at a substantial discount from the prevailing market price. To lock in their profits, the defendants normally sold the stock as soon after conversion as the market would bear the sales.

How to Report Unregistered Convertible Debt Lenders and Penny Stock Dealers and Earn an SEC Whistleblower Award

To report an unregistered convertible debt lender or penny stock dealer and qualify for an award under the SEC Whistleblower Program, the SEC requires that whistleblowers or their attorneys report the tip online through the SEC’s Tip, Complaint or Referral Portal or mail/fax a Form TCR to the SEC Office of the Whistleblower. Prior to submitting a tip, whistleblowers should consult with an experienced whistleblower attorney and review the SEC whistleblower rules to, among other things, understand eligibility rules and consider the factors that can significantly increase or decrease the size of a future whistleblower award.

SEC Whistleblower Attorneys

If you would like more information on reporting fraud to the SEC Office of the Whistleblower, contact an SEC Whistleblower Attorney at Zuckerman Law for a free, confidential consultation. Zuckerman Law is one of the nation’s leading law firms representing whistleblowers in whistleblower rewards and retaliation cases.

For more information about the SEC Whistleblower Program and how to report violations of the federal securities laws to the SEC, download the eBook: Tips from SEC Whistleblower Attorneys to Maximize an SEC Whistleblower Award. Also, click below to hear SEC whistleblower lawyer Matt Stock’s tips for SEC whistleblowers:

IRNewswires Investigative Reports: 

Opinion and Editorial.

Blatant Racially-Motivated Judicial and Governmental Corruption in the New York Federal Courts and Prosecutor's Office.

New York Federal Judge (SDNY)
William H. Pauley, III implicated in Judicial Bribery Conspiracy.

By: Harold Morey, Executive Editor and Alan Reitman, JD, Ph.D., Esq., Public Corruption Investigative Reporter.
October 22, 2020
New York, NY

RE: What should be the charges, fines, punishments, and consequences for New York federal judges William H. Pauley, III, et al.,  and the SEC's Enforcement Division's officials and lawyers, and its Chief Counsel, Joan E. McKown's, for their knowing, intentional, willful, and deliberate conspiracy to fabricate evidence, perjury, grand jury frauds and perjury, kidnapping, mail and wire frauds, bankruptcy frauds, securities frauds, insider-trading, money laundering, racketeering, conspiracy, civil right violations, Hobbs Act extortion; and the concealment and suppression of Rule 16 and Brady exculpatory, exonerating, and impeachment evidence in United States v. Ware, 04cr1224 (SDNY) and United States v. Ware, 05cr1115 (SDNY), (the "Ware cases")?

For more than 50 years the law has not been in doubt, and is well-settled in regard to the disclosure duties and obligations of prosecutors in criminal proceedings. In 1963 the Supreme Court of the United States decided Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and announced the rule of law in regard to the prosecutor's disclosure obligations and duties to a defendant in a criminal proceeding. The Court explained that the government's withholding of evidence from the defendant that is material to the determination of either guilt or punishment of a criminal defendant violates the defendant's [Ulysses T. Ware, Esq.'s] constitutional right to due process of law. Brady's progenies have further expanded the concept and scope of due process to the police, or other government agencies that were involved in the investigation, i.e., in the Ware cases, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Enforcement Division's lawyers, employees, and officials, to wit, Joan E McKown, Spencer C. Barasch, Jeffrey B. Norris, Steve Korotash, Steve Webster, John C. Martin, Robert Hannan, Rebecca Fairchild, Stephen M. Cutler, Rose Romero, Julie D. Draper, Mark Pennington, William Smith-Grieg, and others, jointly and severally, (the "SEC Employees").

PRESS RELEASE

IRN Public Corruption Task Force 

Ulysses T. Ware, Esq. Innocence Project-2020

October 15, 2020
London, UK
Harold Morey, Executive Editor

IRN Public Corruption Task Force has retained an American law firm to opine on the legality and validity of the illegal and unethical conduct of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), its officials, Steve Cutler, Steve R. Peikin, Spencer C. Barasch, Steve Korotash, Steve Webster, John C. Martin, Robert Hannan, Rebecca Fairchild, Rose Romero, and lawyers, its former chief counsel Joan E. McKown, and others employees, Julia D. Draper, before, during, and after the SEC's July 14, 2003 submission of the UNSIGNED complaint in its commingled, bad faith, frivolous, filed for an improper purpose, and fraudulent litigation, SEC v. Small Cap Research Group, et al., case no. 03-0831 (D. NV) KJD-RJJ, (the "Las Vegas Litigation").

The law firm was retained to render an opinion on, (i) the legality and validity of the Las Vegas Litigation; (ii) the Article III and statutory standing of the SEC to file the complaint given its binding judicial admissions pleaded in paragraph 33 of the unsigned complaint; (iii) the validity of the complaint given the SEC's own lawyers have confessed the complaint was not actually signed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 11(a) by a SEC lawyers admitted to the District Court (D. NV); (iv) whether or not the District Court obtained lawful and valid personal jurisdiction over the defendants given the SEC's confessions the complaint was not actually signed; (v) whether or not the SEC and its employees, officials, and lawyers conspired with the United States Attorneys Office (SDNY), (the "USAO"), its lawyers, its officials, and FBI employees, and others involved in the Las Vegas Litigation; (vi) and whether institutional racism, prejudice, bias, bigotry, or other improper purposes or incentives played any part regarding any issues or matters related to the Las Vegas Litigation?

The law firm is also tasked to determine the legality and penal and pecuniary liability of the individuals within and without the SEC who approved former SEC lawyer Jeffrey B. Norris's official testimony as an Enforcement Division lawyer on behalf of the USAO during the null and void ab initio United States v. Ware, 04cr1224 (SDNY) criminal contempt litigation as a FRE 404(b) witness while concealing Norris's own "bad acts", i.e., multiple official sanctions for professional misconduct, Brady impeachment evidence required to have been disclosed pursuant to the August 10, 2007 Brady discovery order (Sweet, J.).

Furthermore, the law firm is tasked to determine whether or not the SEC and the USAO's officials, lawyers, and employees colluded, conspired, acted in concert, and knowingly agreed to criminally and/or civilly hide, suppress, cover up, or conceal Brady exculpatory, exonerating, or impeachment evidence subject to written Brady discovery orders, 18 USC 401(2), (3), criminal contempt crimes, entered in criminal litigation in the New York federal courts, to wit, United States v. Ware, 04cr1224 (SDNY)(RWS) and United States v. Ware, 05cr1115 (SDNY) (WHP), jointly, (the "Ware Cases"). 

The legal opinion will be available within the next seven days and excepts will be released to the public given the Las Vegas Litigation and the Ware Cases concern the institutional ethics, integrity, and credibility of the United States government's legal and constitutional requirements to provide equal protections of the law, due process, and to conduct fair, just, unbiased, impartial, and non-frivolous litigation in the federal courts.

IRN is committed to the exposure of any corruption, fraud, crimes, or other illegal, unethical, bribery, conspiracy, money laundering, mail and wire fraud, kidnapping, extortion, or racist, prejudicial, or Jim Crow misconduct that occurred 

regarding the Las Vegas Litigation or the Ware Cases.

Harold Morey, Executive Editor

IRNewswires Media Group

London, UK

October 15, 2020

Approved for domestic and international distribution.

Copyright (c) 2020. All rights reserved.

Sept. 1, 2004 Kidnapping and false arrest of Atlanta, GA lawyer Ulysses T. Ware, Esq., as an overt act in the SEC's and DOJ's Hobbs Act extortion and insider trading criminal conspiracy 

IRN Public Corruption Task Force's Special Report

Ulysses T. Ware's Innocence Project
October 10, 2020
By: Harold Morey, Executive Editor, Alan Reitman, JD, Ph.D., Esq., and Peter Bonn, JD, Ph.D., Esq. (summa cum laude), Public Corruption Investigative Reporters.

Jones Day, LLP Partner Former SEC Enforcement Chief Counsel Joan McKown's Deliberate and Intentional Government Fraud and Corruption in Conspiracy with Las Vegas Federal District Judge Kent J. Dawson, and SEC Head of the Enforcement Division Stephen M. Cutler.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ulysses-thomas-ware-6a5ba6186_sec-and-doj-misconduct-and-public-corruption-activity-6718526575106641920-CuXn

Public Corruption by Governmental Agents

Joan McKown, the former chief counsel of the SEC's Enforcement Division from 1993 until 2010, and now a purported partner at the Washington, D.C. office of the law firm Jones, Day, LLP approved on behalf of the Enforcement Division, the presentment of the commingled DOJ-SEC pretextual Las Vegas 03-0831 (D. NV) litigation to the full Commission for approval to initiate an enforcement action against Atlanta, GA lawyer Ulysses T. Ware, Esq. and the codefendants.

Rogue SEC Chief Counsel Joan McKown

According to court records in the Las Vegas federal district court on or about July 14, 2003 an unknown person or persons alleged to be employed at the SEC --  SEC lawyer William Smith-Grieg, Esq. has confessed that the SEC has no proof or evidence of the identity of the persons or persons who actually signed and submitted the 03-0831 complaint to the Las Vegas federal court -- submitted for docketing and filing the United States and its privies complaint which was assigned the docket number 03-0831 (D. NV) KJD-RJJ. 

The matter was assigned by clerk Lance C. Wilson to District Judge Kent J. Dawson and Magistrate Judge Robert J. Jonson. IRN investigators have obtained the complete docket of all pleadings filed in 03-0831 and found numerous irregularities, unethical, and illegal misconduct by the SEC, District Judge Dawson, and SEC lawyers Jeffrey B. Norris, Steve Korotash, Spencer C. Barasch, Steve Cutler, John C. Martin, Robert Hannan, Steve Webster, and other SEC lawyers; and IRN's lawyers also found illegal involvement by New York DOJ criminal agents, i.e., rogue FBI special agent David Makol, AUSAs Steve R. Peikin, Alexander H. Southwell, David N. Kelley, and others. 

However, new evidence has been discovered that shows the commingled SEC-DOJ's Las Vegas 03-0831 complaint was not validly and actually signed as required by Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 11(a): which required the comical and fraudulent complaint to be actually signed by an SEC lawyer admitted to practice in the District Court (D. NV). Accordingly, the District Clerk, Lance C. Wilson, was prohibited from issuing any summons commencing litigation in the District Court in regard to the bogus, frivolous, pretextual, bad faith, and fraudulent complaint given the palpable violation of Rule 11(a). 

The law is well-settled. The United States seeking relief as plaintiff is not permitted to appear in federal court except through an admitted lawyer in that court. IRN's lawyers and investigators have interviewed former SEC employees in the Enforcement Division and all have confirmed that the 03-0831 (D. NV) litigation was never lawfully authorized and approved by the Commission's Directors. The Las Vegas 03-0831 (D. NV) litigation was fraudulently concocted as a pretext to gather evidence for use by the DOJ's New York USAO-SDNY in a racially-motivated hate crime prosecution against Ulysses T. Ware, Esq. Orchestrated by William H. Pauley, III, Andrew J. Peck, Alexander H. Southwell, Nicholas S. Goldin, David N. Kelley, Spencer C. Barasch, Jeffrey B. Norris, John C. Martin, Steve Webster, Robert Hannan, Steve Korotash, Joan E. McKown, Steve R. Peikin, Margaret H. Murphy, Kenneth A. Zitter, Dennis S. Meir, John W. Mills, Kilpatrick, Townsend, & Stockton, LLP, convicted felon Edward M. Grushko; and unregistered broker-dealers Alpha Capital, AG, Stonestreet, LP., Markham Holdings, Ltd., Amro International, S.A., LH Financial, Ari Rabinowitz, and other unindicted coconspirators.

Consequently, the District Court, lacked a proper and validly signed Rule 11(a) complaint and valid summons; thus, accordingly failed to obtain valid and proper personal jurisdiction over the defendants, Atlanta, GA Ulysses T. Ware, Esq., et al. Clear cut indisputable Brady exculpatory, exonerating, and impeachment evidence (favorable to discredit, to impeach, and nullify all government moot and fabricated evidence used to obtain invalid and fraudulent arrest warrants issued by Magistrate Judge (SDNY) Andrew J. Peck (also a graduate of Duke Law School, as is Judge William H. Pauley, III, Judge Orinda D. Evans, Judge Gerald B. Tjoflat), used at the grand juries, used at trial, and used on appeal.

FRAUD AND CORRUPTION BY JOAN McKOWN, THE SEC, AND THE DOJ.

Outlaw SEC lawyers Spencer C. Barasch and
Jeffrey B. Norris

McKown, the SEC's chief counsel, and other SEC's Enforcement Division's lawyers and employees, actively colluded and conspired with DOJ lawyers and officials, (i.e., AUSAs Steve R. Peikin, David N. Kelley, Alexander H. Southwell, Michael J. Garcia, Nicholas S. Goldin, et al.) acting officially on behalf of the United States government and its privies,  bound and constrained the United States and its privies, in that and future litigation by the judicial admissions and confessions pleaded in the UNSIGNED Las Vegas 03-0831 (D. NV) complaint at paragraph 33, (the "SEC Judicial Confession").

McKown, the SEC, and DOJ concealed
Brady evidence

The United States via its SEC lawyers pleaded at paragraph 33 in a United States federal court judicial admissions and confessions that pleaded it and its privies out of the 03-0831 and all federal and state courts: the United States confessed and judicially admitted that alleged INZS and SVSY's press releases were, in fact, immaterial, i.e., had no effect on the stocks prices, and therefore were inactionable in a federal court, and accordingly, the Las Vegas 03-0831 proceedings were moot. It is well-settled indisputable constitutional law that Article III federal courts and judges lack subject matter jurisdiction over the merits of moot proceedings. In other words, all orders, judgments, and proceedings conducted in the 03-0831 matter are null and void ab initio; and inadmissible for any preclusive probative effects in any other proceeding. Consequently, all proceedings -- including the DOJ's U.S. v. Ware, 04cr1224 and 05cr1115 SDNY persecutions, the State Bar of Georgia disbarment proceedings, the alleged District Court (NDGA) disbarment proceedings, all Administrative Office of the United States Court proceedings, all U.S. Probation Office authority, and all Bureau of Prison (BOP) proceedings -- that relied in whole or in part on any aspect of the null and void ab initio orders, judgments, and proceedings are themselves nullified. 

Paragraph 33 judicial admission in the unsigned 03-0831
 complaint pleaded the United States and its privies out of the federal courts.

SEC-DOJ's 03-0831 (D. NV) JULY 14, 2003 UNSIGNED COMPLAINT'S PARAGRAPH 33 JUDICIAL ADMISSION.

The United States via its own lawyers, SEC lawyers, or some unknown person(s) purporting to be an SEC lawyer(s), on or about July 14, 2003, in its 03-0831 (D. NV) unsigned complaint at paragraph 33 pleaded and judicially admitted and confessed, on behalf of the United States and its privies, there was no lawful or valid cause of action regarding INZS and SVSY's press releases, to wit:

 " ... [INZS and SVSY's press releases] did not have the intended

  effect of increasing the company's stock price." (emphasis added).

The evidence and court records show that McKown, the SEC's chief counsel, knowingly, deliberately, and intentionally, as a racially-motivated hate crime aided and abetted the SEC and DOJ in a vast and illegal hate crime conspiracy. Our lawyers have uncovered and thoroughly reviewed concealed internal SEC and DOJ documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA); and upon a very thorough and comprehensive review conclusively proved that the SEC's and DOJ's lawyers and officials, and the District Judge, Kent J. Dawson, all actively conspired and acted in concert to cover up, hide, suppress, and conceal exculpatory, exonerating, and impeachment Brady evidence covered by written discovery orders entered in the DOJ's NY federal court racially-motivated retaliatory hate crime prosecutions (04cr1224 and 05cr1115 SDNY) against Atlanta, GA lawyer Ulysses T. Ware, Esq.

Joan E. McKown, the SEC's chief counsel from 1993 until 2010, an alleged expert, tasked by the SEC's internal policies and procedures to review and approve all enforcement decisions, and all cases presented to the Commission for review for judicial enforcement actions, not later than July 14, 2003, McKown and the SEC knew the INZS and SVSY's press releases were immaterial, and consequently inactionable in any Article III federal court, civil or criminal. Immaterial and inactionable alleged public disclosures, as a matter of law are moot.

In other words, the United States federal securities laws and controlling judicial precedents in 2003, and in 2020, indisputably prevented the SEC, the DOJ, the Las Vegas or New York federal courts from adjudicating the merits of any claim(s), or granting any relief -- the SEC and the DOJ lacked Article III or 28 USC 1331 standing to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of any Article III United States federal court -- to the SEC, DOJ, or the State Bar of Georgia with respect to any claims based in whole or in part on the Las Vegas 03-0831 (D. NV), 05cr1115 SDNY, or 04cr1224 SDNY proceedings.

 Prosecutors have no qualified immunity for grand jury deception.

Former SDNY federal prosecutors have a very real and serious problem in regard to the grand jury proceedings conducted in United States v. Ware, 04cr1224 (SDNY) and United States v. Ware, 05cr1115 (SDNY).

The evidence is overwhelming that Alexander H. Southwell, David N. Kelly, Steve Peikin, Nicholas S. Goldin, Michael J. Garcia, FBI special agent David Makol, and others knowing and deliberately falsified, lied, committed perjury, and fabricated material grand jury material in regard to "essential elements" necessary to the charges sought against Atlanta, GA lawyer Ulysses T. Ware, Esq.

The Second Circuit's decision below is the legal standard that applies to the facts in a grand jury proceeding. That legal standard was breached, deliberately, as a racially-motivated retaliatory hate crime against Mr. Ware.

Maria E. Douvas, Preet Bharara, and Katherine Polk-Failla

District Judge William H. Pauley, III (SDNY)

        Former AUSA Alexander H. Southwell (SDNY)            

By Casey C. Sullivan, Esq. on September 18, 2015 6:59 AM

Prosecutors who mislead grand juries aren't protected by qualified immunity and can be sued, the Second Circuit ruled last Friday. The case involved a former New York State Special Assistant Attorney General who submitted fraudulent and misleading evidence to a grand jury in order to indict a dentist accused of Medicaid fraud.

After the dentist, Dr. Leonard Morse, was acquitted, he returned to court to sue the prosecutors, alleging that their manipulation of evidence before the grand jury denied him his constitutional right to a fair trial. A district court jury, and now the Second Circuit, agreed.

The Prosecutor's Power

When it comes to grand juries, prosecutors run the show. They present evidence, subpoena witnesses, and craft a story most favorable to their ends. The non-adversarial nature of a grand jury proceeding means that prosecutorial abuses can more easily go unchecked -- there simply are no other attorneys present to challenge them. With so much control, it's no wonder that Sol Wachtler, former New York chief judge, claimed that prosecutors have so much influence the could convince a grand jury to "indict a ham sandwich."

But apparently, one prosecutor wasn't confident enough that he could convince a jury to indict a dentist. John Fusto, a former Medicaid fraud prosecutor, and Jose Castillo, an investigator in his unit, misled a grand jury into indicting Dr. Morse for fraudulent Medicaid billing, a trial court found. Specifically, the two were found to have manipulated evidence in a chart summarizing the claims against the dentist. Morse was awarded $7.7 million in damages.

Super Patients and Tooth Numbers

The charts presented a distorted picture of the evidence against Dr. Morse. For example, a billing summary for "Edwin Gonzalez" included all charges related to Edwin Gonzalez -- all three Edwin Gonzalezes. Fusto had combined three patients with the same name to make them look like one "super patient."

Fusto also excluded important details to make his evidence look stronger. The Second Circuit noted that the "tooth number" field was excluded from his charts. That made it look like Morse had billed repeatedly for the same procedure, when in fact he billed Medicaid for each tooth treated. If Morse treated three cavities in one patient, for example, the evidence made it look like he treated one cavity and billed for it three times.

No Qualified Immunity

A jury found that the evidence was false and that the prosecutor had known it to be false when he presented it. Yet Fusto and Castillo claimed they were protected by qualified immunity -- that they had not violated any of Dr. Morse's clearly established constitutional rights.

While Fusto and Castillo argued that "prosecutors may properly give one-sided presentations to the grand jury," that does not allow prosecutors to violate one's "right not to be deprived of liberty as a result of the fabrication of evidence."

The omissions in the evidence presented to the grand jury were strong enough to rise to the level of fabrication, the Second Circuit ruled. Omitting material information from the summaries "in effect falsified them."

Judicial and prosecutorial corruption in the New York federal courts and prosecutor's office. 

September 28, 2020

New York

By: Alan Reitman, JD, Ph.D, Esq., Public Corruption Investigative Reporter

Our newly formed Public Corruption Task Force and International Innocence Project to exonerate Atlanta, GA lawyer Ulysses T. Ware, Esq. has uncovered new evidence that indisputably proves the criminal corruption and fraud committed by federal prosecutors Maria E. Douvas, currently employed at RBC in New York; Preet Bharara, Katherine Polk-Failla, Sarah E. Paul, Alexander H. Southwell, Steven D. Feldman, Nicholas S. Goldin, Jessica Ortiz, David N. Kelley, Michael J. Garcia, and numerous federal judges, William H. Pauley, Kent J. Dawson, Robert W. Sweet, Leonard B. Sand, Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. Barbara S. Jones, Peter W. Hall, Robert A. Katzmann, Robert D. Sack, Amalya L. Kearse, and others.

Jessica Ortiz, Esq.