Before Griffith NoKo Trial US Says He Reached For $1 Million in Crypto, Seeks Remand
The US request was filed late Friday - when will Judge Castel, who is presiding over a trial, rule? Inner City Press in on it
By Matthew Russell Lee, Pod Exclusive Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - The Source
SDNY COURTHOUSE, July 9 – Virgil Griffith, charged with violating North Korea sanctions in connection with a crypto-currency conference there, now faces trial in September 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
This emerged at a telephone conference in the case on December 22. Griffith's defense lawyer Brian E. Klein spoke among other things about filings not yet placed in the public docket, only emailed to SDNY Judge P. Kevin Castel.
Now on July 9 the US Attorney's Office has written to Judge Castel saying Griffith attempted to access one of his frozen cryptocurrency accounts containing assets of nearly $1 million. They went a hearing, and they want him remanded (jailed). Full letter on Patreon here. Inner City Press is on it.
On February 11, Judge Castel held a proceeding about who knew what before and at the conference Griffith spoke at. A stipulation or agreement has been proposed, essentially that some people know, but the DPRK / Kim government as such did not. Inner City Press live tweeted the first proceeding, here.
And on February 23 the second proceeding, in two parts, here.
On June 16, Griffith's lawyers complained that "the defense is still awaiting the completion of the government's review and production... the Government filed a letter correcting a 'mistake' it had made regarding its presentations to the Court about the FBI's first interactions with OFAC... The defense hopes that the prosecutors will honor their commitment to a June 22, 2021 deadline. If not, the defense reserves its right to seek relief from the Court." Watch this site.
Back in March 12, citing the swearing into the office of US Attorney General of Merrick Garland the day before, the US Attorney's Office has asked for a three week delay for its Classified Information Procedures Act filings, since Garland must sign them on personal knowledge, under US v. Aref. Others might wonder if the change in Administration might result in a changed prosecutorial stance in this and certain other cases.
The case is US v. Griffith, 20-cr-15 (Castel).
***
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.