We recently questioned why an experienced Assistant United States Attorney, Michael Krouse, filed a Notice of Appearance in the Nejad case, as the pretrial freedom extended to the defendant strongly suggests that he is a cooperating individual. Otherwise, why is an Iranian national who is a flight risk out on bond ? And why is his trial set many months in the future ? The defendant, the owner of Malta's defunct Pilatus Bank, is accused of money laundering, specifically of moving $115m through the American financial system, for a dodgy Venezuelan construction contract. A sealed document was filed in the case this month, which may mean a sealed Indictment against an individual not yet in custody.
Now the case has become even more confusing:
(1) An experienced white collar criminal defense attorney, David Matthew Fragale, filed his appearance on April 11. Why are all these attorneys entering into the case ?
(2) Yet another AUSA, Jane Kim, filed her Appearance , also on April 11.
We are wondering what are all these legal heavyweights doing, appearing in this case. Perhaps it is being zealously defended after all, but if that is the case, why is Ali Sadr Hashemi Nejad, known to be an Iranian banker, being allowed out on bond ? He is not a US citizen, only a permanent resident, and he holds an Iranian passport and a St Kitts CBI passport. When this case is sorted out, we shall advise our readers.