The trial judge in the Iran sanctions evasion case against Ali Sadr Hasheminejad, in a 34-page Opinion and Order, again took the US Attorneys' Office, SDNY, to task for failure to timely/ disclose favorable Discovery to defense counsel, for what the Court bluntly called misrepresentation, and for other alleged sins and transgressions. Obviously, there will be a reckoning down the road for those among the dozen or so AUSAs who engaged in Brady violations, or worse, but our concerns continue on a different issue.
In fact the Court itself noted, at Page 8, " ... Mr. Sadr's co-defendant Bahram Karimi, who was not tried (and thus not prejudiced by the late disclosure issues discussed extensively below)..." there were no violations committed against Karimi, from my objective viewpoint. So why dismiss against him, unless he also contributed to Ali Sadr's probable Substantial Assistance, to the extent that prosecutors wanted to reward him as well ?
Was this case really about some powerful evidence that came into Government hands, courtesy Ali Sadr, who did it to save his soul, and the Discovery furor is merely a smokescreen to cover it up ? Were extremely powerful players, on a global scale, named ? We cannot say, but we shall continue to watch and listen for clues. Meanwhile, some prosecutors are going to suffer.
We duly note that the Court, in its Order, insured that everyone in the SDNY note the seriousness of the allegations:
" The Court HEREBY ORDERS that the Acting United States Attorney ensure that all current AUSAs and SAUSAs read this Opinion. Within one week of the date of this Opinion, the Acting United States Attorney shall file a declaration affirming that this has occurred."
Stay tuned; we shall advise our readers of all developments as they occur.