Fraud in New York

New York politics has taken a sharp turn after the dismissal of a 250 million dollars civil tax fraud case in court. This crucial case was against Trumps former associate of Russian descent. It was on Wednesday when the court decided the qui tam case didn’t hold. The court allowed a whistleblowers insight into the case on the state’s behalf. It would then leave the attorney generals offices the option to intervene in the case or not.

The accused was Felix Sater, a Russian American businessman. Apart from being a co-founder in Bayrock real estate, Sater was also Donald Trump’s associate in earlier years. In the prosecution, Fred Oberlander was the whistleblower. Oberlander had a history with Jody Kriss, a former partner whereby he represented him in a lawsuit against sater’s company for money laundering. In the said case, however, the court ordered the withdrawal of certain data as it was confidential and deemed it classified. With his whole argument based on classified and revoked data, Oberlander had to yield as the court ruled against him. According to Sater however, dismissal of the case wasn’t due to the procedural grounds but rather the merits. He insisted that the prosecuting lawyers frequently involved themselves in misconduct and had twice had to face DOJ due to criminal contempt.

The attorney general’s office was inclined to stay off the case following a misleading press release from Oberlander in 2016. In the press release, Oberlander claimed Eric Schneiderman; the Attorney General was taking up the case. Schneiderman went on to notify New York Supreme Court of this foul play, pointing out the state was not intervening in the case. In addition to this, the office of the attorney general stated it would closely follow suit in order to safeguard the states’ rights and interests.

Jody Kriss was also the former finance director in Tevfik Arif Bayrock. In 2010, Kriss filed a lawsuit against the firm based on their business conduct. He insisted that the company was marred with illegalities such as wire, mail and bank fraud, money laundering, tax evasion, embezzlement, extortion and so on. He believed the firm to be mob-owned and thus the pattern of related crimes. Kriss was also bitter about an alleged loss of millions to some of its co-founders. He claimed he had lost millions to racketeering, fraud and other financial misconducts from some of the co-founders. His case was moved forward as a racketeering case after a New York judge’s ruling in December 2016

Jody Kriss’ case stated that Slater and Tevfik Arif, one of the co-founders, negotiated with Trump’s firm to market their products back in 2003. Trump, however, was in the wind about their said criminal past. This was in a deposition in 2017, Trump denied having any knowledge of Sater’s past during the agreements to partner with his company in developing Trump SOHO. Moreover, he claimed he couldn’t put a face to the name had they been in the same room as Sater. The informant, however, called for great discretion on his identity in fear of slater and the possible ramifications. Sater, on the other hand, emphasized that he had regular meetings with Trump, while Kriss claimed that Trump appreciated the loyalty and Russian connections from Sater. In response to this, Donald Trump called Russia one of the hottest places for investment, and that it made no sense to invest in the haven.

The prosecution plans to appeal They are also very hopeful that the classified data will come out and shed more light on the case and hopefully the prosecution side will carry the day/