Sample complaint for rescission of contract in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample complaint for rescission of contract in California also contains causes of action for fraud, reformation of contract, usury violations, unfair business practices, cancellation of written instruments, declaratory relief, injunctive relief and an account. The sample complaint was used to sue an individual private lender that defrauded an individual and used undue influence to convince them to sign an amended promissory note with an usurious annual interest rate of 18%, and then started non-judicial foreclosure proceedings by claiming an inflated amount due on the notice of default. The sample complaint on which this preview is based is 16 pages and includes brief instructions and a sample verification. The author is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jailBruce Givner
This document provides an overview of criminal tax laws and penalties for tax evasion and related offenses. It discusses the differences between tax avoidance and tax evasion, outlines several key tax crimes statutes including sections 7201 for tax evasion, 7202 for failure to collect or pay over taxes, 7203 for willful failure to file a return or pay tax, and 7206 for false tax returns. It also provides examples of cases charged under these statutes and defenses that can be raised. The document is intended to help explain what types of conduct could lead to criminal prosecution for tax problems.
This document is a complaint filed in Massachusetts Superior Court alleging that DFRF Enterprises, LLC operated an illegal pyramid/Ponzi scheme that defrauded investors. The plaintiffs invested $80,000 and $100,000 respectively in DFRF and were promised annual returns of 15% but did not receive any returns. The complaint names DFRF, its managers, related individuals and companies, and several banks as defendants for their alleged roles in operating and facilitating the fraudulent scheme. The plaintiffs are seeking to represent other similarly defrauded DFRF investors in a class action lawsuit.
This legal notice confirms that an investigation was conducted regarding Ediberto del Carmen, also known as Angel Ferdinand Marcos, and his organization GIDIFA. The investigation, conducted in cooperation with various US and Philippine government agencies, determined that the documents presented by GIDIFA are fraudulent and that Marcos and GIDIFA are engaged in international financial fraud. Neither Marcos nor GIDIFA have any legitimate affiliation with organizations such as the United Nations, World Bank, or US Treasury. Individuals presented with fraudulent documents from these organizations by Marcos or GIDIFA should report the matter to law enforcement.
This document is a response opposing a motion to set aside a default judgment against Murdoch Group, Inc. and requesting sanctions. It summarizes that Dawn Estep and her company Murdoch Group, Inc. were properly served with the complaint but failed to respond, leading to a default being entered. It disputes claims that the default was improper, noting that Murdoch Group was not represented by counsel at the time and refutes assertions about the timing and nature of contacts with various attorneys regarding potential representation of the defendants.
05/09/18 Cary Cornelius Johnson's Complaint Filed With The Office Of The Att...VogelDenise
17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
The following is the Complaint Mr. Cary Cornelius Johnson went to file with the Office Of The Attorney General State Of Mississippi on today, May 9, 2018, wherein his efforts were OBSTRUCTED by Mr. Perry Tate, Sr. who from his online Profile is a Senior Criminal Investigator at the MS Office Of Attorney General.
We see, that it appears, Mr. Perry may be a Jackson State University Alumni - UMMMM!
Sample complaint for rescission of contract in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample complaint for rescission of contract in California also contains causes of action for fraud, reformation of contract, usury violations, unfair business practices, cancellation of written instruments, declaratory relief, injunctive relief and an account. The sample complaint was used to sue an individual private lender that defrauded an individual and used undue influence to convince them to sign an amended promissory note with an usurious annual interest rate of 18%, and then started non-judicial foreclosure proceedings by claiming an inflated amount due on the notice of default. The sample complaint on which this preview is based is 16 pages and includes brief instructions and a sample verification. The author is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
15 01-15 everything you wanted to know about going to jailBruce Givner
This document provides an overview of criminal tax laws and penalties for tax evasion and related offenses. It discusses the differences between tax avoidance and tax evasion, outlines several key tax crimes statutes including sections 7201 for tax evasion, 7202 for failure to collect or pay over taxes, 7203 for willful failure to file a return or pay tax, and 7206 for false tax returns. It also provides examples of cases charged under these statutes and defenses that can be raised. The document is intended to help explain what types of conduct could lead to criminal prosecution for tax problems.
This document is a complaint filed in Massachusetts Superior Court alleging that DFRF Enterprises, LLC operated an illegal pyramid/Ponzi scheme that defrauded investors. The plaintiffs invested $80,000 and $100,000 respectively in DFRF and were promised annual returns of 15% but did not receive any returns. The complaint names DFRF, its managers, related individuals and companies, and several banks as defendants for their alleged roles in operating and facilitating the fraudulent scheme. The plaintiffs are seeking to represent other similarly defrauded DFRF investors in a class action lawsuit.
This legal notice confirms that an investigation was conducted regarding Ediberto del Carmen, also known as Angel Ferdinand Marcos, and his organization GIDIFA. The investigation, conducted in cooperation with various US and Philippine government agencies, determined that the documents presented by GIDIFA are fraudulent and that Marcos and GIDIFA are engaged in international financial fraud. Neither Marcos nor GIDIFA have any legitimate affiliation with organizations such as the United Nations, World Bank, or US Treasury. Individuals presented with fraudulent documents from these organizations by Marcos or GIDIFA should report the matter to law enforcement.
This document is a response opposing a motion to set aside a default judgment against Murdoch Group, Inc. and requesting sanctions. It summarizes that Dawn Estep and her company Murdoch Group, Inc. were properly served with the complaint but failed to respond, leading to a default being entered. It disputes claims that the default was improper, noting that Murdoch Group was not represented by counsel at the time and refutes assertions about the timing and nature of contacts with various attorneys regarding potential representation of the defendants.
05/09/18 Cary Cornelius Johnson's Complaint Filed With The Office Of The Att...VogelDenise
17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
The following is the Complaint Mr. Cary Cornelius Johnson went to file with the Office Of The Attorney General State Of Mississippi on today, May 9, 2018, wherein his efforts were OBSTRUCTED by Mr. Perry Tate, Sr. who from his online Profile is a Senior Criminal Investigator at the MS Office Of Attorney General.
We see, that it appears, Mr. Perry may be a Jackson State University Alumni - UMMMM!
USA vs. Hossein Lahiji, Najmeh Rokhsareh Vahid Dastjerdi, Ahmad Iranshahi - O...Umesh Heendeniya
This document is an indictment charging 3 individuals - Hossein Lahiji, Najmeh Vahid, and Ahmad Iranshahi - with conspiracy to defraud the United States. Specifically, it alleges they conspired to impair the Treasury Department's enforcement of sanctions against Iran and the IRS's oversight of tax-exempt organizations. It details how the defendants donated funds to an Oregon charity that were then transferred to Iran in violation of sanctions, and filed false tax forms to conceal this activity.
Indictment of Guy Philippe - Akizasyon Gouvènman Ameriken Kont Senatè Elu Guy...Stanleylucas
Lapolis Ayiti arete yon Senatè elu Ayisien Guy Philippe sou lod otorite Potoprens yo. Apre sa otorite Potoprens yo remèt Guy Philippe bay Gouvènman ameriken. Dokiman sa se akizasyon ke gouvènman ameriken prezante nan tribinal Florida kont senatè elu Guy Philippe.
Plaintiffs filed a complaint against Defendants alleging fraud and other unlawful conduct. Specifically, Plaintiffs claim that Defendants John Textor and Rene Eichenberger, founders and executives of Defendant Pulse Evolution Corporation, fraudulently induced Plaintiffs to invest millions of dollars in Pulse by making false representations about how the funds would be used. However, according to Plaintiffs, Pulse was actually a sham entity operated as a Ponzi scheme, with Textor and Eichenberger embezzling invested funds for personal use rather than legitimate business purposes. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages and other relief from Defendants.
This document contains an identity theft affidavit and complaint form completed by Adalberto Cervantes Rodriguez. It includes his personal information, details about fraudulent accounts and inquiries he believes were opened using his identity, and sections to file a police report or have his affidavit witnessed. The form provides a way for identity theft victims to document the crime and disputes with creditors for the purpose of removing fraudulent information from their credit reports.
This class action complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in an illegal price fixing scheme to charge consumers extra fees on money transfers and international phone calls to and from Haiti. The complaint alleges that the defendants, which include the Haitian government, money transfer companies, and phone carriers, conspired to charge $1.50 on every money transfer and $0.05 per minute on international phone calls under the false pretense that the fees were taxes to fund education. The plaintiffs allege that the fees were actually collected for the defendants' personal benefit in violation of US antitrust laws. The complaint seeks damages on behalf of the proposed class of consumers who paid the illegal fees.
Sample motion to vacate judgment for fraud on the court under rule 60(d)(3)LegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of motion and motion to vacate a judgment for fraud on the court. It was filed in a United States District Court by an attorney representing a defendant seeking to vacate a judgment entered against their client. The motion alleges that the judgment was obtained through fraud on the court, briefly listing facts regarding the fraud. It notices a hearing date and time and states that the motion is brought under Rule 60(d)(3) and will be supported by a memorandum, declaration, and exhibits providing details on the alleged fraud on the court.
U.S. IMMIGRATION LAW NEWS AND UPDATES: New Trump Initiatives, AC-21 Updates, L-1A Functional Management Updates, DACA Termination Updates, NPZ Lawyers in India, Etc.
This letter from Plaintiffs' counsel opposes Defendant Unitransfer's motion for Rule 11 sanctions related to Plaintiffs' amended complaint alleging antitrust violations. Plaintiffs argue their complaint is supported by evidence, including recordings of Martelly discussing agreeing with companies to increase fees. Plaintiffs also argue Unitransfer had economic incentive to participate given corruption in Haiti. Finally, Plaintiffs state their state law claims are valid under the act of state doctrine since collection occurred in the US.
The Diocese of Rochester filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. It listed its assets as between $10 million and $50 million and its debts as between $100 million and $500 million. The Diocese operates in Monroe County, New York and lists over 1,000 potential creditors. It filed the petition to restructure its debts and create a plan to compensate victims of clergy sexual abuse.
NOTARIZED MAY 10 2022 NY DMV COMMISSIONER AND REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY US...ssuser8b1714
VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM, DMV ALLEGED COMMISSIONER, MARK SCHROEDER AND REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY, NEW ORGANIZED FRAUD HATE CRIMES, BETRAY THE CONSTITUTION, AND MURDER BY PROXY PROGRAMMINGS, USING REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY’S ATTACHED, NAME ALIGNED REPEATED UNCONSTITUTIONAL DRIVER LICENSE SUSPENSIONS, THREATS, SCHEMES AND CRIMES. THIS IS ALSO AN ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM TO ADDITIONAL FRIVOLOUS AND DEADLY DMV CLAIMS, CRIMINAL SENILE POLICE WITH GUNS SET UPS, USING A REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY, INVISIBLE AUTHORITY, UNAUTHORIZED, NO AFFIDAVIT ANYWHERE, ATTACHED, UNSIGNED, NYS COUNTERFEIT TAX WARRANT, AS AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE HIS CRIMINAL POLICE AND CIVILIAN, PLOTTED INDUCED HOSPITALIZED, PREPAID HOSPITAL KILLINGS, MURDER BY PROXY CRIMES, VIA THE CRIMINAL USE OF DMV FOR KNOWINGLY, FALSIFIED, GOOD-STANDING DRIVER LICENSE SUSPENSIONS. THIS IS REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY’S REPLICATED ATTEMPTED MURDER BY PROXY PROGRAMMING. HE HAS BEEN PROGRAMMING THE KILLING OF HEALTHY CHILDREN AND ADULTS FOR OVER 50 YEARS WITH NO PENALTIES. PLEASE SEE THE REFERENCE SECTION. THE SYSTEM CREATED AN 80-YEAR-OLD, COVID 19 HEALTHCARE, NAME ALIGNED, SENILE, REGIONAL KILLER WHO NEEDS THE DEATH PENALTY, IN ORDER TO STOP KILLING EUGENIC PREY, HE CREATES. SEE EXHIBITS 3-8 FOR PROOF OF ANSWER, US MAIL RECEIPTS RECEIVED BY DMV AND THE RECEIPT FOR DMV EVIDENCE UPLOAD.
City Attorney Dennis Herrera sent a pre-litigation demand letter and draft complaint to McDonald's Corporation this afternoon, informing the Oak Brook, Ill.-based fast-food giant of its civil liability for violations of the California Drug Abatement Act and Unfair Competition Law at the property it owns in San Francisco's Haight-Ashbury neighborhood.
The letter and complaint sent to President and CEO Steve Easterbrook detail the bases for which McDonald's Corporation could be held legally accountable for the lawlessness harbored at its 730 Stanyan Street property, where its franchisee has defiantly refused to abate problems related to drug trafficking and other public nuisances. The McDonald's location "has generated nearly 1,100 calls for service" to the San Francisco Police Department since January 2012, according to Herrera's letter -- more than any other business in the area. Criminal activity includes arrests for sale and possession of LSD, psychedelic mushrooms, hashish, marijuana, and marijuana edibles as well as dozens of incidents involving fights, assaults, auto burglaries and even two dog attacks.
Herrera expressed "hope to enlist your assistance to resolve the public nuisance conditions" to McDonald's President and CEO, but was unequivocal in his intention to file suit if necessary, both to abate conditions plaguing the Haight-Ashbury neighborhood and to pursue injunctive relief, civil penalties, and attorneys' fees.
On February 27, 2015, DHS, in effect, admitted that its Family Detention Centers were in violation of the Flores settlement by seeking to modify it to allow family detention.
Dossier 1'50 $ diapsora Celestin et al_v_martelly_et_al__nyedce-18-07340__006...Daniel Alouidor
This document is an amended class action complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against several defendants including Michel Joseph Martelly, Jocelerme Privert, Jovenel Moise (former and current Presidents of Haiti), Western Union, Unibank S.A., Digicel Haiti, and Natcom S.A. The complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in horizontal price fixing agreements in violation of United States antitrust laws and consumer protection laws by conspiring to add unlawful fees to money transfers and international phone calls to Haiti. The named plaintiffs are United States and Haitian citizens who allege they paid higher prices when sending money or making phone calls to Haiti as
Defendants dismas charities,inc.,ana gispert,derek thomas and adams leshota's...Cocoselul Inaripat
1) The document is a motion to dismiss a complaint filed by Traian Bujduveanu against Dismas Charities Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas, and Adams Leshota.
2) The motion argues that the complaint should be dismissed for failing to state any valid causes of action. It does not provide specific facts or legal elements to support the ten alleged legal violations or theories of recovery.
3) The complaint also fails to delineate which defendant is being sued for each specific cause of action. The motion asserts that the complaint does not give the defendants proper notice of the specific reasons they are being sued.
Defendants dismas charities,inc.,ana gispert,derek thomas and adams leshota's...Cocoselul Inaripat
1) The document is a motion to dismiss a complaint filed by Traian Bujduveanu against Dismas Charities Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas, and Adams Leshota.
2) The motion argues that the complaint should be dismissed for failing to state any valid causes of action. It does not provide specific facts or legal elements to support the ten alleged legal violations or theories of recovery.
3) The complaint also fails to delineate which defendant is being sued for each specific cause of action. The motion asserts that the complaint does not give the defendants proper notice of the reasons they are being sued.
Defendants dismas charities,inc.,ana gispert,derek thomas and adams leshota's...Cocoselul Inaripat
1) The document is a motion to dismiss a complaint filed by Traian Bujduveanu against Dismas Charities Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas, and Adams Leshota.
2) The motion argues that the complaint should be dismissed for failing to state any valid causes of action. It does not provide specific facts or legal elements to support the ten alleged legal violations or theories of recovery.
3) The complaint also fails to delineate which defendant is being sued for each specific cause of action. The motion asserts that the complaint does not give the defendants proper notice of the reasons they are being sued.
This document contains an identity theft victim's complaint and affidavit. It collects personal information about the victim such as name, address, phone numbers, and social security number. It documents the fraudulent accounts and activities, including the dates they occurred and the companies involved. Law enforcement report information is included, such as the filing date, report number, and officer details. The victim signs affidavits certifying the information is true and authorizing the report to be shared with law enforcement.
This document describes the relevant parties in a legal complaint. It establishes that Plaintiff Vogel Newsome was employed by Defendant Page Kruger & Holland (PKH), a Mississippi law firm, starting in December 2004. In May 2006, PKH terminated Newsome's employment, allegedly due to her filing a housing discrimination lawsuit against her landlord in Hinds County Court in March 2006. The document provides background details on the individuals and entities involved in the complaint.
041017 EEOC RESPONSE TO FIRST HERITAGE CREDIT LLC's STATEMENT OF POSITIONVogelDenise
The document is a rebuttal by Vogel Denise Newsome to a "Statement of Position" filed by First Heritage Credit, LLC regarding an EEOC charge of discrimination. Newsome objects to not being provided documents referenced in First Heritage's filing. Newsome also argues that First Heritage has not met the legal requirements to establish a defense of insubordination against the discrimination claims. Newsome requests documents from the EEOC and argues the charge was timely filed and the statute of limitations has not expired.
The petitioner, a 13-year old student, filed a criminal writ petition arguing that the FIR registered against him contained false allegations made by the complainant (respondent no. 3) with the ulterior motive of avoiding repayment of a loan. The court noted that the petitioner's arguments prima facie appeared to have substance and allowed more time for the filing of counter affidavits. The petitioner would not be arrested pursuant to the FIR until the next court date or submission of the police report, whichever is later, subject to his cooperation during the ongoing investigation.
Donald J. Trump Fulton County GA Racketeering IndictmentAlan Yarborough
This document is an indictment filed in Fulton County Superior Court charging 42 counts against 16 defendants related to alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 US presidential election. The defendants include Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and Sidney Powell. The charges include violations of Georgia RICO act, solicitation of election fraud, conspiracy to commit election fraud, and making false statements. Each count lists the defendants charged and the relevant Georgia criminal statute. The indictment also includes sections for defendants to waive rights and plead guilty, though none appear to have done so at this time.
USA vs. Hossein Lahiji, Najmeh Rokhsareh Vahid Dastjerdi, Ahmad Iranshahi - O...Umesh Heendeniya
This document is an indictment charging 3 individuals - Hossein Lahiji, Najmeh Vahid, and Ahmad Iranshahi - with conspiracy to defraud the United States. Specifically, it alleges they conspired to impair the Treasury Department's enforcement of sanctions against Iran and the IRS's oversight of tax-exempt organizations. It details how the defendants donated funds to an Oregon charity that were then transferred to Iran in violation of sanctions, and filed false tax forms to conceal this activity.
Indictment of Guy Philippe - Akizasyon Gouvènman Ameriken Kont Senatè Elu Guy...Stanleylucas
Lapolis Ayiti arete yon Senatè elu Ayisien Guy Philippe sou lod otorite Potoprens yo. Apre sa otorite Potoprens yo remèt Guy Philippe bay Gouvènman ameriken. Dokiman sa se akizasyon ke gouvènman ameriken prezante nan tribinal Florida kont senatè elu Guy Philippe.
Plaintiffs filed a complaint against Defendants alleging fraud and other unlawful conduct. Specifically, Plaintiffs claim that Defendants John Textor and Rene Eichenberger, founders and executives of Defendant Pulse Evolution Corporation, fraudulently induced Plaintiffs to invest millions of dollars in Pulse by making false representations about how the funds would be used. However, according to Plaintiffs, Pulse was actually a sham entity operated as a Ponzi scheme, with Textor and Eichenberger embezzling invested funds for personal use rather than legitimate business purposes. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages and other relief from Defendants.
This document contains an identity theft affidavit and complaint form completed by Adalberto Cervantes Rodriguez. It includes his personal information, details about fraudulent accounts and inquiries he believes were opened using his identity, and sections to file a police report or have his affidavit witnessed. The form provides a way for identity theft victims to document the crime and disputes with creditors for the purpose of removing fraudulent information from their credit reports.
This class action complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in an illegal price fixing scheme to charge consumers extra fees on money transfers and international phone calls to and from Haiti. The complaint alleges that the defendants, which include the Haitian government, money transfer companies, and phone carriers, conspired to charge $1.50 on every money transfer and $0.05 per minute on international phone calls under the false pretense that the fees were taxes to fund education. The plaintiffs allege that the fees were actually collected for the defendants' personal benefit in violation of US antitrust laws. The complaint seeks damages on behalf of the proposed class of consumers who paid the illegal fees.
Sample motion to vacate judgment for fraud on the court under rule 60(d)(3)LegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of motion and motion to vacate a judgment for fraud on the court. It was filed in a United States District Court by an attorney representing a defendant seeking to vacate a judgment entered against their client. The motion alleges that the judgment was obtained through fraud on the court, briefly listing facts regarding the fraud. It notices a hearing date and time and states that the motion is brought under Rule 60(d)(3) and will be supported by a memorandum, declaration, and exhibits providing details on the alleged fraud on the court.
U.S. IMMIGRATION LAW NEWS AND UPDATES: New Trump Initiatives, AC-21 Updates, L-1A Functional Management Updates, DACA Termination Updates, NPZ Lawyers in India, Etc.
This letter from Plaintiffs' counsel opposes Defendant Unitransfer's motion for Rule 11 sanctions related to Plaintiffs' amended complaint alleging antitrust violations. Plaintiffs argue their complaint is supported by evidence, including recordings of Martelly discussing agreeing with companies to increase fees. Plaintiffs also argue Unitransfer had economic incentive to participate given corruption in Haiti. Finally, Plaintiffs state their state law claims are valid under the act of state doctrine since collection occurred in the US.
The Diocese of Rochester filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. It listed its assets as between $10 million and $50 million and its debts as between $100 million and $500 million. The Diocese operates in Monroe County, New York and lists over 1,000 potential creditors. It filed the petition to restructure its debts and create a plan to compensate victims of clergy sexual abuse.
NOTARIZED MAY 10 2022 NY DMV COMMISSIONER AND REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY US...ssuser8b1714
VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM, DMV ALLEGED COMMISSIONER, MARK SCHROEDER AND REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY, NEW ORGANIZED FRAUD HATE CRIMES, BETRAY THE CONSTITUTION, AND MURDER BY PROXY PROGRAMMINGS, USING REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY’S ATTACHED, NAME ALIGNED REPEATED UNCONSTITUTIONAL DRIVER LICENSE SUSPENSIONS, THREATS, SCHEMES AND CRIMES. THIS IS ALSO AN ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM TO ADDITIONAL FRIVOLOUS AND DEADLY DMV CLAIMS, CRIMINAL SENILE POLICE WITH GUNS SET UPS, USING A REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY, INVISIBLE AUTHORITY, UNAUTHORIZED, NO AFFIDAVIT ANYWHERE, ATTACHED, UNSIGNED, NYS COUNTERFEIT TAX WARRANT, AS AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE HIS CRIMINAL POLICE AND CIVILIAN, PLOTTED INDUCED HOSPITALIZED, PREPAID HOSPITAL KILLINGS, MURDER BY PROXY CRIMES, VIA THE CRIMINAL USE OF DMV FOR KNOWINGLY, FALSIFIED, GOOD-STANDING DRIVER LICENSE SUSPENSIONS. THIS IS REGIONAL KILLER BOYDEN GRAY’S REPLICATED ATTEMPTED MURDER BY PROXY PROGRAMMING. HE HAS BEEN PROGRAMMING THE KILLING OF HEALTHY CHILDREN AND ADULTS FOR OVER 50 YEARS WITH NO PENALTIES. PLEASE SEE THE REFERENCE SECTION. THE SYSTEM CREATED AN 80-YEAR-OLD, COVID 19 HEALTHCARE, NAME ALIGNED, SENILE, REGIONAL KILLER WHO NEEDS THE DEATH PENALTY, IN ORDER TO STOP KILLING EUGENIC PREY, HE CREATES. SEE EXHIBITS 3-8 FOR PROOF OF ANSWER, US MAIL RECEIPTS RECEIVED BY DMV AND THE RECEIPT FOR DMV EVIDENCE UPLOAD.
City Attorney Dennis Herrera sent a pre-litigation demand letter and draft complaint to McDonald's Corporation this afternoon, informing the Oak Brook, Ill.-based fast-food giant of its civil liability for violations of the California Drug Abatement Act and Unfair Competition Law at the property it owns in San Francisco's Haight-Ashbury neighborhood.
The letter and complaint sent to President and CEO Steve Easterbrook detail the bases for which McDonald's Corporation could be held legally accountable for the lawlessness harbored at its 730 Stanyan Street property, where its franchisee has defiantly refused to abate problems related to drug trafficking and other public nuisances. The McDonald's location "has generated nearly 1,100 calls for service" to the San Francisco Police Department since January 2012, according to Herrera's letter -- more than any other business in the area. Criminal activity includes arrests for sale and possession of LSD, psychedelic mushrooms, hashish, marijuana, and marijuana edibles as well as dozens of incidents involving fights, assaults, auto burglaries and even two dog attacks.
Herrera expressed "hope to enlist your assistance to resolve the public nuisance conditions" to McDonald's President and CEO, but was unequivocal in his intention to file suit if necessary, both to abate conditions plaguing the Haight-Ashbury neighborhood and to pursue injunctive relief, civil penalties, and attorneys' fees.
On February 27, 2015, DHS, in effect, admitted that its Family Detention Centers were in violation of the Flores settlement by seeking to modify it to allow family detention.
Dossier 1'50 $ diapsora Celestin et al_v_martelly_et_al__nyedce-18-07340__006...Daniel Alouidor
This document is an amended class action complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against several defendants including Michel Joseph Martelly, Jocelerme Privert, Jovenel Moise (former and current Presidents of Haiti), Western Union, Unibank S.A., Digicel Haiti, and Natcom S.A. The complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in horizontal price fixing agreements in violation of United States antitrust laws and consumer protection laws by conspiring to add unlawful fees to money transfers and international phone calls to Haiti. The named plaintiffs are United States and Haitian citizens who allege they paid higher prices when sending money or making phone calls to Haiti as
Defendants dismas charities,inc.,ana gispert,derek thomas and adams leshota's...Cocoselul Inaripat
1) The document is a motion to dismiss a complaint filed by Traian Bujduveanu against Dismas Charities Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas, and Adams Leshota.
2) The motion argues that the complaint should be dismissed for failing to state any valid causes of action. It does not provide specific facts or legal elements to support the ten alleged legal violations or theories of recovery.
3) The complaint also fails to delineate which defendant is being sued for each specific cause of action. The motion asserts that the complaint does not give the defendants proper notice of the specific reasons they are being sued.
Defendants dismas charities,inc.,ana gispert,derek thomas and adams leshota's...Cocoselul Inaripat
1) The document is a motion to dismiss a complaint filed by Traian Bujduveanu against Dismas Charities Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas, and Adams Leshota.
2) The motion argues that the complaint should be dismissed for failing to state any valid causes of action. It does not provide specific facts or legal elements to support the ten alleged legal violations or theories of recovery.
3) The complaint also fails to delineate which defendant is being sued for each specific cause of action. The motion asserts that the complaint does not give the defendants proper notice of the reasons they are being sued.
Defendants dismas charities,inc.,ana gispert,derek thomas and adams leshota's...Cocoselul Inaripat
1) The document is a motion to dismiss a complaint filed by Traian Bujduveanu against Dismas Charities Inc., Ana Gispert, Derek Thomas, and Adams Leshota.
2) The motion argues that the complaint should be dismissed for failing to state any valid causes of action. It does not provide specific facts or legal elements to support the ten alleged legal violations or theories of recovery.
3) The complaint also fails to delineate which defendant is being sued for each specific cause of action. The motion asserts that the complaint does not give the defendants proper notice of the reasons they are being sued.
This document contains an identity theft victim's complaint and affidavit. It collects personal information about the victim such as name, address, phone numbers, and social security number. It documents the fraudulent accounts and activities, including the dates they occurred and the companies involved. Law enforcement report information is included, such as the filing date, report number, and officer details. The victim signs affidavits certifying the information is true and authorizing the report to be shared with law enforcement.
This document describes the relevant parties in a legal complaint. It establishes that Plaintiff Vogel Newsome was employed by Defendant Page Kruger & Holland (PKH), a Mississippi law firm, starting in December 2004. In May 2006, PKH terminated Newsome's employment, allegedly due to her filing a housing discrimination lawsuit against her landlord in Hinds County Court in March 2006. The document provides background details on the individuals and entities involved in the complaint.
041017 EEOC RESPONSE TO FIRST HERITAGE CREDIT LLC's STATEMENT OF POSITIONVogelDenise
The document is a rebuttal by Vogel Denise Newsome to a "Statement of Position" filed by First Heritage Credit, LLC regarding an EEOC charge of discrimination. Newsome objects to not being provided documents referenced in First Heritage's filing. Newsome also argues that First Heritage has not met the legal requirements to establish a defense of insubordination against the discrimination claims. Newsome requests documents from the EEOC and argues the charge was timely filed and the statute of limitations has not expired.
The petitioner, a 13-year old student, filed a criminal writ petition arguing that the FIR registered against him contained false allegations made by the complainant (respondent no. 3) with the ulterior motive of avoiding repayment of a loan. The court noted that the petitioner's arguments prima facie appeared to have substance and allowed more time for the filing of counter affidavits. The petitioner would not be arrested pursuant to the FIR until the next court date or submission of the police report, whichever is later, subject to his cooperation during the ongoing investigation.
Ähnlich wie Trump 1st Indictment Apr 4 2023.pdf (20)
Donald J. Trump Fulton County GA Racketeering IndictmentAlan Yarborough
This document is an indictment filed in Fulton County Superior Court charging 42 counts against 16 defendants related to alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 US presidential election. The defendants include Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and Sidney Powell. The charges include violations of Georgia RICO act, solicitation of election fraud, conspiracy to commit election fraud, and making false statements. Each count lists the defendants charged and the relevant Georgia criminal statute. The indictment also includes sections for defendants to waive rights and plead guilty, though none appear to have done so at this time.
The complaint alleges that Donald Trump and Eric Trump violated New York laws by diverting charitable funds from the Donald J. Trump Foundation and the Eric Trump Foundation for their private benefit and the benefit of Trump businesses. It claims they falsely represented that donations would be used for charity but instead funds were used to settle legal disputes, purchase portraits of Donald Trump, and make payments to the Trump Organization. The complaint requests criminal charges and recovery of damages for losses resulting from the defendants' unlawful actions.
Bounded rationality refers to the idea that human decision-making is limited by cognitive blinders that prevent people from considering all relevant information. Herbert Simon proposed that people are only rational to a limited extent and can be emotional or irrational when making important decisions. They have limitations in processing complex information. A major source of bounded rationality is opportunistic behavior, which refers to taking self-interested actions with guile, such as misleading others or withholding beneficial information. Opportunistic behavior can happen before or after agreements and allows one party to avoid consequences. While not everyone acts this way, opportunism is costly to prevent. Tools like laws, contracts, transparency, and risk management can help mitigate opportunistic tendencies and
Allotrope Science Corporation's development cycle stagesAlan Yarborough
The document outlines a 6 step process for developing a technology: 1) Identify potential partners, 2) Complete the development to reach Technology Readiness Level 3, 3) Seek funding and a manufacturing partner, 4) Hand off the vetted technology, 5) Manufacture the technology, and 6) Field or deploy the technology.
Allotrope Sciences Corporation development cycle stagesAlan Yarborough
The document outlines a 6 step process for developing a technology: 1) Identify potential partners, 2) Complete the development to reach Technology Readiness Level 3, 3) Seek funding and a manufacturing partner, 4) Hand off the vetted technology, 5) Manufacture the technology, and 6) Field or deploy the technology.
The document outlines a 6 step process for developing a technology: 1) Identify potential partners, 2) Complete the development to reach Technology Readiness Level 3, 3) Seek funding and a manufacturing partner, 4) Hand off the vetted technology, 5) Manufacture the technology, and 6) Field or deploy the technology.
Allotrope Science Corporation's Advanced Energetics project developed a small caliber projectile (.50 Caliber) that penetrates light armor and has a behind armor effect. It is a non-sensitive (inert) munition and will not explode on a soft target. We are seeking partner to further develop the technology in a medium caliber round. A variation on our technology will develop ordnance for unmanned systems using advanced reactive metals.
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...Massimo Talia
This guide aims to provide information on how lawyers will be able to use the opportunities provided by AI tools and how such tools could help the business processes of small firms. Its objective is to provide lawyers with some background to understand what they can and cannot realistically expect from these products. This guide aims to give a reference point for small law practices in the EU
against which they can evaluate those classes of AI applications that are probably the most relevant for them.
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...lawyersonia
The legal profession, which has historically been male-dominated, has experienced a significant increase in the number of women entering the field over the past few decades. Despite this progress, women lawyers continue to encounter various challenges as they strive for top positions.
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentationseri bangash
"Lifting the Corporate Veil" is a legal concept that refers to the judicial act of disregarding the separate legal personality of a corporation or limited liability company (LLC). Normally, a corporation is considered a legal entity separate from its shareholders or members, meaning that the personal assets of shareholders or members are protected from the liabilities of the corporation. However, there are certain situations where courts may decide to "pierce" or "lift" the corporate veil, holding shareholders or members personally liable for the debts or actions of the corporation.
Here are some common scenarios in which courts might lift the corporate veil:
Fraud or Illegality: If shareholders or members use the corporate structure to perpetrate fraud, evade legal obligations, or engage in illegal activities, courts may disregard the corporate entity and hold those individuals personally liable.
Undercapitalization: If a corporation is formed with insufficient capital to conduct its intended business and meet its foreseeable liabilities, and this lack of capitalization results in harm to creditors or other parties, courts may lift the corporate veil to hold shareholders or members liable.
Failure to Observe Corporate Formalities: Corporations and LLCs are required to observe certain formalities, such as holding regular meetings, maintaining separate financial records, and avoiding commingling of personal and corporate assets. If these formalities are not observed and the corporate structure is used as a mere façade, courts may disregard the corporate entity.
Alter Ego: If there is such a unity of interest and ownership between the corporation and its shareholders or members that the separate personalities of the corporation and the individuals no longer exist, courts may treat the corporation as the alter ego of its owners and hold them personally liable.
Group Enterprises: In some cases, where multiple corporations are closely related or form part of a single economic unit, courts may pierce the corporate veil to achieve equity, particularly if one corporation's actions harm creditors or other stakeholders and the corporate structure is being used to shield culpable parties from liability.
Business law for the students of undergraduate level. The presentation contains the summary of all the chapters under the syllabus of State University, Contract Act, Sale of Goods Act, Negotiable Instrument Act, Partnership Act, Limited Liability Act, Consumer Protection Act.
Receivership and liquidation Accounts
Being a Paper Presented at Business Recovery and Insolvency Practitioners Association of Nigeria (BRIPAN) on Friday, August 18, 2023.
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptxMasoudZamani13
Excited to share insights from my recent presentation on genocide! 💡 In light of ongoing debates, it's crucial to delve into the nuances of this grave crime.
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
Trump 1st Indictment Apr 4 2023.pdf
1. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
-against
DONALDJ. TRUMP,
Defendant.
THE GRANDJURY OF THE COUNTY OF NEWYORK, by this indictment, accuses
the defendant of the crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST
DEGREE
, inviolation of Penal Law §175.10, committedas follows:
The defendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere,on or about February 14,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
SECOND COUNT:
thereof,made and caused a false entry inthe business records ofan enterprise ,to wit,an invoice
from Michael Cohen dated February 14, 2017, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump
Revocable Trust,and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization .
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDSIN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenalLaw §175.10, committedasfollows:
The defendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere, on or about February 14,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made andcaused a false entry inthe business records of anenterprise,to wit,anentry in
the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number
842457,andkept andmaintained by the Trump Organization.
2. THIRD COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment, further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 ,committed as follows:
The defendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere,on or about February 14,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made andcaused a false entry in the businessrecords of anenterprise,to wit, anentry in
the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number
842460,andkept andmaintained bythe Trump Organization.
FOURTH
COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment , further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime ofFALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS INTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 ,committed as follows:
Thedefendant,inthe County ofNew York andelsewhere,on or about February 14,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made and caused a false entry inthe business records ofanenterprise,to wit,a Donald J.
Trump Revocable Trust Account check and check stub dated February 14,2017,bearingcheck
number 000138,and kept and maintainedby the Trump Organization.
FIFTH COUNT :
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime ofFALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDSINTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenalLaw §175.10, committedasfollows:
3. The defendant,in the County of New York and elsewhere,on or about March 16,2017
through March 17,2017,with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and
conceal the commission thereof , made and caused a false entry in the business records of an
enterprise ,to wit,aninvoice from Michael Cohen dated February 16,2017 and transmitted on or
about March 16,2017 ,marked as a record ofthe Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust,and kept and
maintained by the Trump Organization .
SIXTH
COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment, further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE ,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows :
The defendant, inthe County of New York and elsewhere, on or about March 17, 2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made and caused a false entry inthe business records ofanenterprise ,to wit,anentry in
the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number
846907,and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization .
SEVENTHCOUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment, further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation of PenalLaw §175.10, committedas follows:
4. The defendant,inthe County of New York and elsewhere,on or about March 17,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made and caused a false entry inthe business records of anenterprise,to wit,a Donald J.
Trump Revocable Trust Account check and check stub dated March 17,2017,bearing check
number 000147,and kept andmaintained by the Trump Organization.
EIGHTH COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment , further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE ,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows :
The defendant,in the County of New York and elsewhere,on or about April 13,2017
through June 19,2017,with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and
conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an
enterprise, to wit,an invoice from Michael Cohen dated April 13,2017,marked as a record of
DonaldJ.Trump, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.
NINTH COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolationofPenalLaw §175.10,committedasfollows:
Thedefendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere,onor aboutJune 19,2017,with
intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof,
madeandcaused a false entry inthe business records ofanenterprise,to wit,anentry inthe Detail
GeneralLedgerfor Donald J. Trump,bearing voucher number 858770, and kept andmaintained
by the Trump Organization.
5. TENTH
COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment, further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10, committed as follows:
Thedefendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere,on or aboutJune 19,2017,with
intent to defraud and intent to commitanother crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof,
made and caused a false entry inthe business records of anenterprise,to wit, a Donald J. Trump
accountcheck and check stub dated June 19,2017,bearing check number002740,and kept and
maintainedbythe Trump Organization.
ELEVENTH
COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment, further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime ofFALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS INTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows:
Thedefendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere,on or about May 22,2017,with
intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof,
made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit,an invoice from
Michael Cohen dated May 22,2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and
maintainedby the Trump Organization.
TWELFTH COUNT :
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime ofFALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDSINTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenalLaw §175.10, committedasfollows:
6. Thedefendant,inthe County ofNew York andelsewhere,on or about May 22,2017,with
intentto defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof,
made andcaused afalse entry inthe business records ofanenterprise,to wit,anentry inthe Detail
General Ledgerfor Donald J. Trump,bearing voucher number 855331,and kept and maintained
bythe Trump Organization.
THIRTEENTH COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment , further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE ,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows :
The defendant,inthe County ofNew York andelsewhere,on orabout May 23,2017,with
intentto defraud and intentto commit another crime and aid and concealthe commissionthereof,
made and causeda false entry inthebusinessrecords of anenterprise,to wit, a DonaldJ. Trump
accountcheck and check stub dated May 23,2017,bearing check number 002700,and kept and
maintainedby theTrump Organization.
FOURTEENTHCOUNT:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolationofPenalLaw §175.10,committedasfollows:
The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere,on or about June 16,2017
through June 19,2017,with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and
conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an
enterprise,to wit,an invoice from Michael Cohen dated June 16,2017,marked as arecord of
DonaldJ.Trump,and kept andmaintained by the Trump Organization.
7. FIFTEENTH
COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment , further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10, committed as follows:
Thedefendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere,on or aboutJune 19,2017,with
intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof,
made and causeda false entry inthe business records ofanenterprise,to wit,anentry inthe Detail
GeneralLedger for Donald J. Trump ,bearing voucher number 858772, and kept and maintained
by the Trump Organization.
SIXTEENTH
COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment , further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime ofFALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS INTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows:
The defendant,inthe County ofNewYork andelsewhere,onor aboutJune 19,2017,with
intentto defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof,
made andcaused a false entry inthe business records of anenterprise,to wit,a Donald J. Trump
accountcheck and check stub dated June 19, 2017,bearing check number002741,and kept and
maintainedby the Trump Organization.
SEVENTEENTHCOUNT
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime ofFALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDSINTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenalLaw §175.10, committedasfollows:
8. Thedefendant,inthe County ofNew York andelsewhere,onor about July 11,2017,with
intentto defraud and intentto commit another crime and aid and concealthe commission thereof,
made and caused a false entry inthe business records of an enterprise,to wit,an invoice from
Michael Cohen dated July 11,2017, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump, and kept and
maintainedby the Trump Organization.
EIGHTEENTHCOUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment , further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE ,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows :
The defendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere,onor about July 11,2017,with
intentto defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof,
madeandcaused a false entry inthe business records ofanenterprise,to wit,anentry inthe Detail
GeneralLedgerfor Donald J. Trump,bearing voucher number 861096, and kept andmaintained
bythe Trump Organization.
NINETEENTHCOUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolationofPenalLaw §175.10,committedasfollows:
Thedefendant,inthe County ofNew York andelsewhere,onor about July 11,2017,with
intent to defraud and intent to commitanother crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof,
made and causeda false entry inthe businessrecords of anenterprise,to wit, a Donald J. Trump
account check and check stub dated July 11, 2017,bearing check number 002781,and kept and
maintainedby the Trump Organization.
9. TWENTIETHCOUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolationofPenalLaw §175.10, committedas follows:
The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about August 1, 2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,madeandcaused afalse entry inthe businessrecords of an enterprise,to wit,an invoice
from MichaelCohen datedAugust 1,2017,markedasarecordofDonaldJ. Trump,andkeptand
maintainedby theTrump Organization.
TWENTY - FIRST COUNT :
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenalLaw §175.10, committedasfollows:
The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about August 1, 2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made andcaused a false entry in the business records ofanenterprise,to wit, anentry in
the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump,bearing voucher number 863641, and kept and
maintainedby the Trump Organization.
TWENTY- SECOND COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment , further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime ofFALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS INTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10, committed as follows:
10. The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about August 1, 2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made and caused a false entry inthe business records ofanenterprise , to wit,a Donald J.
Trump account check and check stub dated August 1
,2017,bearing check number 002821,and
kept and maintained by the Trump Organization .
TWENTY - THIRD COUNT :
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment , further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE ,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows :
The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about September 11,
2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the
commissionthereof,made and caused a false entry in the business records of anenterprise,to wit,
an invoice from Michael Cohen dated September 11, 2017,marked as a record of Donald J.
Trump,and keptand maintained by the Trump Organization.
TWENTY
- FOURTHCOUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolationofPenalLaw §175.10,committedasfollows:
The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about September 11,
2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the
commissionthereof,made and caused a false entry in the business records of anenterprise,to wit,
an entry inthe Detail General Ledger for DonaldJ. Trump,bearing voucher number 868174, and
kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.
11. TWENTY
- FIFTH COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment, further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10, committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about September 12,
2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the
commission thereof,made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise,to wit,
a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated September 12, 2017, bearing check
number 002908,and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization .
TWENTY
- SIXTH COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment, further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime ofFALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS INTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows:
The defendant, inthe County ofNewYork and elsewhere, on or about October 18,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made and caused a false entry inthe business records of an enterprise,to wit,an invoice
from Michael Cohendated October 18, 2017,marked as a record of Donald J. Trump,and kept
andmaintained by the Trump Organization.
TWENTY- SEVENTHCOUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime ofFALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDSINTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenalLaw §175.10, committedasfollows:
12. The defendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere, on or about October 18,2017,
with intentto defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and concealthe commission
thereof,madeand caused a falseentry inthebusinessrecords ofanenterprise,to wit,anentry in
theDetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 872654, and kept and
maintainedby the Trump Organization.
TWENTY
- EIGHTH COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolationofPenalLaw §175.10
, committed
as follows
:
The defendant, inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere, on or about October 18,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made and caused a false entry in the business records ofanenterprise,to wit, a Donald J.
Trump accountcheck andcheck stub dated October 18, 2017,bearing check number 002944, and
kept andmaintained by the Trump Organization.
TWENTY
- NINTHCOUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolationofPenalLaw §175.10,committedasfollows:
The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about November 20,
2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the
commission thereof,made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise,to wit,
an invoice from Michael Cohen dated November 20, 2017, marked as a record of Donald J.
Trump ,and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization .
13. THIRTIETH
COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment, further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about November 20,
2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the
commission thereof,made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise,to wit,
anentry inthe Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump ,bearing voucher number 876511,and
kept and maintained by the Trump Organization .
THIRTY
- FIRST
COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment, further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime ofFALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS INTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows:
The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about November 21,
2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the
commissionthereof,madeand causeda false entryinthe businessrecordsofanenterprise,to wit,
a Donald J. Trump account check and check stub dated November 21, 2017, bearing check
number002980,and kept andmaintainedby the Trump Organization.
THIRTY - SECOND COUNT :
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime ofFALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDSINTHE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolation ofPenalLaw §175.10, committedasfollows:
14. The defendant,inthe County ofNewYork and elsewhere,onor about December 1,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,madeandcaused afalse entry in the businessrecords of an enterprise,to wit,an invoice
from MichaelCohendated December 1,2017,marked as arecord of Donald J. Trump,andkept
andmaintained by the Trump Organization.
THIRTY
- THIRD COUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID , by this indictment , further accuses the
defendant ofthe crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE ,
inviolation ofPenal Law §175.10 , committed as follows :
The defendant, inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere,on or about December 1,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof,made andcaused a false entry in the business records ofanenterprise,to wit, anentry in
the DetailGeneral Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 877785, and kept and
maintainedby the Trump Organization.
THIRTY- FOURTHCOUNT
:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the
defendantofthe crime of FALSIFYINGBUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE,
inviolationofPenalLaw §175.10,committedasfollows:
The defendant,inthe County ofNew York and elsewhere,on or about December 5,2017,
with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission
thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit , a Donald J.
15. Trumpaccountcheck and check stub datedDecember5 , 2017, bearingcheck number003006
,
andkeptandmaintainedby the Trump Organization
.
ALVIN L.BRAGG, JR.
DistrictAttorney
16. GJ# 8-5
Filed:
No.
DONALD
J. TRUMP
,
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
-against
INDICTMENT
ALVIN L.BRAGG JR., District Attorney
FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE , P.L. §175.10 , 34 Cts
A True Bill
Foreperson
ADJOURNED TO PART ON
Defendant
.
17. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
-against
DONALD
J. TRUMP
,
Defendant.
furtheranceof the scheme.
STATEMENT OF
IND- 71543-23
INTRODUCTION
1. The defendant DONALD J. TRUMP repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New
York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the
voting public during the 2016 presidential election.
2. FromAugust 2015 to December2017,the Defendant orchestrated aschemewith
otherstoinfluencethe2016presidential electionby identifyingandpurchasingnegative
informationabouthimto suppressits publicationand benefitthe Defendant's electoralprospects.
Inordertoexecutetheunlawfulscheme,theparticipants violated electionlawsand made and
causedfalseentries inthe businessrecords ofvarious entities inNewYork. Theparticipants
alsotook steps that mischaracterized,for tax purposes,thetruenatureofthe payments made in
3. Onecomponent ofthis scheme was that,atthe Defendant's request,alawyer who
thenworkedfor the Trump Organizationas Special Counsel toDefendant( LawyerA ),
covertlypaid$130,000to anadultfilm actressshortly beforetheelectiontopreventherfrom
publicizing asexual encounter withthe Defendant. Lawyer A made the $130,000 payment
through ashellcorporation he setup and funded atabank inManhattan. This paymentwas
illegal,and Lawyer A has sincepleaded guilty tomaking an illegal campaigncontributionand
1
18. served time inprison. Further,false entries were made in New York business records to
effectuate this payment,separate and apart from the New York business records usedto conceal
thepayment.
4. Afterthe election,the DefendantreimbursedLawyer A for the illegal payment
through aseries ofmonthly checks,first from the DonaldJ. Trump Revocable Trust (
the
Defendant's Trust ) a Trust created under the laws ofNew York which heldthe Trump
Organization entity assets after the Defendant was electedPresident andthen from the
Defendant's bank account. Each checkwas processed by the Trump Organization, and each
check wasdisguised as apayment for legal services renderedinagiven monthof2017 pursuant
to aretainer agreement. The payment records,kept and maintainedby the Trump Organization,
werefalse New York business records. Intruth,there was no retainer agreement,and Lawyer A
was notbeingpaid for legalservices rendered in 2017. The Defendantcausedhisentities
businessrecords to be falsified to disguise his and others criminal conduct.
BACKGROUND
5. The Defendant is the beneficial owner ofa collection ofbusiness entities known
by the trade namethe Trump Organization. The Trump Organization comprises approximately
500 separate entities that,among other business activities,own and manage hotels,golf courses,
commercialrealestate,condominium developments,and other properties. The Trump
Organization is headquartered at725 FifthAvenue in NewYork County.
6. From approximately June 2015 to November 2016, the Defendant was a candidate
forthe office ofPresidentofthe United States. OnJanuary 20, 2017, hebecame President ofthe
United States.
2
19. The Catch and KillScheme to Suppress NegativeInformation
7 . During and in furtherance of his candidacy for President,the Defendant and
others agreedto identify and suppress negative stories about him. Two parties to this agreement
have admitted to committing illegal conduct in connection with the scheme. InAugust 2018,
Lawyer A pleaded guilty totwo federal crimes involving illegal campaign contributions,and
subsequently served time inprison. Inaddition,in August 2018,American Media,Inc. ( AMI ),
amedia company that owned andpublished magazines and supermarket tabloids includingthe
NationalEnquirer,admitted inanon-prosecution agreement that itmade apayment to a source
ofastory to ensure that the source didnotpublicize damaging allegations about the Defendant
before the 2016 presidential election andthereby influence that election.
The2015 Trump Tower Meeting
InJune 2015, the Defendantannounced his candidacy for Presidentof the United
States.
A.
8 .
9 . Soonafter,inAugust 2015,the Defendantmet withLawyer A and AMI's
ChairmanandChief Executive Officer (the AMI CEO ) at Trump Tower in NewYork County.
Atthe meeting,the AMI CEO agreed to help withthe Defendant's campaign,saying that he
would actasthe eyes andears forthe campaignby looking outfor negative stories aboutthe
Defendantand alerting LawyerA beforethe stories werepublished. The AMI CEO also agreed
topublishnegative storiesabout theDefendant's competitors for the election.
Suppressing
the Doorman's
Story
A few monthslater
, in or about Octoberor November
2015
, the AMICEO
learnedthat a former TrumpTower doorman(the Doorman ) was tryingto sellinformation
regardinga child that the Defendanthad allegedly fathered out ofwedlock. Atthe AMICEO's
THE SCHEME
B.
10.
3
20. direction,AMInegotiated and signed an agreement to pay the Doorman $30,000 to acquire
exclusive rights to the story. AMIfalsely characterized this payment in AMI's books and
records,including in its general ledger. AMIpurchased the information from the Doorman
without fully investigating his claims,but the AMI CEO directed that the deal take place because
ofhis agreement with the Defendant and Lawyer A.
11. When AMI later concluded that the story was not true,the AMI CEO wanted to
release the Doorman from the agreement . However,Lawyer A instructed the AMI CEO notto
release the Doorman until after the presidential election,and the AMI CEO complied with that
instruction because ofhis agreement withthe Defendant and Lawyer A.
Suppressing Woman 1's Account
Aboutfive months before the presidential election,inorabout June 2016,the
editor-in-chiefofthe NationalEnquirer andAMI's ChiefContent Officer (the AMI Editor-in
Chief )contacted Lawyer A about awoman( Woman 1 )who alleged she had a sexual
relationship withthe Defendant while hewas married. The AMI Editor-in-Chiefupdated
Lawyer A regularly about the matter overtext message and by telephone. The Defendant didnot
wantthis information to become public because he wasconcerned about the effect itcouldhave
onhis candidacy. Thereafter,the Defendant,the AMI CEO,andLawyer A had a series of
discussions about who should pay offWoman 1to secureher silence.
C.
12
.
13. AMIultimately paid $150,000 to Woman 1 in exchange for her agreement notto
speak out about the alleged sexual relationship ,as well as for two magazine cover features of
Woman 1 and a series of articles that would be published under her byline. AMI falsely
characterized this payment in AMI's books andrecords,including in its general ledger. The
AMI CEO agreed to the deal after discussing it with boththe Defendant and Lawyer A,and on
4
21. the understandingfrom Lawyer A that the Defendant or the Trump Organizationwould
reimburseAMI
.
14. Ina conversation captured inan audio recording in approximately September
2016 concerning Woman account,the Defendant and Lawyer A discussed how toobtainthe
rights to Woman account from AMI and how to reimburse AMIfor itspayment. Lawyer A
toldthe Defendant he would openup acompany forthe transfer ofWoman account andother
information,andstatedthat he had spoken tothe Chief Financial Officer for the Trump
Organization (
the TO CFO ) about howtoset the whole thing up. The Defendant asked, So
what do we got topay for this? One fifty? and suggested paying by cash. When Lawyer A
disagreed,the Defendant then mentionedpayment by check. After the conversation,LawyerA
created ashellcompany called Resolution Consultants,LLC onor about September 30,2016.
15. Lessthantwo months before the election,on or about September 30,2016,the
AMI CEO signed an agreement in which AMIagreed to transfer its rights to Woman account
to LawyerA's shell company for $125,000. However,after the assignment agreement was
signed but before the reimbursement took place,the AMI CEO consulted with general
counsel andthen told Lawyer A that the deal to transfer the rights to Lawyer A's shell company
was off
Suppressing Woman 2's Account
Aboutone monthbefore the election,on or about October 7,2016,news broke
that theDefendanthad beencaught ontape sayingtothe host ofAccess Hollywood: just start
kissingthem [women]. It'slike amagnet. Just kiss. Idon'tevenwait. Andwhen you're astar,
they letyoudoit. Youcan do anything. ... Grab em by the [genitals]. You cando anything.
Theevidenceshows that boththeDefendant and his campaignstaffwere concernedthatthetape
wouldharm his viability as a candidate and reduce his standingwith femalevoters inparticular.
D.
16.
5
22. 17. Shortly afterthe Access Hollywood tape became public,the AMI Editor-in-Chief
contacted the AMI CEO about another woman ( Woman 2 ) who alleged she had a sexual
encounter with the Defendant while he was married. The AMI CEO told the AMI Editor-in
Chief to notify Lawyer A.
18. or about October 10,2016,the AMI Editor-in-Chiefconnected Lawyer A with
Woman 2's lawyer ( Lawyer B ). Lawyer A then negotiated a deal with Lawyer B to secure
Woman 2's silence andprevent disclosure ofthe damaging information inthe final weeks before
the presidential election. Under the deal that Lawyer B negotiated,Woman 2would bepaid
$130,000 forthe rights to her account.
19. The Defendant directed Lawyer A to delay making a payment to Woman 2 as
long as possible . He instructed Lawyer A that ifthey could delay the payment until after the
election,they could avoid paying altogether,because at that point itwould not matter ifthe story
became public . As reflected in emails and text messages between and among Lawyer A,Lawyer
B and the AMI Editor-in-Chief,Lawyer A attempted to delay making payment as long as
possible.
20. Ultimately,with pressure mounting and the election approaching,the Defendant
agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed. Lawyer A discussed the deal withthe
Defendant and the TO CFO. The Defendant did not want to make the $130,000 payment
himself,and asked Lawyer A and the TO CFO to find away to make the payment. After
discussing various payment options with the TO CFO,Lawyer A agreed he would make the
payment. Before making the payment,Lawyer A confirmed withthe Defendant that Defendant
would pay him back.
6
23. 21. or about October 26,shortly after speaking with the Defendant onthe phone,
Lawyer opened a bank account in Manhattan in the name ofEssential Consultants LLC,a new
shell company he had created to effectuate the payment . Hethen transferred $ 131,000 from his
personal home equity line ofcredit ( HELOC ) into that account . On or about October 27,
Lawyer A wired $130,000 from his Essential Consultants LLC account inNew York to Lawyer
Bto suppress Woman 2's account.
Post
- ElectionCommunicationswith AMI CEO
OnNovember 8 , 2016, the Defendant won the presidential election and became
the President
- Elect
. Thereafter
, AMIreleasedboththe doormanand Woman1 from theirnon
E.
22
.
disclosure agreements .
23. The Defendantwas inaugurated as PresidentonJanuary 20,2017. Between
ElectionDay and Inauguration Day,during the period of the Defendant's transition to his role as
President,the Defendant met withthe AMI CEO privately inTrump Tower inManhattan. The
Defendantthankedthe AMICEO for handlingthe stories ofthe Doormanand Woman 1, and
invitedthe AMI CEOto the Inauguration. Inthe summerof2017,the Defendantinvitedthe
AMICEO tothe White House for adinner to thank himfor his help during the campaign.
II
. The Defendant Falsified Business Records
24
. Shortly after being elected President,the Defendant arranged to reimburse
Lawyer A forthe payoff he made onthe Defendant's behalf. Inor aroundJanuary 2017,the TO
andLawyer A metto discuss how LawyerA would be reimbursed for the money he paid to
ensure Woman 2's silence. The TO CFO asked Lawyer A to bringacopy ofabank statement
forthe Essential Consultants account showing the $ 130,000 payment.
25. The TO CFO and Lawyer A agreed to a total repayment amount of $420,000.
They reachedthat figure by adding the $130,000 payment to a $50,000 payment for another
7
24. expense for which Lawyer A also claimed reimbursement ,for atotal of$ 180,000. The TO CFO
then doubled that amount to $360,000 so that Lawyer A could characterize the payment as
income on his tax returns,instead ofareimbursement ,and Lawyer A would be left with
$180,000 afterpaying approximately 50% inincome taxes. Finally,the TO CFO added an
additional $60,000 as a supplemental year-end bonus. Together ,these amounts totaled
$420,000. The TO CFO memorialized these calculations in handwritten notes onthe copy ofthe
bank statement that Lawyer A hadprovided.
26. The Defendant ,the TO CFO,and Lawyer A then agreed that Lawyer A would be
paid the $420,000 through twelve monthly payments of$35,000 over the course of2017. Each
month,Lawyer A was to send aninvoice to the Defendant through Trump Organization
employees,falsely requesting payment of $35,000 for legal services rendered in agiven month
of2017 pursuant to a retainer agreement . At nopoint did Lawyer A have a retainer agreement
withthe Defendant or the Trump Organization .
27. Inearly February 2017,the Defendant and Lawyer A met inthe Oval Office atthe
White House and confirmed this repayment arrangement.
28. Onor about February 14,2017,Lawyer A emailed the Controller ofthe Trump
Organization (
the TO Controller ) the first monthly invoice,which stated: Pursuant to the
retainer agreement, kindly remit payment for services rendered for the months of January and
February,2017. The invoice requested payment inthe amount of $35,000 for each ofthose two
months. The TO CFO approved the payment,and,inturn,the TO Controller sentthe invoice to
the Trump Organization Accounts Payable Supervisor (the TO Accounts Payable Supervisor )
with thefollowing instructions : Post to legal expenses. Put retainer for the months ofJanuary
and February 2017 inthe description.
8
25. 29. Lawyer A submitted tensimilar monthly invoices by email to the Trump
Organization for the remaining months in2017. Eachinvoice falsely stated that itwas being
submitted [p]ursuant to the retainer agreement, and falsely requested payment for services
rendered for a month of 2017. Infact,there was no such retainer agreement and Lawyer A was
notbeing paid for services rendered in any monthof2017.
30. The TO Controller forwarded each invoice tothe TO Accounts Payable
Supervisor Consistent with the TO Controller's initialinstructions,the TO Accounts Payable
Supervisorprintedouteach invoice and markeditwith an accounts payable stamp andthe
general ledger code 51505 for legal expenses. The Trump Organization maintainedthe
invoicesasrecords of expenses paid.
31. Asinstructed,the TO Accounts Payable Supervisor recorded each payment inthe
Trump Organization's electronic accounting system,falsely describing it as a legalexpense
pursuant to aretainer agreement for a monthof2017. The Trump Organization maintaineda
digital entry for eachexpense,called a voucher," and these vouchers,likevouchers for other
expenses,became part ofthe Trump Organization's general ledgers.
32. The AccountsPayable Supervisor then prepared checks with attached check
stubsfor approval and signature. The firstcheckwas paid from theDefendant's Trust and
signed bythe TO CFO and the Defendant's son,as trustees. The check stub falsely recorded the
paymentas Retainer for 1/1-1/31/17 and Retainerfor 2/1-2/28/17. The second check,for
March2017,was alsopaid from the Trust and signed by two trustees. The check stub falsely
recordedthepaymentas Retainerfor 3/1-3/31/17.
33. Theremainingninechecks, correspondingto the months ofAprilthrough
Decemberof2017, werepaid by the Defendantpersonally. Eachofthe checkswas cutfromthe
9
26. Defendant's bank account and sent,along with the corresponding invoices from Lawyer A,from
the Trump Organization in New York County to the Defendant in Washington ,D.C. The checks
and stubs bearing the false statements were stapled to the invoices also bearing false statements.
The Defendant signed each ofthe checks personally and hadthem sent back to the Trump
Organization inNew York County. There,the checks,the stubs, and the invoices were scanned
and maintained inthe Trump Organization's data system before the checks themselves were
detached and mailed to Lawyer A for payment.
The $35,000 payments stopped after the December2017 payment.
TheInvestigation into Lawyer A and the Defendant's Pressure Campaign
35. or about April 9,2018,the FBIexecuted a search warrant on Lawyer A's
residencesand office. Inthemonthsthat followed,the Defendantandothers engaged inapublic
and private pressurecampaign to ensure that LawyerA did notcooperate with law enforcement
inthe federalinvestigation.
36. the day ofthe FBI searches,Lawyer A called to speak with the Defendant to
lethim know what had occurred. In a return call,the Defendant told Lawyer A to stay strong.
37. or about April 21,2018,the Defendant publicly commented onTwitter
encouraging Lawyer A not to flip stating Most people will flip ifthe Government lets them
out oftrouble,even if...itmeans lying or making up stories .Sorry,Idon't see [Lawyer A]
doing that ....
38. Inmid-April 2018, Lawyer A was also approached by anattorney ( Lawyer C ),
who offered torepresent him inthe interest ofmaintaining a back channel ofcommunication
tothe Defendant. Onor about April 21,2018,Lawyer C emailed Lawyer A,highlighting that he
had aclose relationship withthe Defendant's personal attorney ( Lawyer D ) and stating,
[T]his could notbea better situation for the President oryou. Laterthat day,Lawyer C
III
.
34.
10
27. emailed Lawyer A again,writing , I spoke with [Lawyer D .Very Very Positive. You are
loved. [Lawyer D said this communication channel must be maintained . ..Sleep well
tonight,you have friends in high places.
39. orabout June 14, 2018,Lawyer C emailed Lawyer A a news clip discussing
the possibility ofLawyer A cooperating,and continued to urge him not to cooperate with law
enforcement ,writing , The whole objective ofthis exercise by the [federal prosecutors] isto
drain you,emotionally and financially ,until you reach a point that you see them as your only
means to salvation." Inthe same email ,Lawyer C,wrote,"You are making a very big mistake
ifyou believe the stories these journalists are writing about you. They want you to cave. They
want you to fail. They do not want you to persevere and succeed .
40. August21,2018,Lawyer A pleaded guilty inthe federal investigation. The
nextday,on orabout August 22,2018,the Defendant commentedonTwitter, Ifanyoneis
lookingfor agoodlawyer,Iwould strongly suggest that you don'tretainthe services of[Lawyer
A Laterthat day,the Defendant posted to Twitter again, stating, Ifeel very badly for oneof
hisformercampaign managerswhohadbeen criminally charged,saying, “[U]nlike [Lawyer A],
herefusedto break makeupstories inorder toget a deal.
Lawyer A and AMI Admit Guilt in Connectionwith Payoffs of Woman 1 and
Woman 2
Ultimately, other participants in the scheme admittedthat the payoffs were
IV
.
41
.
unlawful
42. Inorabout September 2018,AMI entered into anon-prosecution agreement with
the UnitedStatesAttorney's Office for theSouthernDistrictofNew York inconnectionwith
AMI'spayoffofWoman 1, admittingthat “[a]t no timeduringthe negotiationor acquisition of
[Woman ] story did AMI intendto publishthe story or disseminate informationaboutit
11
28. publicly . Rather, AMI admitted that itmade the payment to ensure that Woman 1 did not
publicize damaging allegations about the Defendant before the 2016 presidential election and
thereby influence that election.
43. InAugust 21,2018,Lawyer A pleaded guilty to a felony inconnection with his
role inAMI's payoff to Woman 1,admitting in his guilty plea that he haddone so at the
Defendant's direction:
n or about the summer of 2016, in coordination with, and at the direction
of, a candidate for federal office, I and the CEO of a media company at the
request ofthe candidate worked together to keep an individual with information
that would be harmful to the candidate and to the campaign from publicly
disclosing this information. After a number of discussions , we eventually
accomplished the goal by the media company entering into a contract with the
individual under which she received compensation of $ 150,000 . I participated in
this conduct, which on my part took place in Manhattan, for the principal purpose
ofinfluencing the election.
(emphasisadded
) .
LawyerA also pleadedguilty to a felony inconnection with his payoffof Woman
2 to secure her silence, again at the Defendant's direction. Lawyer A admitted as part ofhis
guiltyplea
:
n or about October of 2016 , in coordination with, and at the direction of
the same candidate , I arranged to make a payment to a second individual with
information that would be harmful to the candidate and to the campaign to keep
the individual from disclosing the information . To accomplish this , I used a
company that was under my control to make a payment in the sum of $130,000.
The monies I advanced through my company were later repaid to me by the
candidate . I participated in this conduct, which on my part took place in
Manhattan , for the principal purpose of influencing the election.
44.
(emphasis added).
1
1
This Statement of Facts contains certain of the information that is relevant to the events
described herein, and does not contain all facts relevant to the charged conduct.
12
29. DATED
: New York, New York
April 4, 2023
ALVIN L.BRAGG, JR .
DistrictAttorney
New York County
13