Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Egypt. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn Egypt. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng

Thứ Hai, 1 tháng 7, 2013

Emergency Protection of Egyptian Cultural Antiquities Act

The pillage of Egyptian cultural heritage continues. The latest news of ravaged archaeological sites comes from El Hibeh and Abu Sir Al Malaq where photos depict thrown-away bones and broken artifacts that mar ancient archaeological sites, a grisly byproduct of destructive digging by reckless looters. Political leaders must act.

The illegal trade in cultural heritage is a transnational, for-profit business that depends on moving looted objects to the market. The number of Egyptian cultural objects smuggled into the U.S. remains unknown. What is known is that the United States is a significant consumer of Egyptian cultural artifacts. Last year nearly 14% of all archaeological, historical, or ethnographic objects imported for consumption into the U.S.--as a percentage of the total customs value of all such imports--came from Egypt, making The Land of The Pharaohs the third top supplier of declared cultural goods entering America.

Just as Congress passed legislation targeting plundered Iraqi heritage, lawmakers should adopt similar legislation authorizing the President to implement emergency import protections covering at-risk Egyptian cultural heritage. Its language could mirror the language of the Emergency Protection of Iraqi Cultural Antiquities Act:
SHORT TITLE
Emergency Protection of Egyptian Cultural Antiquities Act

EMERGENCY IMPLEMENTATION OF IMPORT RESTRICTIONS.

(a) AUTHORITY- The President may exercise the authority of the President under section 304 of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 2603) with respect to any archaeological or ethnological material of Egypt without regard to whether Egypt is a State Party under that Act, except that, in exercising such authority, subsection (c) of such section shall not apply.

(b) DEFINITION- In this section, the term `archaeological or ethnological material of Egypt means cultural property of Egypt and other items of archaeological, historical, cultural, rare scientific, or religious importance illegally removed from locations in Egypt since [date to be agreed upon].

TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.
The authority of the President under section 3002(a) shall terminate five years from the date of enactment.
The passage of the Emergency Protection of Egyptian Cultural Antiquities Act would heighten American attention to the increasing cultural heritage crisis in Egypt and give federal law enforcement an additional tool to stop antiquities trafficking at the border.

Photo credit: exkrupier


This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2013 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Thứ Bảy, 23 tháng 3, 2013

New York Prosecutors Seek to Forfeit Ancient Egyptian Artifacts


­­­The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York on March 20 filed a complaint in federal court seeking to forfeit five ancient Egyptian objects. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized the items in 2010. The artifacts include:
  • Amarna-style carving in Egypt.  Photo credit: PocketAces
    An Amarna Period sunken limestone relief of offering bearers with an appraised fair market value of $18,000.
  • A Late Period fragment block statue made of gray schist, having an appraised fair market value of $12,000.
  • A New Kingdom limestone relief displaying the arms of offering bearers, appraised at $2,000.
  • A New Kingdom limestone relief depicting a man, valued at $5,000.
  • A Middle Kingdom funerary boat valued at $20,000.
Government lawyers write that the archaeological material arrived in a FedEx shipment on August 20, 2010 at Newark's Liberty International Airport. The ancient Egyptian objects "were sold in and exported from Dubai, UAE by Hassan Fazeli Trading Company, LLC (‘Fazeli Trading’). [They] were purchased and imported by [Salem] Alshdaifat, by and through Holyland [Numismatics],” allege the prosecutors.

[Sidebar: Alshdaifat, owner of Holyland Numismatics, pleaded guilty on December 21, 2012 to a reduced charge of misdemeanor accessory after the fact in the cultural property case of U.S. v. Khouli et al. The present forfeiture case, however, is not directed against Alshdaifat as it is a civil matter naming the ancient Egyptian artifacts as the defendants in rem.]

The government argues that the objects should be forfeited because of false statements regarding the reported values of the cultural artifacts, false statements about the country of origin, and false declarations made to customs regarding their descriptions.

Prosecutors cite four legal grounds. First, they argue that the objects must be forfeited under 18 U.S.C. § 545 (smuggling) because the archaeological material "are goods or merchandise smuggled, clandestinely introduced into the united States, imported contrary to law ....” Second, the artifacts constitute unlawfully imported merchandise under 18 U.S.C. § 545 and/or 18 U.S.C. § 542 (false statements). Third, they "were imported into the United States without the merchandise invoices setting forth accurate information necessary for proper appraisement, examination and classification” in violation of 19 U.S.C. § 148.  Fourth the cultural items "were not imported into the United States with reasonable care to make entry therefore by filing with the CBP documentation and information necessary to determine whether the  [objects] may be released from custody of Customs and Border Protection” contrary to 19 U.S.C. § 1484 (a)(1).

The forfeiture complaint alleges that the value of the goods was understated. The government hired National Appraisal Consultants, LLC, who estimated the fair market value of the archaeological objects to be $57,000. But the import value reported to CBP was below that figure.

The government, meanwhile, claims that discrepant values were placed on customs forms and invoices. Prosecutors write, "The value declared on the FedEx airwaybill and the Fazeli Trading invoice to Holyland was $17,500. The value declared on the Customs Form 3461 was $1,334. The value declared on the Customs Form 7501 was $17,881, broken down into one line item valued at $17,500 and a second line item valued at $381. No invoice was provided for the second line item.” Moreover, “The Fazeli Trading invoice lists four items sold to Holyland: one 'Ancient Egyptian Wooden Boat' ... for $3,500 and three 'Ancient Egyptian Stone Fragment[s]' for $14,000, for a total of $17,500. This information is repeated on the Commercial Invoice supplied to FedEx Brokerage. Although the shipment contained four stone fragments, both invoices state that there were only three stone fragments sold. Neither invoice reflects an object sold for $381."

The government's complaint also argues the listing of a false country of origin. While prosecutors point out that “[t]he Fazeli Trading invoice and Commercial Invoice describe the Defendants inrem as ‘Ancient Egyptian,’” the lawyers add that “the Commercial Invoice listed the ‘country of manufacture’ as ‘Turkey.’” Government attorneys additionally say that “the documents available to Customs upon the shipment's arrival … did not list Egypt as the country of origin or country of manufacture ….” Prosecutors specify that “[t]he country of manufacture declared on the FedEx airwaybill was Turkey, [t]he country of origin declared on the Customs Form 3461 was the UAE, [t]he country of origin declared on the Customs Form 7501 was ‘Multi.’”

The government's complaint additionally alleges false descriptions, arguing "The Fazeli Trading invoice and Commercial Invoice list only three stone fragments, while there were in fact four stone pieces in the shipment...." The complaint also claims that the import description of "Stone Wooden Antique Lime" was inadequate. Morevoer, the listed Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) 9703 number, which designates original sculptures and statuary, was off target say the prosecutors.  The government alleges that when CBP detained the archaeological objects the importer of record supplied a new HTS number of 9706.00.0060, which covers antiques over 100 years old. The objects should have been classified as HTS 9705.00.0070, argue prosecutors.  HTS 9705.00.0070 covers collections and collectors' pieces of archaeological, historical, or ethnographic pieces.

 The government's complaint states that Alshdaift filed a response to the CBP seizure, writing
"Alshdaifat and Holyland submitted a petition for remission through counsel dated September 23, 2010. In his petition, Alshdaifat claimed that he 'conducted his due diligence' to ensure that the [objects] 'were not stolen from Egypt.' In particular, Alshdaifat averred that he had asked Hassan Fazeli, proprietor of Fazeli Trading, about the origin ... to which Fazeli responded that [they] had been part of a private Turkish collection of decorative antiques that he purchased in 2008. Alshdaifat also submitted a copy of Fazeli's export commercial invoice and UAE Customs declaration which purportedly established Fazeli' s purchase and importation of the private collection.”  The forfeiture complaint notes that “none of the items described in the export commercial invoice for Fazeli's purchase correspond to the [objects]."

The forfeiture case is docketed as 13-CV-1462.

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2012 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Thứ Tư, 13 tháng 2, 2013

Ka Nefer Nefer Settlement Terms to be Discussed

The United States Attorney's Office has informed the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals that a settlement may be possible between the federal government, Egypt, and the St. Louis Art Museum (SLAM) in the Ka Nefer Nefer forfeiture case.

The federal district court in St. Louis twice dismissed the case last year before prosecutors filed an appeal to the higher court.  But federal attorneys told the appeals court in a January 17 status report that "the parties are planning to meet between February 25 and 27, 2013 at a location agreed upon by the parties, where Appellant, Appellee, and the Republic of Egypt will each be represented. It is the hope of the parties that this meeting will result in the parties and the Republic of Egypt coming to terms that will settle this matter in its entirety, such that no further appellate proceedings will be required."


This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2012 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Thứ Ba, 8 tháng 1, 2013

U.S. v. Khouli et al. Update: Motion to Defer Prosecution Ushers Rapid End to Antiquities Case

Prosecutors in Brooklyn last week entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with defendant Joseph Lewis, II, completing the alleged antiquities trafficking case of United States v. Khouli et al.  One co-defendant's sentence to house arrest in November for smuggling and making  false statements, and a second co-defendant's plea in December to misdemeanor accessory after the fact, with a sentence of a $1000 fine, appear to have accelerated the case to its rapid conclusion.

A deferred prosecution typically involves an agreement between the prosecution and defense whereby the case is suspended for a period of time and upon certain conditions such as good behavior.  Court documents do not reveal the specific agreement in the case involving Lewis, but one document suggests that the deferral period is for one year beginning January 3, 2013.  At the end of the deferral period, the case is dismissed.  For all intents and purposes, a deferred prosecution generally ends the criminal prosecution.  No conviction is entered.

Last year at this time, Lewis' attorney filed a motion to dismiss arguing that the government could not prove its case.

A fourth co-defendant, Ayman Ramadan, remains a fugitive.  However, the completion of the antiquities case in the Eastern District of New York suggests that the fugitive warrant may not be executed by the U.S. Attorney if he were to be arrested.


This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2012 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Chủ Nhật, 18 tháng 11, 2012

Jail or No Jail? Sentencing Arguments Filed in US v. Khouli

Mousa "Morris" Khouli will be sentenced this week in federal court in Brooklyn.  Khouli's lawyer, Gerald Shargel, seeks a sentence of probation while the prosecution wants imprisonment.

[UPDATE 11/21/12: Judge Edward R. Korman on November 20 sentenced Khouli to terms that included six months home confinement, one year probation, up to 200 hours of community service, and a criminal monetary assessment of $200.  Judge Korman departed from the federal sentencing guidelines when issuing the order.  Khouli also agreed to forfeit the property seized.]

Assistant United States Attorney Karin Orenstein submitted written arguments to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York in advance of the sentencing, asking for 46-57 months of incarceration. The prosecutor writes:

Source: ICE
"The smuggling of the Egyptian antiquities that are the subject of the Indictment comprised but a small part of the defendant's smuggling career. ... His willingness to invent provenances to 'launder' cultural property has added an air of legitimacy to items that should be scrutinized as potential stolen property. Indeed, the defendant sold at least one antiquity, the terre-crue head, that was stolen from Iraq. Last, the defendant lied to government agents repeatedly to cover up his criminal conduct."

But Khouli's lawyer argues in court papers that similarly situated defendants have not received sentences of imprisonment. Cultural property dealers, an American soldier, a book author, and a hand surgeon have all received probation for smuggling cultural property, the defense argues.  The defense points to ten criminal cases involving 25 defendants to show that probation is the typical sentence handed down by the courts.

Federal prosecutors counter in their pleadings "that the combination of the rarity of cultural property smuggling prosecutions accompanied by a pattern of non-incarcerative sentences has failed to have a deterrent effect. To the contrary, the remote possibility of a non-jail felony conviction has become the cost of doing business." They add, "Unlike securities dealers or government contractors, dealers in cultural property can continue to work in the same field despite convictions for smuggling and lying to government agents."

Prosecutors concede that "smugglers of cultural property have generally received non-incarcerative sentences" but observe "that that these sentences often include a period of six months or a year of home detention as well as forfeiture and fines." Cases cited by federal prosecutors include (with descriptions and sentences supplied by this author):
  • United States v. Malter, (a case that includes Malter Galleries, Inc.) 09-CR-834 (C.D. Cal.): Pleas of guilty in 2012 to illegal trafficking of artifacts from federal land in violation of the Antiquities Resources Protection Act. Charges dropped involving illegal pre-Hispanic ceramic vessels and artifacts from El Salvador.  Sentence imposed of one year home detention, two years probation, payment of $10,000 of community service to the National Park Foundation Pacific West Region Archaeological Investigation fund, special assessment of $100, restitution in the amount of $6,215.57, and a fine of $8,000.
  • United States v. Perez, 07-CR-499 (C.D. Cal.):  Plea of guilty in 2012 to a single count indictment of smuggling a pre-Hispanic bowl from El Salvador in violation of 18 USC 545 without an export permit as required by 19 USC 2606(a) of the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA). Sentenced to six months house arrest and a fine of $10,000.
  • United States v. Johnson, 08-CR-491 (S.D.N.Y.):  Egyptian stolen property case with a plea of guilty in 2008 to misdemeanor count (dropped from a felony) of receiving stolen property within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction pursuant to 18 USC 662.  Sentenced to restitution in the amount of $21,200 plus a special assessment of $25 and 18 months probation with the first six months served in home detention.
  • United States v. Braude, 03-CR-1009 (E.D.N.Y.):  Pleas of guilty to smuggling under 18 USC 545 and false statements under 18 USC 1001 for trafficking three Iraqi cylinder seals. Sentenced to six months house arrest and a fine of $2000 plus $300 assessment.
"Khouli's professional life has suffered tremendously," argues Khouli's attorney, adding that others do not want to engage in business with a felon who is seen a "a pariah in the industry."  That is why "the government's deterrence arguments [in favor of incarceration] are meritless," he writes.

The defense additionally takes issue with the prosecution's assertion that Khouli had knowledge that an Iraqi terre-crue artifact was stolen.  The defense also emphasizes that "their is no claim that any antiquities at issue in this case were stolen or looted, possessed by Khouli in violation of U.S. law, or imported in violation of Egyptian patrimony laws" (emphasis in the original).

Federal prosecutors want the court to consider that "the defendant flouted Customs regulations time and time again for his own pecuniary gain" and that "Khouli lied to Customs for years and covered up those lies by making false statements directly to investigating agents." They conclude, "A nonincarcerative sentence under these circumstances does not promote respect for the law."

Mousa "Morris" Khouli pleaded guilty on April 18, 2012 to smuggling Egyptian cultural property into the United States and making a false statement to law enforcement authorities.  The antiquities dealer was indicted by a federal grand jury in 2011.  Also indicted were Joseph A. Lewis II, Salem Alshdaifat, and Ayman Ramadan who continue to litigate their cases. Ramadan remains at large.


This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2012 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Thứ Tư, 24 tháng 10, 2012

SLAM Litigants Move Toward Resolving Ka Nefer Nefer Mummy Mask Case

The St. Louis Art Museum (SLAM), the United States government, and the Republic of Egypt appear to be in discussions to settle the contest over title to the mummy mask of Ka Nefer Nefer. Last week the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Missouri filed an unopposed motion with the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals asking for filing deadlines to be held in abeyance in the case. The court granted the motion.

The federal government's October 17 motion tells the court that "the parties believe that continued discussions will be productive and that there is a significant possibility that they will reach a resolution that would obviate the need for the appeal to continue."  The appeals court was notified that "the United States must consult further with the Solicitor General, the Department of State, and the government of the Republic of Egypt before it can propose or agree to any potential settlement terms."

U.S. Attorney Richard Callahan appealed the mummy forfeiture case in June after a federal district court denied the government's efforts to seize and forfeit the Ka Nefer Nefer mask from SLAM.  The federal government alleges that the mask was stolen from Egypt and is in the United States in violation of the law.  SLAM asserts that they are the rightful owners of the artifact.  SLAM filed a declaratory action in February 2011 to gain quiet title to the mask followed by the U.S. Attorney's petition for forfeiture in March 2011.


This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2012 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Thứ Sáu, 28 tháng 9, 2012

Hearing Scheduled in Antiquities Trafficking Case - U.S. v. Khouli et al.

Source: US District Court, Eastern District of New York
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York has scheduled an important hearing in the alleged antiquities trafficking case involving Joseph A. Lewis, II and Salem Alshdaifat, known as U.S. v. Khouli et al.

The evidentiary hearing will focus on the admissibility of the Alshdaifat's statements to law enforcement as well as the portions of the defendants' omnibus motions that have not been dismissed already.

A summary of the government's written arguments can be found here.  A summary of the defendants' written arguments can be found here: Part I and Part II.

The hearing will take place before Senior District Judge Edward R. Korman on November 19, 2012 at 11:30 a.m.

Lewis and Alshdaifat were charged by a federal grand jury in 2011.  They are presumed innocent unless the government proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.  Another defendant in the case, Mousa Khouli, pleaded guilty to charges in April.  A fourth alleged conspirator, Ayman Ramadan, remains a fugitive. 


This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2012 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Thứ Ba, 31 tháng 7, 2012

Egyptian Coffins Successfully Detected and Recovered by Customs in Texas - Question of Proper Seizure Authority Remains - Updated August 10, 2012

Homeland Security's U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency today announced the seizure of "two priceless Egyptian sarcophagi-type artifacts."  A CBP officer at the World Trade Bridge on the border with Mexico in Laredo, Texas is credited with the discovery that successfully recovered the pharaonic-era coffins.

No arrests were made and the transporter(s) has not been identified.  Meanwhile, the suggested legal authority given by CBP for seizing the coffins appears questionable even though there are legal arguments available that would support the seizure of the artifacts.

The coffins did not have export permits from Egypt.  "Working in coordination with HSI [Homeland Security Investigations] and with Office of Assistant Chief Counsel, CBP on July 9 determined that the artifacts would be seized due to a lack of export documentation to substantiate legal exportation of the artifacts from Egypt," CBP says in a press statement.

But the United States is unable to enforce a foreign nation's export laws.  CBP incorrectly explains in its press release that "[t]hrough the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act, the United States entered into a cultural property agreement with the Egyptian government to help protect archaeological and ethnological materials through import controls."  The United States and Egypt, however, do not have a bilateral agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) pursuant to the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA).

[Sidebar: The CPIA is the federal law that implements in the U.S. the 1970 UNESCO Convention (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property).  It permits the U.S. to enact import protections and seize endangered cultural objects coming from nations which have a bilateral agreement with America.]

Last year, CBP authorities in Chicago misapplied the law in a case where officers seized a Nayarit figurine from Mexico.  The seizure was reportedly made on the basis of a violation of the CPIA because it was presumed that the United States and Mexico had a bilateral agreement in force under the CPIA.  But the U.S. and Mexico did not (and still do not) have such an agreement in place

Federal officials potentially could rely on the CPIA to seize the Egyptian coffins if they were stolen from a museum after January 12, 1983 and the artifacts were inventoried.  But CBP does not report that the coffins were unlawfully taken from a cultural institution in Egypt.

Federal authorities may choose to rely on alternative legal arguments, nevertheless, to seize, forfeit, and return the coffins to Egypt.  These legal theories are outlined in a 2011 blog post entitled Reclaiming Trafficked Egyptian Cultural Objects.

Instead of returning the coffins right away, the authorities could also choose to secure the coffins as evidence while they investigate and potentially indict suspects for possible violations of the law

CBP tells how the customs officer in Laredo "selected a shipment manifested as Egyptian sculptures for an enforcement examination. In the course of their examination, CBP officers discovered that the shipment included possible Egyptian antiquities . . . ."  CBP reports that it "had recently been made aware of possible stolen artifacts of Egyptian origin,"  It is unknown if the information the agency received was generic--such as the ICOM Red List--or whether CBP received specific intelligence about the shipment traveling through Texas.  In either case, the customs official at the border remained alert so as to intercept the cultural items.

CBP is to be commended for its detection and interdiction of the contraband Egyptian coffins.  Yet it is important that the agency accurately cite the proper legal authority for the seizure of the artifacts.  That is because the public relies on government officials for guidance so as to remain compliant with the law and to avoid the potential loss of property.

[UPDATE August 10, 2012: CBP has now revised its web-posted press release by striking any reference to the seizure of the Egyptian coffins under the authority of the federal Cultural Property Implementation Act. The agency finds support for the seizure by stating that neither sarcophagus had any accompanying export paperwork from Egypt.

CBP should clarify that it is not the lack of foreign regulatory paperwork that justifies the seizure of the cultural objects--although the lack of an export permit from Egypt can be an important piece of evidence to federal enforcement authorities--it is that American import and criminal laws are triggered by Egypt's legal ownership claims to the coffins.  The sarcophagi, for example, can be seized under 19 USC 1595a's "contrary to law" provision where there is probable cause to believe that the coffins constitute stolen property in the United States under the McClain/Schultz doctrine's interpretation of the National Stolen Property Act. To simplify, stolen property brought into the United States from abroad is contraband under federal law that may be seized by CBP officers and returned to the legal owner.]

CBP's press release may be found here.  Photos of the seized Egyptian coffins courtesy of CBP.

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at http://culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2012 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Thứ Hai, 23 tháng 7, 2012

Objection Filed: Prosecution Outlines Factual Claims in U.S. v. Khouli et al.

Assistant United States Attorneys Karin Orenstein and Claire Kedeshian have filed an 87 page objection in response to motions filed on April 30, 2012 by Joseph Lewis, II and Salem Alshdaifat.  The government objects to the defendants' efforts to scuttle the case of United States v. Khouli et al., and the prosecutors take the opportunity to present the court with their evidence.

Lewis and Alshdaifat were charged by a federal grand jury in 2011 with crimes related to antiquities trafficking.  They are presumed innocent unless the government proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they had knowledge of the illegality and acted unlawfully. Another defendant in the case, Mousa Khouli, pleaded guilty to charges in April, while a fourth alleged conspirator, Ayman Ramadan, remains a fugitive at large.

In its objection filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, the government argues, in part, that
  • the warrants authorizing searches of Lewis' home in Virginia and Alshdaifat's home in Michigan and their execution by federal agents were proper;
  • the search of the two defendants' emails were reasonable and properly authorized by three valid warrants;
  • Alshdaifat did not suffer violations of his right to remain silent or his right to counsel;
  • the smuggling statute (18 USC 545) is not unconstitutionally vague;
  • the government did not engage in any alleged overreaching or misconduct in the case;
  • the venue of the court (eastern district of New York) is proper; and
  • the money laundering conspiracy charge is valid.
Source: ICE
To support its legal arguments, and to paint a picture of the alleged smuggling and money laundering conspiracy, the government presents the court with a narrative describing the movements of an allegedly smuggled Greco-Roman coffin, a mummy board, a 3-piece nesting Egyptian coffin set, and Egyptian boats and limestone artifacts.

Federal prosecutors outline how Khouli and Ramadan smuggled the Greco-Roman coffin into JFK Airport in New York by transferring two payments of $10,000 and $3400 and submitting false customs information.  "While Lewis and Alshdaifat are not charged with smuggling the Greco-Roman coffin . . . the facts surrounding this transaction are revealing with regard to Lewis’s mens rea [i.e. criminal knowledge] for his subsequent transactions with Khouli," write the attorneys. The attorneys highlight that the customs papers listed the Greco-Roman coffin's country of origin as United Arab Emirates and not Egypt and described the coffin as "antique wood panel" valued at $3400. Prosecutors also tell how a sales invoice that did not originate from the actual seller, who was Ayman Ramadan/Nefertiti Eastern Sculptures Trading, was attached to the customs papers.

The government's lawyers go on to describe that the first artifact purchased by Lewis from Khouli was a mummy board, eventually seized by federal agents during a July 13, 2011 search of Lewis' Virginia home:

"Khouli sold an Egyptian mummy board to a customer .... A mummy board is a decorated wooden board that fits inside a coffin along with a mummy. On January 9, 2009, before [the customer] took physical possession of the mummy board from Khouli, Lewis purchased it from [the customer] for $60,000.  The bill of sale between Lewis and [the customer] included a photograph of the mummy board and identified its prior owners as Khouli’s company, Windsor Antiquities (“Windsor”), and previously, a private Dutch collection that acquired the item in the 1960s. The mummy board depicted in the bill of sale appears to have a transverse cut across the middle. On January 14, 2009, several days after the sale, Khouli and Lewis were in direct e-mail contact about shipping the mummy board from Khouli to Lewis.

"On February 10, 2009, Khouli advised Lewis by e-mail that he had obtained the mummy board from a restorer and offered to ship it to Lewis. Lewis inquired as to whether the repair at the 'joints' was invisible, referring to where the cut pieces were joined together."

On the same day, February 10, 2009, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent (ICE) agent questioned Khouli about the importation of the Greco-Roman coffin.  The government reports that "[o]n the following day, February 11, 2009, Khouli offered Lewis two Egyptian antiquities: the Greco-Roman coffin and a bronze figure. Khouli advised Lewis by e-mail, 'Let me know what you think about the two Egyptian pieces[;] these are from my dad[’]s collection[;] he passed away about three years ago and my brothers and I want to sell them and split the money.'"  Lewis reportedly purchased the coffin for $32,500, not $65,000 as proposed by Khouli.

Because "[n]o mention was made of any other objects remaining from Khouli’s father’s collection [and because] Lewis’s dealings with Khouli the previous month indicated that Khouli had ... acquired the mummy board from a private Dutch collection, not from his father," federal prosecutors argue that "[t]hese facts belie Lewis’s argument that he had a basis for believing that every item he purchased from Khouli came from Khouli’s father’s collection."

In fact, government attorneys suggest that Khouli signaled to Lewis that the Greco-Roman coffin did not actually come from his father, stating:

"On March 6, 2009, after Khouli and Lewis had agreed to the sale of the Greco-Roman coffin, but months before Lewis took possession of it, Khouli offered Lewis a mummy linen and mask, writing in an e-mail, 'I just got th[e]s[e] items[;] i described them to you last week . . . .' (Gov’t Exh. 1; emphasis added). On the same date, Lewis responded, in sum and substance, that he already had four such items and that they were not very expensive. Khouli replied on the same date, 'It is very interesting[;] it was inside the coffin you bought from me according to the owner but he sold I[t] to me separately son of a gun.' (Id.; emphasis added). The statement that the Greco-Roman coffin had belonged to a separate 'owner' who 'sold' both the coffin and a related mummy linen and mask to Khouli was inconsistent with Khouli’s earlier representation that the Greco-Roman coffin had been sitting in his father’s collection for decades.  Upon learning this information, Lewis did not cancel the Greco-Roman transaction or request a new provenance from Khouli. Rather, he agreed to purchase the mummy linen and mask. In addition, despite Lewis’s only information about the mummy linen and mask’s provenance being that Khouli had 'just' received them and they were 'sold' to Khouli by another dealer, Lewis’s records for these antiquities include a Windsor bill of sale stating that these items were 'legally acquired by the late Jack Khouli in Israel in the 1960s.' While Lewis is not charged with smuggling the Greco-Roman coffin, his experience with Khouli in early 2009 told him that (1) not every Egyptian antiquity Khouli sold was from his father’s collection, and (2) any provenance that included Khouli’s father was unreliable."

The next day, on March 7, 2009, Khouli offered Lewis both a middle and outer coffin of an ancient Egyptian nesting coffin set, according to the prosecution.  Khouli reportedly went to Dubai in April to view them and discovered a third inner coffin.  Prosecutors say that  "Lewis’s e-mail messages indicate that he believed that the inner coffin was part of the same set as the middle coffin and outer coffin lid, making a three-piece nesting set. In these email messages, Khouli advised Lewis that the inner coffin had already been sold to another buyer and Lewis agreed to pay $150,000 for the inner coffin to avoid breaking up the set. The total agreed price for the nesting set was $310,000. Nothing in these e-mail exchanges suggested that Khouli had previously been aware of any of these coffins let alone that they had ever been in his father’s collection."

The government's lawyers add:
"On April 12, 2009, Lewis sent an e-mail message to Khouli confirming the details of the sale of the three piece coffin set. Lewis’s terms included that Khouli would provide “[p]rovenance from [his] late father’s collection, Israel 1960s” and a guarantee that the items would be cleared by Customs within 30 days of arrival. Khouli agreed to these terms. (Gov’t Exh. 4)."

The nesting coffins were sent to the United States in pieces using different transportation methods--international mail, air cargo, and sea cargo--and sent through separate points of entry, specifically JFK Airport in New York and the Port of Newark in New Jersey.  Prosecutors write in their pleading that the shipments were variously described for Customs as wooden panels, Indian furniture, purchased by a Connecticut third-party, or valued at $900. The coffin set was delivered to a Connecticut address.

Prosecutors further allege that Lewis knew that the Egyptian coffin parts required assembly.  "Lewis was therefore aware that pieces of the inner coffin and the remaining parts of the coffin set were being shipped in pieces, over an extended time period, because there was some risk attached to their importation."  Federal attorneys describe how Khouli sent an email to Lewis on April 29, 2009: "“i (sic) got the first half of the cut inner coffin the second half is on the way, shall I send it to you or should I wait for the second half and have [a certain person] look at it and have it fixed?” (Gov’t Exh. 6; emphases added). Lewis responded, “[The certain person] needs to put them together, when will the other two coffins arrive?” (Id.; emphasis added)."

Then in May 2009, Alshdaifat allegedly sold Khouli two ancient Egyptian funerary boats and five limestone figures for $40,000, which made their way from Ramadan to Khouli by international mail and then to Lewis. Prosecutors say that Ramadan sent the shipping label, which described the package as "antiques," to both Alshdaifat and Khouli.

The defendants may file a reply to the government's objection.  Meanwhile, Khouli's sentencing hearing is scheduled for next month.

CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com
(c) 2012 Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC

Thứ Bảy, 30 tháng 6, 2012

Notice of Appeal Filed by U.S. Attorney in St. Louis Art Museum (SLAM) Ka Nefer Nefer Mummy Mask Case

One day after the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri denied the government's latest effort to forfeit the Ka Nefer Nefer mummy mask held at the St. Louis Art Museum (SLAM), U.S. Attorney Richard Callahan filed a notice of appeal.

The notice challenges Judge Henry E. Autrey's denial of the government's motion to strike SLAM's claim, the dismissal of the government's verified complaint to forfeit the mask, the denial of the government's motion for reconsideration to reopen the forfeiture case, and the refusal to allow federal attorneys to amend its complaint.

The case now moves to the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com
(c) Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC

Thứ Sáu, 29 tháng 6, 2012

Judge Once Again Dismisses Ka Nefer Nefer Forfeiture Case

U.S. District Court Judge Henry Edward Autrey yesterday denied the government's motion to file a new complaint to forfeit the Ka Nefer Nefer mummy mask from the St. Louis Art Museum (SLAM).  In a brief order, the judge described how he had ruled on the case twice before:

"On March 31, 2012 the Court entered an Order dismissing the Verified Complaint in the instant matter. After allowing The Government an extension of time to file its Motion for Reconsideration, on May 7, 2012, The Government filed a Motion to Reconsider Order and Opinion Dismissing Verified Complaint. In the motion, The Government requested, in the alternative, that the Court grant The Government an additional seven (7) days to move for leave to file an amended complaint before entry of judgment. On June 1, 2012, The Court denied the Government’s Motion for Reconsideration in its entirety. For the reasons outlined in The Court’s March 31, 2012 Order of Dismissal, and for the reasons offered in its Order denying reconsideration, The Court denies The Government’s requested leave raised in its motion submitted on June 8, 2012." (Citations omitted).

The U.S. Attorney's Office must now consider whether to appeal the rulings to the Eight Circuit.

UPDATE: The case will be appealed.

CONTACT: http://www.culturalheritagelawyer.com/
(c) Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC

Thứ Ba, 19 tháng 6, 2012

Eternal Rest Not Coming Soon for Ka Nefer Nefer Mummy Mask as Motions are Once Again Filed in Missouri Forfeiture Case

"This Court has previously denied the Government’s motion for reconsideration of its Order of Dismissal, and this latest filing by the Government amounts to little more than a second motion to reconsider."  That is what lawyers for the St. Louis Art Museum (SLAM) write in their Motion to Strike the Motion of the United States to File First Amended Verified Complaint.  SLAM's latest motion and memorandum to the Missouri federal court in the forfeiture case of United States v. Mask of Ka Nefer Nefer comes on the heels of the government's filing of a new complaint alleging that the mummy mask should be forfeited.

SLAM's lawyers argue that the parties should not have to keep coming back to court to argue an issue that has already been put to rest:

"The Government’s renewed attempt to re-open this case is unsettling. Not only has this Court dismissed this case, this Court has already once denied the Government’s request to reopen this case on the very same bases now reasserted in the Government’s Motion, and effectively denied the Government’s previous requests for leave to amend post-judgment. The Government now asserts that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rules”) grant it limitless attempts to reexamine and to re-open this case until they are successful. The Government’s misinterpretation of these Rules would result in an abuse of procedure, a waste of judicial resources and burden on this Court, and a continued strain on the Claimant Museum’s limited resources."

Attorneys for the government counter in their Memorandum of Opposition that its recent petition asking the court's permission to accept a new forfeiture complaint is timely filed.  They argue:

"The Museum’s Motion to Strike is merely its latest attempt to generate procedural confusion in this case in order to avoid a decision on the merits. In any other setting, one would expect the Museum’s arguments to be presented in the form of a memorandum in opposition to the United States’ Motion for Leave to Amend. Instead, the Museum declined to respond and sought instead to strike the United States’ motion, presumably in the hopes of delaying this Court’s decision on the motion until after July 1, 2012, when the United States’ time to file notice of appeal might arguably run."

The pleadings, published on June 15, are expected to be ruled on by the court.

Hat tip to Gary Nurkin.

CONTACT: http://www.culturalheritagelawyer.com/

Thứ Tư, 13 tháng 6, 2012

Federal Attorneys Test the Waters in Ka Nefer Nefer Case by Submitting New Court Complaint Claiming That Parties "Knew" or Were "Wilfully Blind" to Alleged Fictional Provenance

Following Judge Henry Autrey's order seemingly shutting down the government's renewed effort to forfeit a mummy mask located at the St. Louis Art Museum (SLAM), the eastern district U.S. Attorney's Office has once again filed court papers trying to reopen the case of United States v. Mask of Ka-Nefer-Nefer.  In pleadings dated June 8, federal prosecutors propose both an amended complaint and a request to the court for permission to accept the latest petitions.

The government's motion for permission to accept the new complaint states that "[n]one of the Court’s orders have addressed the United States’s request for time to seek leave to file an amended complaint or indicated that any proposed amendment would be futile. District courts routinely do not terminate a case at the same time that they grant a motion to dismiss; rather, they generally dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice and give the plaintiff at least one opportunity to amend his complaint."  The government therefore submitted a new complaint for the court's consideration.

In the new complaint, the government's attorneys repeat their contention that the Ka Nefer Nefer mask was stolen. But they allege more forcefully and more thoroughly claims that the parties involved either "knew" the mummy mask was stolen, unlawfully exported, or illegally imported, or that they were "willfully blind" to the fact that the mask's "purported provenance was fictional."

Details of the government's allegations can be found by reading the The First Amended Verified Complaint.

CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Bài đăng phổ biến