New York police officers beating protesters with batons to disperse a protest on May 30, 2020 after the killing of George Floyd. Brooklyn, New York. Photo: Mostafa Bassim
This story was produced in partnership with the Garrison Project, an independent, nonpartisan organization addressing the crisis of mass incarceration and policing.
On June 4, 2020, hundreds of protesters marched through the Mott Haven neighborhood of the South Bronx, trailed by a large deployment of NYPD officers. About 50 cops diverted the march using a roadblock off Willis Avenue and then encircled — or “kettled”— people at 136th Street and Brook Avenue. The cops were joined by body-armor-wearing bicycle officers from the Strategic Response Group, the NYPD’s 700-strong squad formed in 2015 by former commissioner Bill Bratton and trained for both protest suppression and anti-terrorism patrols.
According to a lawsuit, Julian Phillips, who was in the crowd that day, heard a recorded announcement played over a loudspeaker claiming the demonstrators were in violation of an 8 p.m. curfew, though police had blocked them from dispersing. As the clock drew closer to eight, Phillips locked eyes with an officer in a white shirt — an NYPD supervisor — who, Phillips claimed, grinned at him and pointed to his watch. Within minutes, the cops waded into the crowd with batons flailing, indiscriminately dousing the trapped demonstrators with pepper spray. Phillips saw one officer use his riot shield to slam protesters to the ground before Phillips himself was dragged down by a crush of people, then pinned and arrested by multiple cops, one of whom he says repeatedly kneed him in the head.
In the wake of George Floyd’s murder that feverish summer, the NYPD responded to days of widespread protests with a prolonged campaign of aggression. Then–Police Commissioner Dermot Shea commended officers for doing a “phenomenal job,” and Mayor Bill de Blasio backed him up, blaming any violence in the demonstrations on a “substantial number of out-of-towners” — a phrase that harks back to the “outside agitator” infamously invoked by southern law enforcement during the 1960s to describe civil-rights protesters. But cell-phone videos and news broadcasts showed a police force out of control — one that turned to belligerent, often violent tactics against peaceful demonstrators in places like the South Bronx and downtown Brooklyn yet failed to stop the looting of business districts in lower Manhattan and the West Bronx.
The brutality on display two years ago is quickly receding into the historical memory. But a complex tangle of 2020-related litigation continues to wind its way through the courts with possibly enormous consequences for the NYPD’s handling of protests in the city going forward. In the future, it may not be police commanders who oversee the force’s response to demonstrations but a federal court. The intense unfolding legal battle illustrates why previous attempts have failed to transform the way cops deal with free speech and protest in New York City and the lengths to which the city will go to maintain the status quo.
New York City had seen well-publicized incidents of police brutality toward protesters many times: in 1988, 1992, 2003, 2004, and 2011, to name a few recent examples. But the NYPD’s behavior in May and June 2020 was uniquely violent. On May 28, a throng of cops battered dozens of protesters in Union Square; some officers body-slammed people with their mountain bikes. The next evening, chaos erupted in Brooklyn, first at the Barclays Center and then into the surrounding neighborhoods of Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, and Park Slope. An even larger crowd — enraged not only by the nine-minute video of Floyd’s murder but by footage of the NYPD’s suppression of the previous day’s demonstration — fought back against the cops, shrugging off pepper spray, brawling with officers, and torching police vehicles. That clash kicked off a tumultuous week of mass marches, skirmishes, thousands of arrests, and a citywide nighttime curfew.
In September 2020, Human Rights Watch issued a report concluding that “police conduct during the Mott Haven protest on June 4 amounts to serious violations of international human-rights law which the federal, state, and local governments are obligated to observe.” The brutality in Mott Haven was so extreme — cops even attacked medical workers in their scrubs and people acting as volunteer legal observers for the National Lawyers Guild — that the New York City Bar Association excoriated the NYPD. That October, New York Civil Liberties Union legal director Chris Dunn described the NYPD’s conduct in the summer protests as the most egregious example of police violence since the 1988 Tompkins Square Park riots.
To longtime NYPD observers, the response to the Floyd protests represents the culmination of its decades-long pattern of suppressing protests, often with the precision of military operations. Columbia University law professor Jeffrey Fagan, an influential expert on policing, crime, oversight, and gun control, labeled Terry Monahan, the NYPD’s former chief of department, as the “architect” of such policies, noting that Monahan was also a key player in policing the 2004 Republican National Convention. (The City reported that when Monahan retired in 2021, he received a $235,635 lump-sum payment along with his pension, the highest retirement payout ever recorded.)
“All of this — Critical Mass, Occupy, the RNC — they were building up the technology and strategic plan for how to disrupt legitimate protest,” Fagan said. Monahan declined a request for comment, citing ongoing litigation. “I look forward to testifying,” he wrote in an email.
Now, the city’s legal bill is coming due. At least 750 complaints were made to the Civilian Complaint Review Board regarding NYPD conduct during the Floyd demonstrations, leading to 321 official investigations. The agency has found merit in almost 40 percent of all cases investigated to date — the average usually ranges from 10 to 15 percent — against 145 officers. Of the 44 CCRB cases finalized by the NYPD, 18 cops have been found guilty of misconduct as of mid-May, the last time the oversight agency released data about protest-related disciplinary cases.
Several federal civil-rights lawsuits brought by protesters allegedly victimized by the NYPD have been consolidated for discovery purposes into a massive docket called “New York City Policing During Summer 2020 Demonstrations” in front of Southern District of New York judge Colleen McMahon and magistrate judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein. The city still faces an avalanche of tort claims and lawsuits stemming from the 2020 protests — more than 550 have been filed, according to a report from the city comptroller’s office. Since civil suits seldom figure into the NYPD’s internal-discipline system and the evaluations or promotions of officers, the end result of these legal actions will most likely be taxpayer-funded settlements for the plaintiffs.
Probably the most significant legal battle the city faces is an ongoing lawsuit from New York attorney general Letitia James, who in January 2021 filed suit seeking the imposition of court oversight to correct a pattern of suppressing protests that she maintains goes back decades. Echoing the observations of Fagan and other longtime NYPD observers, James’s complaint encompasses the NYPD’s response to Occupy Wall Street in 2011, the protests against the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City, and the antiwar movement of the early aughts. “There is no question that the NYPD engaged in a pattern of excessive, brutal, and unlawful force against peaceful protesters,” James said on January 14, 2021.
James’s suit tallies more than 50 instances of blunt strikes, over 30 occasions of unlawful pepper-spray deployment by NYPD officers, and the use of “unreasonable” force against demonstrators in at least 75 examples over the course of the protests. Other instances of alleged police violence in the complaint include conduct during trans-led marches, election-related gatherings, and a dispute involving tenant advocates at a real-estate attorney’s office in downtown Brooklyn that led to 19 protesters being encircled and arrested. A spokesperson for James declined to comment, citing the ongoing litigation.
In an email statement, the NYPD denied allegations that it has systematically abrogated the First Amendment right to protest over the past 20 years. “There is absolutely no pattern or practice of this Department suppressing lawful protests, making illegal arrests, or using excessive force. In fact, it’s the opposite,” the statement read.
Court oversight of New York City’s policing of protests would represent a sea change. As in other cities, oversight could be imposed through a consent decree, which would bind the NYPD to a set of agreed-upon terms ensuring its policing practices are in line with constitutional standards. Practically, it would mean a team of court-appointed monitors — typically a mix of academics, attorneys, former law enforcement, and other policing experts — who would closely evaluate police tactics and training methods for dealing with protesters, submitting their findings to the court on a quarterly or semi-annual basis with the purpose of evaluating the department’s progress. If the NYPD does not make the requisite policy changes or engages in future brutality or civil-rights violations against demonstrators, the AG could go back to the supervising federal judge and make the case that the department is in violation of the decree. The judge could then impose monetary sanctions, remove key personnel from their posts, or force through the reforms.
Consent decrees are typically imposed for five years but can be extended if the presiding judge determines a city’s police force has not made enough progress in changing its ways. (The longest-running consent decree is in Oakland, California, which has been under court oversight since 2003.)
Court oversight of the NYPD’s protest policing would not be the first such measure imposed on the country’s largest police department. Two other consent decrees and orders stemming from federal civil litigation already govern its post-9/11 intelligence-gathering practices and street stops by officers. Another possible consent decree could result from a recently announced U.S. Department of Justice investigation into a pattern and practice of gender-biased, ineffective casework by the Special Victims Division, the NYPD’s troubledsex-crimes unit.
Almost inevitably, police departments and police-friendly mayors chafe at consent decrees, which affirm that a law-enforcement agency is out of control and cannot be run effectively or lawfully by the local government. The New York City Law Department has played a significant but underreported role in shielding the NYPD from meaningful consequences: Under de Blasio, the agency increased staffing to allocate lawyers to NYPD-related lawsuits, with a goal of reducing settlement payouts to victims of police misconduct. In 2021, the city paid $206.7 million in settlements and judgments of police-related litigation. But the biggest obstacle to court-ordered reform is city lawyers’ talent for endlessly delaying the proceedings. Neither the consolidated federal civil-rights cases nor James’s lawsuit will likely be resolved swiftly; New York City attorneys, the NYCLU, the attorney general, and plaintiffs’ attorneys have been locked in discovery disputes that have dragged on for months. On several occasions, Judge Gorenstein has imposed financial sanctions against city lawyers for sandbagging the production of relevant NYPD documentation.
For much of the legal process, “the city has blown through deadlines to comply with discovery requests,” said Molly Biklen, the deputy legal director for the NYCLU, who is counsel on Payne v. City of New York et al., a lawsuit filed by 11 plaintiffs who claimed their civil rights were violated in numerous ways by NYPD officers during the 2020 demonstrations, including getting struck with batons and having a phone “forcefully knocked” out their hands. Bizarrely, at one point last summer, discovery in protest-related suits was delayed by a still-unattributed hacking attempt targeting the Law Department. But on July 28 of this year, plaintiffs’ attorneys in the consolidated George Floyd federal lawsuit submitted yet another request to a federal judge for sanctions against the city, alleging its attorneys have “slow-walked discovery and taken maximally recalcitrant positions without justification.”
City lawyers have resisted turning over the documentation, including a draft of an internal after-action report, because it purportedly was informational in nature and didn’t result in final discipline. Critically for the plaintiffs, the draft report includes an extensive examination of NYPD intelligence reports, interviews with officers, and other materials the city has refused to divulge. And the July 28 filing includes dozens of stills from body-camera footage of as-yet-unidentified officers who engaged in excessive force during the Floyd protests and other requests for identification. In one incident, the July filing seeks information to “identify Doe Officer who stepped on” plaintiff Oscar Rios’s “face, breaking his eyeglasses, and told Mr. Rios, in sum and substance, to ‘Shut the fuck up,’ after Mr. Rios expressed that he was struggling to breathe with his face pressed into the ground.”
On September 1, plaintiffs’ attorney J. Remy Green filed a motion accusing the Law Department of unnecessarily designating records as confidential, including email-signature images and “a bizarre pro-police song sent in by a citizen.” More alarmingly, Green’s motion accused city lawyers of including “hundreds, if not thousands, of blank or junk documents Defendants have marked as confidential” in discovery filings. The city’s pitched battles over discovery mean that a mountain of civil-rights complaints against the NYPD will likely drag on through at least 2023, though the docket shows there have been several mediation conferences between the parties during the last half of September.
So far, Floyd-related settlements have been sparse and small: On July 21, 12 volunteer legal observers with the National Lawyers Guild settled their suit against the city for $49,012 over their treatment by cops in Mott Haven. A number of observers were arrested that day under orders from NYPD Legal Bureau sergeant Kenneth Matthew Rice, who escaped discipline after an NYPD senior legal official, Oleg Chernyavsky, intervened in his case last December.
Sometimes, city lawyers have gone beyond mere stonewalling. In early May, Hell Gate reported that the city’s lead attorney, Dara Weiss, told Judge Gorenstein she had responded by email to a request for discovery in the consolidated protest suit concerning a racist video sent by former Sergeants Benevolent Association president Ed Mullins in 2019. But a forensic expert hired by the plaintiffs’ attorneys alleged that a PDF printout of an email Weiss said she had sent was a fake. “It is highly unlikely that the PDF was printed from a native email,” the expert wrote. According to Hell Gate, Weiss had already been sanctioned five times for failing to disclose evidence relating to the Floyd protests, and the city fired her after the email dispute. (In a May statement to the Times, Weiss said she had made an “unintentional mistake.”) Judge Gorenstein ordered the city to determine whether any of its employees were aware of other misrepresentations made to the court or the plaintiffs’ attorneys. On May 10, he ruled that the plaintiffs’ attorneys should be awarded attorneys fees in part for the work they undertook in surfacing the misrepresentation by Weiss.
“The NYPD and the city owe it to the people of New York to undertake an honest and transparent assessment of their failures during the 2020 protests and thereafter,” said Miriam Krinsky, a former federal prosecutor and the executive director of Fair and Just Prosecution. “That assessment necessarily must include looking at the actions of government lawyers and, if misconduct occurred, not simply addressing accountability but also looking at the systemic failures that allowed those acts to occur and what corrective action is needed.”
The Law Department has defended its conduct and claims Weiss’s termination shows the city’s commitment to complying with the discovery process. City lawyers described the plaintiffs’ broadsides against the city’s obstruction as mischaracterizations.
So far, the aftermath of the summer 2020 protests looks all too familiar: after-action reviews, investigative reports from external organizations, millions of dollars in legal settlements, and loud calls for reform that have largely gone ignored.
On a systemic level, almost nothing has changed in the past two years. No NYPD officers have been fired as a result of their conduct, and commanders who allegedly participated in or turned a blind eye to violence by subordinates have been promoted: Deputy Inspector Craig Edelman, who was in charge of Brooklyn’s 73rd Precinct when one of his subordinates pushed 21 year-old Dounya Zayer to the ground on the night of May 29 as he watched, was given the No. 2 job at the citywide Gun Violence Suppression Division.
Nearly two dozen officers found to have committed misconduct during the Floyd protests have received no discipline from Commissioner Keechant Sewell and her predecessor, Shea, despite substantiated CCRB charges. These include Captain Tarik Sheppard, who allegedly shoved a woman to the ground at a June 3 demonstration in Brooklyn’s Cadman Plaza, then ordered the arrest of Ernesto Lopez, who was manhandled and detained by other officers, according to a suit Lopez filed in May 2021. The CCRB sustained allegations of unwarranted force against Captain Sheppard and recommended charges, but his case was retained by Commissioner Shea and no discipline resulted.
The NYPD declined to comment on allegations against individual officers.
Earlier this month, a Bronx lieutenant who was photographed flailing his baton at demonstrators in the 2020 Mott Haven kettle retired after 20 years, avoiding discipline for his conduct toward BLM protesters and complainants in other incidents. The City reported that, at the time of his retirement, Lieutenant Eric Dym faced 29 charges brought by the CCRB, including four instances of pointing a gun at someone and one case of making a false official statement; the latter alone carries a penalty of termination. According to the CCRB database, Dym also had seven substantiated allegations of the use of improper physical force. Almost all of these took place between 2018 and June 2020, a period that includes the Mott Haven kettle.
Several interlocking dynamics help explain why the NYPD has been unable to change its ways from within. Inside the department, an insular, us-vs.-them worldview predominates. The force’s archconservative, heavily white command structure, which some have labeled the “Irish Mafia,” tends to perceive any attempt at outside oversight — from the CCRB, from local electeds, from the feds — as meddling. There are widespread perceptions that the disciplinary system is biased against lower-ranking officers, with supervisors seldom receiving meaningful penalties for their conduct, and the severity of discipline allegedly varies sharply according to racial background.
Criminal-legal-system veterans say the NYPD’s internal disciplinary system has been politicized and weakened to the point where an officer’s fate is often determined by rank and political connections. Arnie Kriss, a former Brooklyn assistant district attorney who ran the NYPD’s trial room as a deputy commissioner under Mayor Ed Koch, also cited the breakdown of an effective administrative system under the purview of the past four police commissioners — Ray Kelly, Bratton, James O’Neill, and Shea. Pointing to a 2019 independent report on the NYPD’s disciplinary process, Kriss noted this disciplinary system has become susceptible to outside parties lobbying the commissioner and other key department officials over specific case outcomes, thus weakening the integrity of the process. In the 2019 case of Officer Daniel Pantaleo, who was ultimately fired for fatally choking Eric Garner in 2014, the PBA reportedly negotiated a deal with then-Commissioner O’Neill and Chief of Department Monahan that would let Pantaleo retire and keep his pension. O’Neill later reneged on that agreement under pressure from de Blasio. “The report found there was interference from outside the police commissioner’s office: people coming in, talking to the police commissioner about specific cases,” Kriss said. While the deputy commissioner of trials can make recommendations about potential discipline, the final determinations ultimately lie with the commissioner, who can, and has, overturned sustained findings of culpability by officers and supervisors.
The disciplinary system’s dysfunction has been evident even in the highest-profile cases. Eight years after Garner’s killing, several cops involved in it still haven’t faced any disciplinary action. They include Justin D’Amico, Officer Pantaleo’s partner, who wrote up false charges after Garner’s arrest presumably to make it look more justified. In September, Garner’s mother, Gwen Carr, called for D’Amico and other cops involved in her son’s death to be fired. She’s fighting for the release of CCRB and NYPD files from 2014.
“The police cannot police themselves — we have seen the NYPD repeatedly fail to learn the lessons of years of abuses and unconstitutional policing of protests,” said Biklen, the NYCLU attorney. She said that consent decrees could lead to better outcomes and that if the city’s violations are egregious enough, there could be different consequences. In other cities, monitorships have intervened directly to hold supervisors to account, choosing which officers to promote and demote. Contretemps between court monitors and law-enforcement agencies under consent decrees are relatively frequent and a major reason that municipalities dread court intervention in the minutiae of running a police department.
There is also a reluctance among city politicians to attempt to overhaul the department for fear of being tarred as anti-cop or pro-criminal by the police unions and the NYPD’s allies in the media and in the city’s business lobby.
The track record of New York City’s political class over the past three decades lends little room for optimism. Since the 1992 Mollen Commission convened to examine systemic narcotics-related corruption in the NYPD, successive generations of mayors, councilmembers, state legislators, and attorneys general have watched the cost of NYPD-related legal settlements spiral upward as the department’s internal disciplinary system ossified. Even de Blasio, whose election in 2013 was due in large part to a yearslong campaign against Kelly’s and Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s stop and frisk regime (which resulted in the most recent of the NYPD’s court-oversight rulings), immediately distanced himself from revamping NYPD culture by appointing Bratton, the godfather of zero-tolerance tactics, as his police commissioner and engineering a 1,300-officer expansion of the department, largely via the creation of the SRG and the Critical Response Command. De Blasio’s subjugation to the NYPD was complete by the winter of 2014, when scores of police incensed over his critical remarks about the non-indictment of Officer Pantaleo for Garner’s murder turned their backs on the mayor at the funeral of two cops who had been killed by a Baltimore man.
De Blasio’s successor, Mayor Eric Adams, has been quiet on the fallout from the 2020 protests but has repeatedly called for the public to get behind the NYPD. Meanwhile, the department’s internal-discipline system continues to let cops skate for protest-related misconduct. New York City’s independent police watchdog has also shown serious deficiencies under the Adams administration: The CCRB’s investigations now take almost 600 days to complete, up from 378 days in 2021, according to data released this month in the annual Mayor’s Management Report. (The mayor’s office did not respond to requests for comment.) Fagan cautioned that even if court oversight is a positive step, it’s far from a cure-all. “There’s an institutionalist bias on the part of the judges who’d be implementing reforms: They tend to see problems and data in a light that’s most favorable to the NYPD,” he said. “In the city’s academic and policy circles, there’s not a lot of critical thinking.”
Fagan maintains that the NYPD has for too long been insulated against broad change by politicians and the city’s unelected power brokers. “It’s a huge agency with anywhere from 20,000 to 38,000 members, depending on the year,” he said. “It’s a big ship and a complicated bureaucracy, and that makes reforms really hard to stick. There has got to be sustained commitment from electeds as well. They don’t get to pass the buck to the courts.” Fagan noted that yet another option could eventually be to ask the court to place the NYPD under a formal receiver, who would effectively run the agency to ensure comprehensive reform and prevent future civil-rights violations. Of the existing court orders, the NYPD’s failure to overhaul its stop and frisk policies over nine years of monitoring could represent the clearest case for a receivership. Needless to say, this is the legal equivalent of the nuclear option.
But until that reality arrives, reformers will work with what they’ve got. A consent decree won’t solve the systemic problems that have led to so many unnecessary crackdowns on legitimate protest, but Attorney General James has taken the most concrete action of any elected official since the 1990s toward establishing external oversight on the NYPD. If she gets her way, it would mark real progress — and stand as the best hope for avoiding a violent repeat of summer 2020.
Kraken Coughs Up $362,158 to OFAC to Settle Iran Sanctions Violations
59 mins ago
December 9, 2022
Cryptocurrency companies are in trouble. Regulators are bearing down on crypto companies with the Eye of Sauron – pulling the crypto companies into their jurisdiction, prosecuting fraud cases, and aggressively prosecuting companies for sanctions and anti-money laundering violations. One by one you can bet that crypto companies will be in the enforcement headlines. As they fall, policy makers can point to their continuing excesses as the basis for robust regulation.
Crypto companies, however, appear to be ignoring these trends somehow believing they will escape the enforcement knife. With all of the scandals piling up, investors are losing more money and complaints from investors will ultimately result in a comprehensive regulated framework. The only real question remaining is how quickly this regulatory regime will take to be implemented and how broad a scope will be imposed.
Kraken failed to implement basic compliance tools, including an automated internet protocol (IP) address blocking system. As a result, Kraken exported services to users who appeared to be in Iran when they completed virtual currency transactions. Kraken voluntarily disclosed the conduct to OFAC.
Kraken began operations in 2011 and initiated public trading in 2013. Users can buy, sell, trade or hold cryptocurrencies, and trade fiat currency for cryptocurrencies. Kraken maintained an AML and sanctions compliance program, which included basic screening of customers when onboarded and daily thereafter, as well as review of IP address information generated at the time of onboarding. Notwithstanding these controls, between October 2015 and June 2019, Kraken mistakenly processed 826 transactions, totaling $1,680,577 on behalf of individuals who appeared to be located in Iran at the time of the transactions.
Kraken had a large gap in its screening regime – they screen a customer when onboarded but they did not implement IP address blocking on transactional activity involving existing customers.
Kraken’s IP address data revealed that customers who set up accounts outside of sanctioned jurisdictions appear to have accessed their accounts and conducted transactions later from a sanctioned jurisdiction.
After identifying the problem, Kraken implemented automated blocking for IP addresses linked to sanctioned jurisdictions. To further its compliance efforts, Kraken also implemented multiple blockchain analytics tools to enhance its monitoring program.
As noted in its penalty calculations section, Kraken was credited for voluntarily disclosing the matter, and for agreeing to invest an additional $100,000 in its compliance program, including training and technical enhancements to improve sanctions screening.
OFAC stated that Kraken failed to exercise due caution or care for its sanctions compliance obligations, when knowing that its customer base was global, it limited its geolocation controls to the onboarding of customers and failed to apply these controls to subsequent transactions. Such a failure was compounded by the fact that Kraken had reason to know based on its IP address data that transactions were being conducted from Iran.
Kraken fully cooperated with the OFAC investigation of this matter and implemented significant remediation, including: (a) adding geolocation blocking to prevent clients in prohibited locations from accessing their accounts on Kraken’s website; (b) implementing multiple blockchain analysis tools to assist with sanctions monitoring; (c) investing in additional compliance-related training for its staff, including in blockchain analytics; (d) hiring a dedicated head of sanctions to direct Kraken’s sanctions compliance program, in addition to hiring new sanctions compliance staff; (e) expanding its contract with its current screening provider to add additional screening capabilities to ensure compliance with OFAC’s “50 Percent Rule,” including detailed reports on beneficial ownership; (f) contracting with a vendor that assists with identification and nationality verification by using artificial intelligence tools to detect potential issues with supporting credentials provided by users; and (g) implementing an automated control to block accounts using cities and postal codes associated with the Crimea region and in the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics of Ukraine.
OFAC noted that under its Sanctions Compliance Guidance for the Virtual Currency Industry, OFAC strongly encourages a risk-based approach to sanctions compliance. An adequate sanctions compliance program for cryptocurrency companies will depend on a variety of factors, including the type of business involved, its size and sophistication, products and services offered, customers and counterparties, and geographic locations served. It also should be predicated on and incorporate at least five essential components: (1) management commitment; (2) risk assessment; (3) internal controls; (4) testing and auditing; and (5) training.
OFAC stated that this enforcement action underscored the importance of using geolocation tools, including IP blocking and other location verification tools, to identify and prevent users located in sanctioned jurisdictions from engaging in prohibited virtual currency-related transactions. In particular, OFAC noted that limiting the use of such controls only to the time of account opening — and not throughout the lifetime of the account or with respect to subsequent transactions — could present sanctions risks to virtual currency-related companies. This case also demonstrates the value of a company implementing robust remedial measures after becoming aware of a potential sanctions issue, including the deployment of blockchain analysis tools and compliance-related training on blockchain analytics, as well as committing to future sanctions compliance investments.
Eric Adams faces accusations of corruption as he uses city hall lawyer to fight rat infestation case
2 hours ago
December 9, 2022
Embattled New York City Mayor Eric Adams is facing a new scandal after it emerged that he used a City Hall lawyer to fight a private summons over a rat infestation at his former home in the Bed-Stuy section of Brooklyn.
According to a new report from the New York Times, Adams enlisted deputy chief counsel in the mayor’s office, Rahul Agarwal, to handle the summons.
Adams’ record showed an unpaid summons penalty for $330 that he received in May – after it was found that the residence he owns along Lafayette Avenue is flooded with the rodents. In September, Agarwal filed a motion to vacate the summons, an official in the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings told the Times.
The mayor repeatedly failed to appear before the tribunal. Agarwal argued that Adams only found out about the summons in September because he now lives at the mayoral residence at Gracie Mansion on the Upper East Side.
On Tuesday, Adams finally appeared at a virtual hearing and stressed that he has taken steps to read his former residence of the rats. The panel will take 30 days to render a verdict.
The mayor’s hatred of rodents is famous. During his time as Brooklyn Borough President, Adams endorsed and demonstrated an elaborate rat drowning device that required users to scoop dead rodents out of a vat.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams has been outspoken in his hatred of rats and his wish to rid the Big Apple of the rodents
Deputy Chief Counsel Rahul Agarwal has been working in City Hall since January 2022 having previously worked at the United States Attorney’s Office in New Jersey
Adams’ home is seen on Lafayette Street in Bed-Stuy, Brooklyn. During his run for mayor, Adams said that lives in the basement and rents out the other two floors
When Adams failed to appear at a hearing in November, Agarwal argued that his absence was due to scheduling conflicts. Bizarrely during that appearance, Agarwal told a tribunal: ‘I am not actually appearing officially on his behalf.’
One of Adams’ spokespeople, Fabian Levy, did not address Adams’ use of a city hall lawyer in the case but said that it had been the mayor’s plan to represent himself in the hearing.
Levy told the New York Times: ‘[Adams] spent thousands of dollars to remediate an infestation at his residence in Brooklyn earlier this year, and was happy to appear before OATH today to state as much.’
The Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings is referred to as being an independent body tasked with investigating internal affairs in the New York City’s government.
The commissioner of the body, Asim Rehman, was personally appointed by Adams in March.
Adams shows the rat traps as he and announces the results of a pilot program aimed at curbing the rat population around Brooklyn in 2019
The Ekomille rat trap being displayed in 2019, Adams received huge criticism for his promotion of the supposedly inhumane device
Adams watching a demonstration of the Ekomille rat trap in action
In 2019, Adams annoyed animal rights activists — and upset the stomachs of some journalists — by demonstrating a trap that used a bucket filled with a vinegary, toxic soup to drown rats lured by the scent of food.
More recently, this past May, Adams announced the city’s latest effort: padlocked curbside trash bins intended to reduce the big piles of garbage bags that turn into a buffet for rodents.
‘You’re tired of the rodents, you’re tired of the smell, you’re tired of seeing food, waste and spillage,’ the mayor said.
Rats not only strike fear among the easily squeamish, they can also be a public health concern.
Last year, at least 13 people were hospitalized — one died — because of leptospirosis, a condition that attacks the kidneys and liver. Most human infections are associated with rats.
Bernard Adams, right, brother of New York mayor Eric Adams, mingles with supporters at his brother’s election night party, June 22, 2021, in New York
Adams and his girlfriend Tracey Collins attend the victory of Serena Williams of USA on Day 1 of the US Open 2022
The use of a government lawyer for a personal case is the latest in a line scandals plaguing Adams’ office.
Just two months ago, New York City Schools Chancellor David Banks promoted first-girlfriend Tracey Collins to a top job at the Department of Education several months after Adams hired Banks’ girlfriend as a deputy mayor.
The New York Post reported that Banks named Tracey Collins – longtime partner to Adams – to the role of ‘senior advisor to the deputy chancellor of school leadership.’ Her new role began in July and came with a massive 23% raise, bumping her public salary up to $221,597.
Last December, Adams made Sheena Wright – Banks’ girlfriend – a deputy mayor. She pulls in $251,982, based on what NYC deputy mayors made in fiscal year 2021.
While in January, Adams backed off plans for a $210,000-a-year, city-paid security job for his brother, Bernard, who will now volunteer instead as an advisor.
The retired New York Police Department sergeant now makes $1 a year, so he can officially be a city employee.
‘It was never about the money. My brother wants to be here with his brother, and when it comes down to personal security, you know, what is more important than to have someone you trust?’ the mayor told Spectrum News NY1 at the time. ‘I’m blessed to be able to have my brother.’
The mayor previously said he hated nothing more than rats. He is currently searching for someone to handle the city’s rat infestation
The mayor declared a war on city rats last week when he posted a job searching for what he called the Big Apples ‘Rat Czar,’ more formally known as Citywide Director of Rodent Mitigation.
‘There’s nothing I hate more than rats,’ he said last week while advertising the new job posting.
This comes after Jessica Tisch, Department of Sanitation’s commissioner, sensationally said last month: ‘The rats don’t run this city, we do.’
Adams appeared to be tackling his rat issues by putting rat traps around his home, photos obtained by New York Daily News showed.
Bags of trash also sat in front of his home outside of two filled garbage cans – which may not have helped his growing rat issue.
The mayor’s Brooklyn neighborhood is known to have rat issues and has been treating the problems with the help of the Department of Health.
While Adams is set to appear in court next week, he has ‘spent thousands of dollars to remediate [the] infestation at his residence in Brooklyn earlier this year,’ a spokesperson for the mayor told the Daily News.
But records showed that Adams failed to address the infestation.
Adams’ Brooklyn neighbors said rats are a massive issue on the block due to trash bags on the streets and construction.
‘Every night you’re dodging rats,’ Meredith Rogers said.
The mayor said he lives in the basement of the property with his son and rents out the upper levels.
At the time, Adams was the president of the borough of Brooklyn. He staged a press conference, beside his son, Jordan, 25, to insist that he did live in the property
Adams is seeking to pay a rat hunter more than $120,000 to help rid of the rodents in the city
Adam’s home serves as a partial rental property. The mayor previously failed to list his home as a rental and critics have accused him of actually living in New Jersey with his girlfriend Tracey Collins.
He previously debunked the claims last year – before he became mayor – when he took reporters into his Brooklyn home and showed them his scruffily-made bed and creaking floors.
The mayor said he lived in the basement and rents out the floors above to pay for his son Jordan’s college fees.
Adams is registered to vote on the first floor, yet a tenant who has lived there for years is listed under the same unit in multiple documents obtained by Politico last year.
His neighbors also previously said they didn’t know Adam’s lived on their block.
Adam’s rat issue extends outside of his home and into the streets of New York. Last week, he launched his job search for a rodent mitigation specialist.
The job, which pays between $120,000 to $170,000, is being listed for anyone with a background in urban planning, project management, or government work, but it seems the Democratic mayor wants someone with a flair for the position.
A city councilmember told CBS that the city has had a 71 percent increase in rat sightings since 2020.
Adams invited reporters to tour his basement home in Brooklyn last year, in a bid to prove that he actually lived in the city – rather than in New Jersey
Adams appears to be fighting rats in his own home and throughout the city. Pictured: a rat in the subway
Adams held a press conference in October where he said that ‘fighting rats’ was up there with crime and inequality as what he was focused on in his attempt to make New York a livable city.
The rat hunting job description explained the job as doing ‘the impossible’ in stopping the city’s rats.
It also suggests you have a: ‘swashbuckling attitude, crafty humor and general aura of badassery.’ A knowledge of PowerPoint is also necessary.
There’s a dark side to the position, however, as it says that you’ll need ‘stamina and stagecraft’ and that ‘the ideal candidate is highly motivated and somewhat bloodthirsty.’
The posting notes: ‘Despite their successful public engagement strategy and cheeky social media presence, rats are not our friends. Rodents spread disease, damage homes and wiring and even attempt to control the movements of kitchen staffers in an effort to take over human jobs.’
This is perhaps a reference to a time when rats are seen chowing down on everything from pizza, and bagels to the salad that went viral online.
The first rodent to take social media by storm for its larger-than-life appetite was Pizza Rat.
In September 2015, New Yorkers were amazed when footage emerged of it carrying an entire large slice of pizza down the steps of a subway station.
Despite the slice being bigger than it, the rat managed to drag it down several stairs before it was forced to admit defeat.
Who Is Viktor Bout, the ‘Merchant of Death’ Arms Dealer Biden Traded to Russia For Brittney Griner?
3 hours ago
December 9, 2022
President Joe Biden on Thursday traded Viktor Bout, the notorious international arms dealer known as the “Merchant of Death,” to Russia for U.S. basketball player Brittney Griner, who was arrested at a Moscow airport earlier this year with cannabis oil in her luggage.
But how exactly did Bout earn his nickname?
A former Soviet military translator, Bout supplied arms for deadly conflicts around the world by using his air cargo companies to smuggle weapons from Eastern Europe to Africa and the Middle East in the 1990s and early 2000s. Bout allegedly delivered surface-to-air missiles to Kenya for an attack on an Israeli airliner in 2002. And four years later, Bout reportedly met with Islamic terrorist organization Hezbollah prior to the Lebanon war. The “Merchant of Death” also had a “considerable commercial presence in Libya” during former leader Muammar Qaddafi’s reign, according to intelligence records found in the country in 2011.
U.S. officials under the Bush administration captured Bout during a 2008 sting operation in Bangkok, where the arms dealer believed he was meeting with Colombian narco-terrorist group FARC to secure the sale of 100 surface-to-air missiles and rocket launchers. Bout was extradited from Thailand to the United States in 2010 on terrorism charges including conspiracy to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization, conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals, and conspiracy to kill U.S. officials. A U.S. jury sentenced Bout to 25 years in prison in Manhattan in 2011.
While Biden agreed to swap Griner for Bout in a deal announced Thursday morning, the Democrat did not secure the release of Paul Whelan, a former U.S. Marine whom Russia convicted in June 2020 on espionage charges that American officials have called manufactured. Russia did not agree to include Whelan in the deal, according to the New York Times, leaving Biden to agree to a “one-for-one swap.”