Simels on US$3.5M bail
The stunning arrest and arraignment of his lead counsel for witness tampering may cause the start of the Roger Khan drug trial in New York to be pushed back and the prosecution has also asked Justice Dora L. Irizarry to schedule a status conference soon.
On Wednesday, Khan’s lead attorney, Robert M Simels, and his assistant, Arienne Irving, were hauled before the courts and charged with conspiracy to tamper with witnesses relating to the drug trial. Simels has since been placed on US$3.5 million bail while his assistant was granted US$500,000 bail. Both face 10 years in prison if convicted.
Khan, who is also named as a defendant in the 18-page indictment, is also expected to appear in court on a similar charge. Simels’ dealings in the matter involve an alleged US$1,000 payout and discussions about “eliminating and neutralizing” witnesses. He and his assistant allegedly had numerous discussions with someone over a US government informant, to locate certain individuals close to the case and to get them to rescind statements, not testify against Khan, and or even to be “eliminated”.
In an earlier ruling allowing for an anonymous jury for the drug trial, Justice Irizarry had pointed out that the government’s confidential sources had indicated that Khan would not hesitate to order the killing of anyone he believed was aiding the US government in investigating and prosecuting him and his alleged criminal organisation. US government sources had further alleged that Khan ordered the murder of one of his alleged narcotics associates, whom he believed was cooperating with the government.
Justice Irizarry had also pointed out that the court had to issue an order prohibiting Khan’s lawyers from making statements to the press to protect cooperating witnesses.
Meanwhile, yesterday, another lawyer for Khan, Diarmuid White, in a letter to the judge requested that motions by Khan, which were due to be heard today, be stayed until further notice, in the light of Simels’ arrest.
“The arrests throw into uncertainty the questions of Khan’s future legal representation and the trial schedule. In addition Mr Simels’ office was searched in connection with the arrests and all his computers and files were seized…,” the letter said.
Prosecutor Benton Campbell also wrote to the judge yesterday seeking a status conference on the issue following the arrest of Simels and his assistant.
“There continues to be a firewall between the Assistant United States Attorneys handling the [Roger Khan prosecution] and those handling the obstruction of justice investigation. While the prosecution team in [the Roger Khan case] is walled off from the obstruction case, it is clear that a status conference is needed to address defence counsel’s conflict of interest and other issues arising from defence counsel’s arrest,” Campbell’s letter said.
Vigorous
Simels, who obtained his law degree from New York Law School, was reportedly caught on a federal wiretap discussing with a US government source how to locate witnesses against Khan.
“We intend to mount a vigorous defence,” Simels’ lawyer, Gerald L. Shargel, told the media on Wednesday. “It’s easy for prosecutors to make an accusation, but it’s quite another thing for them to prove it.
“Anyone that’s arrested on serious federal charges is concerned; he’s no different, but he’s a strong guy,” Shargel said of his client. “He’s been around that courthouse for 30, 40 years. Everyone who knows Bob knows that he’s a highly skilled and highly competent and very aggressive defence attorney. He’s not a criminal.”
According to Simels’ website, while he worked as special assistant attorney general for the New York State Special Prosecutor’s Office, he investigated corruption by public officials.
The website lists Khan’s case under “Other celebrated Defence Cases” and described his client as a “prominent Guyanese businessman and community leader whose removal by federal law enforcement authorities to the United States we are currently vigorously challenging.”
Simels also says on his website: “I have led my legendary law firm for more than 30 years, encompassing Criminal and Civil Law. My accessibility to my clients, innovative thinking, devotion to work ethics, and thorough preparation have produced an unprecedented record of litigation success across the entire United States. Working with experts, private investigators, and legal colleagues, I have established a reputation that led one federal judge to call me the Rolls Royce of litigators.”
Federal investigators disagreed. Using evidence gathered during a five-month investigation that began in May they painted the picture of a man who they said was knee-deep in the workings of the criminal underworld — one willing to aid in acts of violence, perhaps murder.
‘Violent’
In her affidavit to support the charges against Khan, Simels and his assistant, Special Agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Cassandra Jackson, said that during Khan’s drug trial the government will seek to establish that he was the leader of a “violent drug trafficking organisation (the Khan organisation) that was based in Georgetown, Guyana, from at least 2001 until his arrest in 2006.” She said that Khan and his co-conspirators obtained large quantities of cocaine, and then imported the cocaine into the Eastern District of New York and other places for further distribution.
“Khan was ultimately able to control the cocaine industry in Guyana, in large part, because he was backed by a para-military squad that would murder, threaten, and intimidate others at Khan’s directive. Khan’s enforcers committed violent acts and murders on Khan’s orders that were directly in furtherance of Khan’s drug trafficking conspiracy,” Jackson said. She noted that the para-military squad was referred to as the ‘Phantom Squad.’
These same accusations led Justice Irizarry to rule earlier this year in favour of an anonymous jury for the drug trial.
The ruling meant that the names, addresses and workplaces of members of the jury would not be revealed and that they would eat lunch together and be accompanied to and from the courthouse each day by the United States Marshals Service.
The judge was of the opinion that the dangerousness of Khan, as alleged by the prosecution, was a fact worth considering since according to one of the government’s confidential sources the ‘Phantom Squad’ Khan was associated with was responsible for “at least 200 extra-judicial killings from 2002 to 2006”, in Guyana.
While Khan was not charged with crimes considered violent in nature, his involvement with and leadership of a criminal organisation indicated his “propensity for violence,” the judge had pointed out.
Khan, through his lawyers, had opposed the government’s motion and had argued that an anonymous jury was unnecessary as the government failed to establish that jurors needed protection and that such measures, in particular the partial sequestering of jurors, would have an unduly prejudicial effect on him.
However, the judge had found that the empanelling of an anonymous and partially sequestered jury was necessary to protect the interest of the public and the jurors.
According to court documents, to support the motion for the anonymous jury, the prosecution had contended that an anonymous and partially sequestered jury was necessary to ensure the public’s interest in an impartial verdict and to protect prospective jurors.
The judge, in making her ruling, had pointed out that there was evidence of Khan’s willingness to tamper with the judicial process since he admitted that in 1993 he successfully evaded federal prosecution in Vermont for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon by absconding to Guyana while on bail. That action, the judge had said, indicated his ability to tamper with the judicial process in the US.
