Archive
U.S. Scientist with NASA Attempted to Sell State Secrets to Israel
It’s been reported that Stewart David Nozette, a former U.S. government scientist with NASA, has pleaded guilty to one count of attempted espionage for trying to sell classified information to an undercover FBI agent posing as an Israeli spy. The offense of espionage has a maximum penalty of death, but because Nozette cooperated with the investigation he was offered a plea agreement with a 13 year sentence.
The secrets Nozette attempted to sell to Israel included information about satellites, early warning systems, ways of retaliating against large-scale attacks, communications intelligence information and major elements of defense strategy. In a recorded conversation with an undercover agent Nozette had estimated the secret information could have cost the U.S. government between $200 million and $1 billion to develop and that he expected around 1% of that value as compensation from Israel. He also requested an Israeli passport in case he needed to flee the country.
Espionage is a serious federal offense, one that carries penalties as stiff as life imprisonment or death. The law was first passed as the Espionage Act of 1917 and is now codified at 18 U.S.C. 792 et. seq. In relevant part, the statute Nozette pleaded guilty to makes it a crime for anyone who “attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government . . . either directly or indirectly, any document, writing . . . or information relating to the national defense” with intent or reason to belive that such information is to be used “to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation.”
Historically, criminal defense attorneys have argued that the espionage statute is an unconstitutional infringement on a person’s 1st Amendment right to free speech. However, the Supreme Court unanimously decided in Schenk v. United States that the government can infringe upon free speech if such words being infringed upon “are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.” Thus validating the Espionage Act’s constitutionality in 1919.
Any future attempts to construe the statute as unconstitutional on the basis of the First Amendment will likely be unsuccessful because since 1919 the Supreme Court has eased the restrictions imposed upon Congress’ ability to restrict free speech. Namely that the “clear and present danger” test from Schenk has been replaced with the “imminent lawless action” test from Brandenberg v. Ohio. Congress is allowed to restrict speech so long as the defendant, through his speech, (1) intended the occurence of an evil Congress is authorized to protect against; (2) the evil was actually imminent; and (3) the evil was likely to occur.
In the case of espionage, the sharing of state secrets with foreign nations implicates all three requirements of this test: (1)Compromising the national security interests of the United States is an evil Congress is authorized to avoid; (2) Sharing top secret information with an agent of a foreign government makes such an evil imminent; and (3) it is likely that U.S. national security concerns are compromised if a foreign government possesses U.S. state secrets. Thus fighting the espionage statute itself will likley bear little fruit.
Therefore a defendant facing federal criminal charges implicating national security should hire experienced counsel that is capable of leveraging the defendant’s knowledge of facts that interest the government against the prosecutor in order to negotiate a plea arrangement that benefits both sides. Avoiding life imprisonment or the death penalty is imperative. Much like Nozette, who is only being sentenced to 13 years, the opportunity to cooperate should be seized by a defendant facing similar offenses.
The author of this blog is Erich Ferrari, an attorney specializing in Federal Criminal Defense matters. If you have any questions please contact him at 202-280-6370 or ferrari@ferrari-legal.com.
Evading currency reporting requirements? Immigration and Customs Enforcement has a Bulk Cash Smuggling Center for that.
The U.S. government has a plethora of criminal statutes designed to curb the illicit transfer of funds and the flow of money in the underground economy. Federal law enforcement officers can investigate unlicensed money transmitting businesses (i.e. hawala) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1960, ensure compliance with reporting requirements in 31 U.S.C. 5316, investigate structured transfers (or “smurfing”) subject to 31 U.S.C. 5324, investigate RICO related foreign travel in 18 U.S.C. 1952, and intercept bulk cash smuggling pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5332. These are in addition to the anti-money laundering and tax evasion statutes also found in the U.S. code.
Law enforcement officers from the FBI, Customs and Border Protection, Homeland Security Investigations and Immigration and Customs Enforcement rely on these authorities to, either directly or indirectly, disrupt and dismantle criminal networks that move bulk cash. Although you may not consider yourself an associate of a criminal network, you are still at risk of being criminally prosecuted for technical violations of these statutes.
At least since 9/11 and the USAPATRIOT Act the U.S. has identified the link between illicit funds, criminal enterprises, and terrorist organizations that endanger American national security. To curb these threats Congress has unapologetically empowered the executive branch to shine a light on funds transfers by either targeting institutions or individuals that facilitate money transfers or targeting the transfers themselves when they are worth more than $10,000 USD. From the U.S. government’s perspective, if everyone with legitimate funds complied with its financial laws, then the only funds left to be transferred outside the law would be the ones derived from illicit activities. Therefore it is imperative for any individuals looking to move around money to fully comply with Treasury’s reporting requirements and to utilize only licensed money transmitters, in addition to satisfying any tax liabilities. Merely paying your taxes will not exonerate you from violations of the financial criminal statutes listed above.
As if the federal government didn’t have enough assistance from the authority granted to it by Congress, ICE provides a law enforcement resource known as the Bulk Cash Smuggling Center (BCSC). The BCSC provides real-time tactical intelligence, investigative support and expertise to federal, state, tribal, local, and foreign law enforcement authorities. This center is available to law enforcement officers 24-hours a day so that they always have access to financial investigative expertise that will help them better follow the money trail, seize and forfeit criminal proceeds. In addition to using K-9 units to identify large amounts of cash, BCSC has awarded government contracts to technology firms to research and develop nonintrusive technology that can more accurately identify large amounts of U.S dollars, Canadian dollars, and Euros. These efforts have recently made enforcement more effective than ever. In 2010 alone 203 individuals were arrested and over $101 million USD was seized. Many of the offenses can lead to sentences that could be as severe as several years in prison.
So please, be mindful of these laws the next time you need to transport money internationally between family members or friends. There is no law limiting the amount of money you can move, so long as you follow the rules associated with moving it.
The author of this blog is Erich Ferrari, an attorney specializing in Federal Criminal Defense matters. If you have any questions please contact him at 202-280-6370 or ferrari@ferrari-legal.com.
Two Iraqis Indicted on Federal Terrorism Charges in Kentucky, Face Up to Life in Prison
Waad Ramadan Alwan, 30, and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, 23, were charged in a 23-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury in Bowling Green, KY on May 26, 2011. Alwan is charged with conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals abroad; conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction against U.S. nationals abroad; distributing information on the manufacture and use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs); attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to al Qaeda in Iraq; as well as conspiracy to transfer, possess, and export Stinger missiles. Hammadi is charged with attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to al Qaeda in Iraq, as well as conspiracy to transfer, possess, and export Stinger missiles.
Alwan was the target of a federal investigation since Septemeber of 2009. Hammadi wasn’t targeted until January of 2011. Both were set up in a sting operation and arrested on May 25, 2011. Many of the allegations against the two defendants were discovered by federal agents when they began using a confidential human source who met with and engaged in recorded conversations with the defendants. Alwan allegedly discussed his prior activities as an insurgent in Iraq from 2003 until his capture by Iraqi authorities in May 2006. The FBI was subsequently able to identify two latent fingerprints belonging to Alwan on a component of an unexploded IED that was recovered in Iraq. Hammadi also allegedly discussed with the informant his prior experience as an insurgent in Iraq.
Alwan entered the United States in April 2009 and Hammadi in July 2009.
Justice officials have stated that the “dismantling of terrorist networks is the first priority of . . . the Department of Justice.” The government uses well coordinated efforts by the FBI, local law enforcement, and the Joint Terrorism Task Forces to effectively pursue and prosecute terrorists in the United States. Not only have these two individuals been charged with crimes committed in Iraq, both were allegedly still supporting al-Qaeda from the United States by facilitating the transfer of money and weapons into Iraq. Alwan also drafted instructions for the construction and use of IEDs in Iraq. As part of the sting operation both Alwan and Hammadi allegedly picked up two Stinger missiles from a storage facility and delivered them to a tractor trailer with the understanding that the items would be shipped to Iraq.
The defendants in this case have been charged with crimes committed both in the United States and abroad. The use of confidential human sources and recorded conversation played an instrumental role in indicting and arresting both men. The use of these federal investigative tactics was so effective that the government was confident enough to charge the defendants with crimes committed over 8 years ago in a war zone in addition to the more recent crimes committed in the United States . The federal government possesses the resources and technology to coordinate efforts across international lines and between federal and state law enforcement agencies. Ensuring the proper administration of justice in high profile cases like these requires the zealous advocacy of an effective federal defense attorney who can properly challenge the government’s use of such tactics. Justice’s press release can be found here.
The author of this blog is Erich Ferrari, an attorney specializing in Federal Criminal Defense matters. If you have any questions please contact him at 202-280-6370 or ferrari@ferrari-legal.com.
