2018 05 24 DeCicco Motion To Dismiss Detail

Case 1:17-cr-10092-NMG Document 304 Filed 05/25/18 Page 1 of 42
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
__________________________________________
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) No. 17-CR-10092-NMG
)
GARY P. DECICCO, )
)
Defendant. )
__________________________________________)
MEMORANDUM OF DEFENDANT GARY DECICCO IN SUPPORT OF

MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT FOR GOVERNMENT MISCONDUCT
[Leave granted on May 25, 2018]
INTRODUCTION
On the eve of trial, the government has belatedly produced evidence to the defense
conclusively demonstrating that in the fall of 2014, the FBI, in conjunction with a former
informant, Medi Mirnasiri, conducted a stealth investigation of Mr. DeCicco for months. The
agent had Mr. DeCicco in his sights since 2011; Mirnasiri, a jealous and vindictive neighbor,
sought revenge because he believed Mr. DeCicco had sent a disparaging anonymous note along
with flowers and cross when he opened his new business. In truth, there was bad blood between
the two men that had been festering for months due to personal issues between them ranging
from Mirnasiri’s cheating of numerous contractors, many of whom were Mr. DeCicco’s friends,
to vulgar and vile comments Mirnasiri had made about Mr. DeCicco and his family. The FBI, on
the other hand, viewed Mr. DeCicco as a significant target due to his prior ownership interest in
the Everett casino land that was the subject of subsequent federal charges and his relationship
with others who were under investigation. It was a perfect marriage; each could use each other
for their own separate objectives.
1
As a result of this questionable alliance, the FBI ran a furtive and undocumented
investigation in an unsuccessful attempt to set up Mr. DeCicco. No standard reports were
prepared. Key evidence was not preserved. And exculpatory evidence disappeared.
Consequently, the United States Attorney’s Office evidently failed to understand or appreciate
what was afoot, which was clearly evident at the May 23, 2018 pretrial conference when the
prosecutor was forced to confess that she was unaware of the multitude of communications
between the FBI and Mirnasiri. But the consequences were severe. The government, which
moved to detain Mr. DeCicco, made numerous misrepresentations to the Court to support its
“strength of the evidence argument.” The Court relied on the veracity of the government’s
representations and ordered Mr. DeCicco detained pending trial. Nonetheless, Mr. DeCicco has
remained behind bars for over 14 months, on a case involving, at most, a state crime of assault
and battery that has no place in federal court. As the new evidence has been produced, it’s now
clear that Mirnasiri contrived this credible and preposterous story that that Mr. DeCicco was
attempting to extort him—a known FBI informant—to become his business partner in a used car
dealership.
Moreover, due to the manner by which the government has inappropriately handled
discovery, it is continuing to produce further exculpatory evidence even today, all to Mr.
DeCicco’s detriment.1 The loss of evidence and the misrepresentations made to the Court have
already caused Mr. DeCicco to serve a significant term of imprisonment—time in his life that
can never be restored.
1
The defense has not had a reasonable opportunity to properly review and analyze the government’s last-minute
disclosures, and reserves the right to raise additional arguments concerning them should the Court allow, or should
the Court order a hearing on this motion. The defense has exercised its best efforts to acknowledge the
government’s May 24, 2018 productions in this brief.
2
In this case, the government has lost sight of the fact that, “[t]he United States Attorney is
the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose
obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose
interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be
done.” Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88 (1935); see also Ferrara v. United States, 372 F.
Supp. 2d 108, 132 (D. Mass. 2005). This is not how the United States should be conducting its
solemn duty of ensuring its citizens a fair trial and the opportunity to raise a defense against
charges brought against them. As demonstrated below, there is a compelling basis for dismissal
based on governmental misconduct.
RELEVANT BACKGROUND
I. Overview of the Government’s Theory of the Case
The Indictment alleges that Mr. DeCicco attempted to extort Medi Mirnasiri from 2013 to
January 11, 2015. Dkt. No. 23. The government’s theory is that Mr. DeCicco desired an interest
in Mirnasiri’s soon to be formed used car dealership, Auto Excellence Group (“AEG”), and
asked Mirnasiri for a partnership stake in AEG at the beginning of its construction, which was
the fall of 2013. Dkt. No. 3-1. The government alleges that when Mirnasiri did not acquiesce to
DeCicco’s request, he opened AEG alone in June 2014. It next maintains that Mr. DeCicco sent
Mirnasiri a delivery of flowers, a glass cross, a note, and pizza on August 4, 2014. In addition,
the government asserts that, shortly after the delivery of flowers, Mirnasiri received two
threatening phone calls on August 4 and August 6, 2014, respectively. The calls purportedly
included a death threat referencing his Muslim religion and a warning that he was going to “get
burned on the cross.” See Ex. 1. The next alleged extortionate act was the assault of Mirnasiri at
AEG on January 11, 2015, during which the assailant, James Lundrigan, told Mirnasiri that this
would teach him “how talk to a lady.” Dkt. No. 3-1. The government alleges that Mr. DeCicco
3
arranged the assault through Jeffrey Prime, who contacted David Witham, who, in turn, enlisted
Lundrigan to commit the assault. Evidently, the government asserts the purpose of an
anonymous assault delivering a message about Mirnasiri’s treatment of women was intended to
force Mirnasiri to make Mr. DeCicco his business partner. See id.
II. The Government’s Longstanding Interest in, and Scrutiny of, into Mr. DeCicco
As the government acknowledged during the Pre-Trial Conference, during the timeframe
immediately preceding the investigation in this case, the government has had Mr. DeCicco under
intense scrutiny. Importantly, the two key FBI agents who played prominent roles in this case
had Mr. DeCicco under active investigation at the outset of the timeframe of the alleged
attempted extortion. FBI Special Agent Jesse Chizmadia—the handler of Mirnasiri as a
confidential human source—had been investigating Mr. DeCicco since July of 2011 on an
unknown matter, according to a report he authored in this case. See Ex. 2. FBI Special Agent
Matthew Elio—the case agent in this case—was actively investigating Mr. DeCicco in the
summer of 2013. Specifically, in July of 2013, the FBI intercepted telephone calls between Mr.
DeCicco and Charles Lightbody during a wiretap conducted on Mr. Lightbody’s phone in the
investigation surrounding the sale of land in Everett as a site for a proposed casino. On August
12, 2014, Agent Elio interrogated Mr. DeCicco at length about his real estate dealings with Mr.
Lightbody.2 Mr. Lightbody was involved in sale of land in Saugus to Mirnasiri, which became
the location of AEG. In addition, as represented by the government, the IRS developed an
interest in Mr. DeCicco due to the content of the intercepted calls in the summer of 2013.3
2
The government later brought criminal charges against Mr. Lightbody and two others in United States v. DeNunzio
et al., Crim. No. 14-10284-NMG (D. Mass.), resulting in the acquittal of all defendants on all counts in a case tried
before this Court.
3
During the investigation in this case, the government simultaneously conducted another investigation of Mr.
DeCicco, and has pursued additional charges against him on allegations of mortgage fraud and unlawful monetary
transactions. See United States v. DeCicco et al., Crim. No. 18-cr-10013-RGS (D. Mass.).
4
III. Miransiri’s Status as an FBI Confidential Human Source
Mirnasiri was well-known to the FBI before the investigation in this case. In 2006,
shortly after Mirnasiri purchased the Saugus land from a limited liability company in which Mr.
Lightbody and Mr. DeCicco were involved, he became an FBI informant. The FBI deactivated
him 2011, shortly after Mirnasiri was charged in state court with threatening bodily harm
stemming from a voicemail he had left for a business associate in which threatened to hunt down
the victim to settle a score; “cut” the victim “to pieces”; stick his foot up the victim’s posterior;
and terminate the victim’s business dealings with a financial institution. The FBI reactivated
Mirnasiri shortly after the assault, on January 11, 2015. In discussions with others, Mirnasiri
routinely referred to the FBI as “his friends.” See Ex. 3. Today, he remains an FBI informant.
Dkt. No. 3-1 ¶ 5.
IV. The Investigation of the Flower Incident on August 4-6, 2014
On August 4, 2014, Mirnasiri was sent a delivery of flowers, a glass cross, a note, and
$75 worth of pizza that he did not order. See Dkt. No. 3-1 ¶ 10. The note contained a
handwritten message that read: “Congrats Gary – We all know who’s place that is. We hope this
cross will help you get rid of that MUSLIM PRICK. From all RT. 1 Autodealers.” Id.
A. Mirnasiri’s Reports to the Saugus Police Department
1. Events on August 4, 2014
Mirnasiri reported this delivery to the Saugus Police Department the same day. Saugus
Detectives Frank Morello and Stacey Forni responded to the call and interviewed Mirnasiri at
AEG on August 4, 2014.4 See Ex. 1. According to the Saugus Police, during the interview,
4
During the interview, Mirnasiri demonstrated overt hostility towards women, which Agent Elio described as
follows: “When Forni arrived at the scene it became very clear to her that Mirnasiri wanted nothing to do with her
because she was female. Mirnasiri would not event talk to Forni and he barely acknowledged her presence. Forni
did not hear any of Detective Morello’s interview of Mirnasiri as she was spending time playing with Mirnasiri’s
5
Mirnasiri claimed, “[s]hortly after receiving the flowers delivery, [he] took a call from a blocked
number. The male caller said, ‘fucking Muslim, I’m going to fucking kill you.’ Id. When Det.
Morello asked Mirnasiri if he had ever experienced any prior incidents of similar harassment,
Mirnasiri told Det. Morello that he had one prior incident involving DeCicco, and that he had
contacted the FBI about the matter “and it stopped shortly after.”5 Id.
2. The Alleged Blocked Call
Mirnasiri did not identify whether he received the blocked call on his business line or his
cell phone. On January 17, 2017, over two and one-half years after the incident, he told the FBI
and IRS that he received the call on his business line. See Dkt. No. 35-13 at ¶ 23. The defense
specifically requested production of Auto Excellence Group’s telephone records for the period of
2013-2015, as well as telephone records showing that Mirnasiri or Auto Excellence Group
received the call and efforts by law enforcement to identify the alleged anonymous caller and the
telephone number from which the alleged call was made. See Dkt. No. 35-13 at ¶ 19. Aside
from the recently produced telephone records of Mirnasiri’s cell phone, the government has
produced no evidence in response to these requests. Analysis of Mirnasiri’s cell phone records
show that he did not receive any blocked calls on August 4, 2014. A copy of Mirnasiri’s cell
phone records on August 4, 2014 is attached as Ex. 7.6 The government opposed providing the
defense with evidence of its efforts to identify the alleged caller and efforts to determine
whether, in fact, any such call was even made.
dog.” Ex. 6. Mirnasiri’s display of his low regard for woman as to Det. Forni provides context for the disparaging
comments he made to Det. Morello on August 6 about Mr. DeCicco’s girlfriend, Kim DeBenedictis, as well as the
mother of one of Mr. DeCicco’s daughters, Pamela Avedisian.
5
The defense has not seen any evidence regarding this purported earlier report to the FBI.
6
On other dates, blocked calls appear on Mirnasiri’s cell phone records, including June 5, 2014 at 12:24 p.m., June
5, 2014 at 10:33 p.m., and on June 7, 2014 at 2:51 p.m See Ex. 9.
6
It is notable, however, that Mirnasiri has given widely conflicting versions of the alleged
call. He told the Saugus Police that the caller said: “Fucking Muslim, I’m going to fucking kill
you.” Yet when he testified under oath before the grand jury, he claimed the caller said: “You
see that cross. We’re going to burn you on it, you fucking Muslim.” See Ex 8 at 40:11-12.
3. Mr. DeCicco’s Prior Alleged Harassment of Mirnasiri
To date, the government has produced no evidence supporting Mirnasiri’s statement that
he previously reported Mr. DeCicco to the FBI for a similar harassment incident. The defense
expressly requested the government to produce “[a]ll documents and objects regarding CW-1’s
statement to the Saugus Police that CW-1 had a prior similar harassment incident involving a
neighbor, as described in the Paragraph 2 of Det. Morello’s Narrative.” See Ex. 5 at 11. The
absence of evidence in the FBI’s files indicate this was an utter fabrication. Moreover, when the
FBI and IRS specifically questioned Mirnasiri about this point, he explained that he was
referring to a contract dispute he had with Mr. DeCicco concerning Mr. DeCicco’s refusal to pay
to pave the parking lot at AEG, which does not remotely concern a harassment incident similar
to the flower, cross, and note. See Dkt. No. 35-13 ¶ 24
4. Events on August 6, 2014
On August 6, 2014, at 1:00 p.m., Mirnasiri called Saugus Police again to report new
alleged incidents, and Det. Morello returned to AEG to interview him. See Ex. 1. Mirnasiri
claimed he had received more threatening and harassing messages, comprising (1) at 12:01 p.m.,
a phone call to the business for payment of the pizzas, (2) at approximately 1:00 p.m., a phone
call to his cell phone telling him that the cross was for him and that he was “going to get burned
on the cross”, and (3) a negative cars.com online review from the week prior. Id. Mirnasiri
provided Det. Morello with a printed copy of the review. Id. Det. Morello then informed
7
Mirnasiri that the purchaser of the flowers delivered on August 4 was described as a “slim blond
female.” Id. Mirnasiri identified her as Kim DeBenedictis, and noted that she was dating
DeCicco at the time. Id. When asked why DeCicco would be interested in harassing him,
Mirnasiri’s included in his answer that DeCicco “wanted to be a partner” in AEG. Id.
5. The Second Alleged Blocked Call
Mirnasiri called the Saugus Police at 1:00 p.m., which is when he claimed he
received a second threatening call. Analysis of Mirnasiri’s cell phone records show that he
received no blocked calls on his cell phone on August 6, 2014. See Ex. 10. Moreover, only call
that received in the vicinity of 1:00 p.m was 11:51 a.m. The defense has identified the caller as a
person named Sylvia Whitman. It obviously was not a 1:00 p.m. and was not a blocked call.
Once again, Mirnasiri has given sharply divergent accounts as to the content of the
alleged call. He told the Saugus Police that the caller said, “The cross was for him and he was
going to get burned on the cross.” Saugus Rep ¶ 5. Before the grand jury, Mirnasiri claimed the
call said, “Fucking Muslim. I’m going to fucking kill you.” Ex. 8 at 40:13-15.
B. The Initial Investigation and the Transfer of the Case to the FBI
The Saugus Police then commenced their investigation of this incident. Dets. Forni and
Morello interviewed the florist and visited the pizza shop that delivered the pizzas. See Ex. 1.
Det. Forni checked the phone records of the pizza shop and traced the call placing the relevant
order to an active landline. Id. Det. Morello also sought surveillance video footage from a bank
near to the florist where the flowers were purchased. Id.
On September 2, 2014, Det. Morello recorded in his report that “the case will be
forwarded to the FBI by Det. Donovan for further investigation.” Id. On September 24, 2014,
after Det. Morello interviewed Mirnasiri yet again regarding more alleged incidents with a
8
different suspect, he wrote, “Due to the fact that there is another agency currently investigating
this and related matters I will be waiting to speak with SA Jesse Chizmadia so that my
investigation does not interfere with or reveal the presence of his investigation.” Id. On October
16, 2014, Det. Morello confirmed “at this time SA Chizmadia from the FBI Boston Field Office
is handling this case. All information from SPD records have been turned over to SA
Chizmadia.” Id.
At the Pre-Trial Conference, the government provided a vague explanation for the
existence of numerous communications between the FBI and Mirnasiri between August 4, 2014
(the flower incident) and January 11, 2015 (the assault), suggesting that the FBI was not even
sure whether it would investigate the case. Yet there was no such uncertainty about the issue
with the Saugus Police. By early September 2014, the Saugus Police clearly knew the FBI was
investigating the matter, and Agent Chizmadia was leading the federal probe.
C. The Purported Failure to Request Mirnasiri’s Telephone Records
Based on the Saugus Police report, there is no indication the Saugus Police physically
reviewed Mirnasiri’s cell phone to confirm that he had received a blocked call on August 6,
2014, or even requested the Essex County District Attorney’s Office to issue a subpoena for
Mirnasiri’s and Auto Excellence Group’s telephone records. Despite the central role of the
alleged telephone threats, the government resisted production of information as to what efforts
were made by law enforcement to identify the alleged callers, including any assessment that
Mirnasiri had just fabricated a story about them.
V. Mirnasiri’s Frequent Contact with Agent Chizmadia from August 2014 through
December 2014
During hearings before Magistrate Judge Hennessy as to the detention of Mr. DeCicco
pending trial, the government represented to the Court that the FBI did not commence its
9
investigation of this matter until Agent Chizmadia met with Mirnasiri on December 28, 2014.
See Ex. 15 at 30:13-15. In addition, in support of its position that Mr. DeCicco must be
imprisoned pending trial, the government vigorously argued against the defense’s contention that
Mirnasiri ginned up a phony extortion crime against Mr. DeCicco, as he was known to
manipulate law enforcement for his own means. In that regard, the government made the
following representation:
There is no evidence that CW-1 [Mirnasiri] knew this information would render the
case a federal Hobbs Act extortion case, and in fact it was the Saugus Police who
referred the case to the FBI, not CW-1. See Docket No. 84-2, at 4. The FBI
subsequently reached out to CW-1 about the incident, not the other way around.
The actual facts of this case do not support Defendant’s baseless and repeated
allegation that CW-1 is ‘vindictive,’ or that he reported this incident to the FBI in
order to punish Defendant (emphasis in original). See Docket No. 87 at 16.
Based on the recently produced telephone records, it is now evident that Mirnasiri initiated the
contact with the FBI—not the other way around—and the government’s representation to the
Court in support of his incarceration was false.
As early as August 27, 2014, several days before Saugus Police referred—but not yet
transferred—the case to the FBI, Mirnasiri called Agent Chizmadia.7 See Ex. 22. Mirnasiri
called at 10:13 a.m. (2 min),8 at 2:40 p.m. (2 min), and then the next day, August 28, 2014, at
7
The significance of the calls described in Sections IV and V was unknown to the defense until Tuesday, May 22,
2018, when the defense was able to identify Agent Chizmadia’s number on the late produced December 2014
telephone records of Mirnasiri’s cell phone. The government did not produce any of Mirnasiri’s cell phone records
until May 17, 2018, almost 4 years after the government commenced its investigation in this case. The telephone
records for the time-period of December 9, 2014 and January 8, 2015 were not produced to the defense until May
22, 2018, only after the defense was forced to persist making production requests despite the obvious relevance of
the records to the case. See Exs. 11 and 12.
8
The defense notes the following from its analysis of telephone records to date. Whether two individuals actually
connected and spoke on a call, particularly calls of short (~1-2 min) duration, can only be definitively determined
from comparing the records of both caller and recipient. For example, a call that goes to the recipient’s voicemail
can register as a call on the caller’s statement, but it may not appear on the recipient’s corresponding statement.
However, if the recipient then checks his or her voicemail, that voicemail retrieval can appear on the statement.
Generally speaking, short calls are more likely than long calls to be voice messages, given that most voice
mailboxes are set up to accept voice messages for a limited amount of time before cutting the speaker off.
10
3:27 p.m. (2 min). After the case is noted as referred to the FBI on September 2, 2014, Mirnasiri
tried to reach Agent Chizmadia again on September 3, at 3:27 p.m. (1 min). On September 5,
2014, Agent Chizmadia finally called Mirnasiri back.
At that time, Mr. DeCicco was squarely on the FBI’s radar screen. Agent Chizmadia had
an open investigation regarding Mr. DeCicco that began in 2011, and Agent Elio had him under
investigation in the casino case and other matters. As noted, Agent Elio had interrogated Mr.
DeCicco the prior summer, and the FBI had intercepted his calls with Mr. Lightbody on a
wiretap. Unquestionably, Mirnasiri’s calls to Agent Chizmadia were a bonanza for the FBI, as it
presented yet one more angle from which the FBI could pursue possible criminal charges against
him. Contrary to the scenario painted by the government at the Pre-Trial Conference, this
breakthrough was significant to the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
From August 27, 2014 until January 11, 2015, when Mirnasiri was assaulted, Mirnasiri
and Agent Chizmadia spoke approximately 1-2 days per week on an irregular basis. However,
there were certain bursts of frequent calling in that time period. For example, after Mr. DeCicco
appeared to leave a voicemail for Mirnasiri on September 17, 2014, Mirnasiri called Mr.
DeCicco back and had a 13-minute conversation in the afternoon. Id. The next morning, on
September 18, Mirnasiri called Agent Chizmadia for 4 minutes, and called again on September
19 for just 1 minute. In another example, on September 30, 2014, Mirnasiri and Agent
Chizmadia exchanged a pair of calls and 3 text messages. There also is evidence they met that
night. That night, at 6:19 p.m., Mirnasiri sent a text message to Agent Chizmadia stating, “I’m
here please come.” Ex. 13. Moments later, Agent Chizmadia replied, “On way.” Id.
The week of October 5, 2014 showed even more significant activity, which correlated
precisely with telephone calls between Mr. DeCicco and Mirnasiri on October 8 and 9:
11
Notably, on October 8, Mirnasiri reached out to Mr. DeCicco after Agent Chizmadia called
Mirnasiri. Mirnasiri and Mr. DeCicco played phone tag, but they then appeared to talk for 6
minutes at 2:23 p.m. Mirnasiri then immediately called Agent Chizmadia back, and they spoke
twice within 30 minutes. The next day, October 9, Mirnasiri again reached out to Mr. DeCicco
after a flurry of text messages and a brief call with Agent Chizmadia. And again, immediately
after Mirnasiri’s outreach to Mr. DeCicco, Mirnasiri called Agent Chizmadia. In November
2014, Mirnasiri and Agent Chizmadia communicated 8 times.
VI. Agent Chizmadia’s Supervision of Mirnasiri’s Contact with the Defendant on

December 9, 2014
By December 2014, Mirnasiri had been under the close supervision of the FBI for three
and a half months. They had communicated by phone and text over forty times in that time-
period, and had at least one in-person meeting.
The events that occurred on December 9 are pivotal in this case. DeCicco became
incensed by comments he heard that Mirnasiri had made about him and his family. At 11:48
a.m., he called Rick Scourtas, a close friend of Mirnasiri, but was unable to reach him and left a
voicemail. He then immediately called Mirnasiri at 11:49 a.m., and left a voicemail for him. At
that time, Mirnasiri was on a 4-minute call (apparently with Fred Varone). At 12:03 p.m.,
Mirnasiri checked his voicemail. Mirnasiri sent a text message to Agent Chizmadia, stating:
“He didn’t answer and it went to voice mail. I did leave him a message.” Agent Chizmadia
replied, “Ok, let me know if he calls back, I will touch base in the morning.” The next day,
Agent Chizmadia called Mirnasiri, and they spoke for 5 minutes.
12
Later that afternoon, Mr. DeCicco finally connected with Mr. Scourtas. In a recent
interview with the FBI, Mr. Scourtas confirmed have a call with Mr. DeCicco in which he was
quite angry with Mirnasiri. Mr. DeCicco insisted that Mr. Scourtas call Mirnasiri and deliver a
message that his buddy “gotta keep his mouth shut,” and was to stop talking badly about Mr.
DeCicco. Ex. 3 at 3. Mr. DeCicco did not tell Mr. Scourtas why he was angry with Mirnasiri,
but wanted Mirnasiri to know that he was sending the message to him through Mr. Scourtas. Mr.
Scourtas agreed to make the call to Mirnasiri.
Mr. Scourtas later spoke with Mirnasiri. Telephone records show that on December 9, at
4:09 p.m., there was an 11-minute call between Mirnasiri and Mr. Scourtas. Mr. Scourtas
conveyed Mr. DeCicco’s message to Mirnasiri, who responded by telling him that he (Mirnasiri)
would do whatever he wanted to do. Ex. 3 at 3. Mirnasiri has confirmed the substance of Mr.
Scourtas’ call to him. In the grand jury, Mirnasiri testified that Mr. Scourtas called him to
deliver a personal message from DeCicco. Ex. 8 at 47:5-6. Mr. Scourtas said that Mr. DeCicco
was very angry and very upset. Ex. 8 at 47:10. While Mirnasiri did not recall Mr. Scourtas’
exact words, in substance, Mr. Scourtas delivered the message that (1) Mirnasiri was to keep
quiet and stop talking about him; (2) he was to stop lying about Mr. DeCicco; (3) Mirnasiri was
to shut the hell up; and (4) Mirnasiri was talking too much, and he’d better stop talking about Mr.
DeCicco Ex. 8 at 47:6-12. On another occasion, Mirnasiri described the message as to shut the
hell up, to not call or contact Mr. DeCicco, and to stop talking shit about him. Dkt. No. 35-13 ¶
21. Mirnasiri has informed the FBI that the call was approximately one month before his
assault. Ex. 14 at 1.
The recently produced telephone records show that immediately after Mirnasiri’s call
with Mr. Scourtas ended, he exchanged three text messages with Agent Chizmadia, at 4:21 p.m.,
13
4:36 p.m., and 4:57 p.m. In the midst of those text messages, there was a 7-minute call between
Mr. DeCicco and Mr. Scourtas, which began at 4:29 p.m. According to Mr. Scourtas, Mr.
DeCicco called him back to learn whether he had spoken with Mirnasiri. Mr. Scourtas
confirmed that they had spoken, but did not tell Mr. DeCicco what Mirnasiri had said.
From 6 p.m. to approximately 7:15 p.m., a critical series of calls occurred ending with what
clearly appears to be Mirnasiri’s attempt to record a call with DeCicco under the direction of
Agent Chizmadia. First, at 6:00 p.m., Mr. Scourtas had another call with Mirnasiri lasting 12
minutes. Shortly thereafter, at 6:25 p.m., Mirnasiri called Agent Chizmadia and they spoke for 6
minutes. Mr. Scourtas then called Mr. DeCicco at 6:41 p.m., and they had an 11-minute call. At
6:59 p.m., Mirnasiri called Mr. Scourtas and they spoke for 15-minutes. Once Mirnasiri finished
speaking with Mr. Scourtas, he immediately called Agent Chizmadia for another 2-minute call.
Following his call with Agent Chizmadia, Mirnasiri then called Mr. DeCicco, and left a 3-minute
voicemail. Mirnasiri testified about the voicemail in the grand jury. He claims he said, “Gary, I
did not make these comments.” Ex. 8 at 48:3-4. According to Mirnasiri, he knew DeCicco had a
bad temper, and he did not want to be on his bad side. Id. at 48:3-4.
Contrary to normal FBI operating procedure, Agent Chizmadia did not prepare a report of
the critical events that occurred on December 9, even though he clearly was integrally involved
in advising Mirnasiri and monitoring the activity. The critical voice mail that DeCicco left for
Mirnasiri was not preserved—at least it has never been produced. The important voicemail that
Mirnasiri left for DeCicco evidently was not recorded, despite the fact that Agent Chizmadia
spoke with Mirnasiri immediately before he placed the call. But if it was recorded, it has never
been produced. Apparently, none of the calls between Mirnasiri and Mr. Scourtas were
recorded, despite his key role as an intermediary between Mirnasiri and Mr. DeCicco in what
14
obviously was an intense personal dispute and had nothing to do with AEG or the alleged
“partnership” story. Agent Chizmadia did not even prepare an FBI Form 302 report of the
events of December. For that matter, based on the government’s production to date, Agent
Chizmadia failed to prepare any reports of any of his interactions with Mirnasiri dating back to
August 27, 2014. It appears as though the FBI was running a stealth investigation with a former
informant seeking to obtain evidence against a significant target without creating a paper trail.
The first documents contact between Mirnasiri and Agent Chizmadia was on December
28, 2014, when Agent Chizmadia interviewed him. But even so, Agent Chizmadia did not
generate a contemporaneous report of that interview. Rather, it appears that he first drafted the
scant report, which provides virtually no details, on October 9, 2010, about 10 months later.
And it is now clear that while the government has consistently maintained that this was the first
time the FBI “talk[ed] to” Mirnasiri regarding this case, that statement is patently false. See Ex.
15 at 30:13-20, see also Section IX, infra.
VII. The FBI’s Continued Investigation After Assault
On January 11, 2015, Lundrigan assaulted Mirnasiri at AEG. The Saugus Police
responded to the scene. The FBI went to AEG the following day to conduct a forensic analysis
of the scene, collecting specimens of physical evidence. See Ex. 16.
A. The Continued, Purported, and Now Selective Failure to Request Mirnasiri’s

Phone Records
As the investigation proceeded, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the FBI sought and
obtained telephone records of virtually all of the key witnesses but one—Mirnasiri. Law
enforcement obtained telephone records of Mr. DeCicco, the Atlantis Marina (Mr. DeCicco’s
work phone), Kim DeBenedictis, Lundrigan, Witham, Prime, and likely others. See Ex. 17. The
15
inclusion of DeBenedictis’s records is particularly notable, given her involvement solely in the
flower delivery incident, but not the assault.
B. The February 11, 2015 Interview of Mirnasiri by FBI Agent Chizmadia
On February 11, 2015, one month after the assault, Agent Chizmadia interviewed
Mirnasiri. See Ex. 16. The only apparent official record of this interview is what appears to be a
composite FD-302 Report (“302 Report”) that was prepared on October 9, 2015 but not finalized
until March 16, 2017, which also happened to be the same day the government filed for the
Criminal Complaint (The “Second 302 Report”). See also Section VIII.A, infra. The entry for
February 11, 2015 read in its entirety:
February 11, 2015 – Mirnasiri reported being assaulted by an Unidentified White

Male (UWM1) on January 11, 2015 in his place of business, AUTO
EXCELLENCE GROUP. As a result Mirnasiri’s jaw was broken and wired shut.
Mirnasiri provided the writer with video footage of the assault that was captured by
Mirnasiri’s security cameras at Auto Excellence Group.
This information was described as provided during one of “four (4) separate occasions as it
related to potential threats received by Mirnasari [sic] from GARY DECICCO as well as an
assault on Mirnasari [sic] allegedly orchestrated by DECICCO.” Ex. 16. The issue with this
Second 302 Report is discussed in more detail in Section VII.A, infra.
C. The FD-1057 Laboratory Forms Reflecting Inconsistent and Exculpatory

Explanation for the Assault
On February 16, 2015, less than a week after he had interviewed Mirnasiri, Agent
Chizmadia prepared a Form FD-1057 Laboratory form. Ex. 2. This report contained highly
exculpatory evidence under Brady, but was not produced to the defense until February 12, 2018.
Significantly, the report contains a statement from Mirnasiri that completely contradicts and
undermines the government’s theory of the case: that Mr. DeCicco attempted to extort Mirnasiri
because he wanted to be Mirnasiri’s partner and a co-owner of AEG. The report stated that
16
Mirnasiri attributed the assault to an outstanding debt he owed to Mr. DeCicco:
It is believed that the assault was arranged by the same subject of the above-
captioned investigation in response to an alleged debt owed by the cooperating
witness to the subject (emphasis supplied).
The subject referenced in the report is DeCicco. Id. at 2. Agent Chizmadia made no reference—
none—to an attempted extortion over an ownership interest in AEG being the reason for the
assault. Moreover, on November 10, 2015, Agent Chizmadia prepared another FD-1057, again
repeating that the assault was believed to be “in response to an alleged debt owed by the
cooperating witness to the subject.” Ex. 18. Both reports indicate the “full investigation” was
initiated on July 6, 2011.
D. The Interview of Mirnasiri by the FBI and the IRS on January 17, 2017
On January 17, 2017, Agent Elio and IRS Special Agent Sandra Lemanski interviewed
Mirnasiri about the alleged extortion. See Dkt. No. 35-13. The purpose of the interview was to
ask Mirnasiri “about information that he provided to the Saugus Police Department on August 4,
2014 relating to a flower delivery.” Dkt. No. 35-13 at ¶ 2. The agents inquired about the
“incident with DeCicco that [Mirnasiri] was referring to in the police report”—referencing
Mirnasiri’s answer to Det. Morello question on August 4, 2014 about “prior incidents of similar
harassment.” Mirnasiri answered that it concerned “their disagreement over DeCicco not paying
for the paving of the dealership.” Id. at ¶ 23; see also Ex. 1. The agents did not appear to ask
Mirnasiri how that dispute constituted Mr. DeCicco’s “harassment” of him given that he was
describing a contractual dispute in which he was asking Mr. DeCicco for money. Nor did they
appear to ask what Mirnasiri meant when he stated that he “contacted the FBI” about the dispute,
or what he meant when he said “it stopped shortly after.” Ex. 1.
17
VIII. The Criminal Complaint and the Government’s Affidavits in Support of the
Pleadings and in Support of Pretrial Detention
The FBI reactivated Mirnasiri as a source in July 2015. The government ultimately
decided to charge Mr. DeCicco by way of a criminal complaint filed on March 16, 2017. See
Dkt. No. 3. The complaint was supported by Agent Elio’s affidavit. See Dkt. No. 3-1.
A. The Government’s Preparation of Misleading FBI FD-302 Reports to

Support the Criminal Complaint
Agent Elio’s affidavit, dated March 16, 2017, was apparently prepared in reliance of a
302 Report that was prepared by Agent Chizmadia, referenced here as the Second 302 Report.
As described earlier, the Second 302 Report purported to include four occasions on which
Mirnasiri provided information to Agent Chizmadia about the purported threats from Mr.
DeCicco as well as “an assault on Mirnasiri allegedly orchestrated by DECICCO.” See Ex. 16.
The earliest contact described between Mirnasiri and Agent Chizmadia was on December 28,
2014, when Agent Chizmadia wrote that Mirnasiri described threats he had earlier reported to
Saugus Police Department that he believed were from Mr. DeCicco related to CW-1’s refusal “to
give part” of his business to Mr. DeCicco. The Second 302 Report went on to document the
collection of evidence on January 13, 2015, the interview with Agent Chizmadia on February 11,
2015, and the identification of James Lundigran as the assailant via photo array on October 2,
2015. The Second 302 Report did not reference any of the other 46 points of contact between
Mirnasiri and Agent Chizmadia prior to December 28, 2014.
As noted, the “Date of Entry” of the Second 302 Report is March 16, 2017, the same day
the government filed the Criminal Complaint. See Dkt. No. 3. The “Date of Investigation” and
“Date Drafted,” however, are October 2 and 9, 2015, respectively—almost 18 months before the
“Date of Entry.” The FBI’s internal policies and procedures governing the preparation of FD-
302 reports require that “the preparation of the FD-302 should be effected within five days
18
following the final interview session.” Ex. 19, FBI Manual of Administrative Operations and
Procedures (MAOP), Part 2, Section 10-13.3 (emphasis supplied).
Before receiving the Second 302 Report in discovery, the defense was first provided with
another version of this 302 Report, dated one day earlier on March 15, 2017 (the “First 302
Report”). Ex. 20. The First 302 Report differs from the Second 302 Report in a few notable
respects, including recounting that Mirnasiri “provided information on three separate occasions”
(instead of four). The First 302 Report also did not contain the entry concerning the January 13,
2015 visit to AEG to collect evidence, which appeared to have been inserted sometime between
March 15 and March 16, 2017, over two years later. Critically, the key phrase in the preamble in
the Second 302 Report describing “an assault on Mirnasiri allegedly orchestrated by
DECICCO,” is missing on the March 15 version. The “Date Drafted” on the First 302 Report
was not altered, however, remaining at October 9, 2015. Absent metadata and supporting notes,
the defense is unable to ascertain when either 302 Report was drafted, revised, altered, and/or
entered into the investigative file.9
B. The Government’s Preparation of Affidavits In Support of the Criminal

Complaint and Motion for Detention
On March 16, 2017, the same day the Second 302 Report was being revised and
finalized, Agent Elio used it to prepare his affidavit to support the Criminal Complaint, which
was filed later that day. Compare Ex. 16 with Dkt. No. 3-1 at ¶ 13, n.2. Much of the affidavit is
based on information provided by Mirnasiri to the Saugus PD and to the FBI, particularly Agent
Chizmadia and Agent Elio. To bolster his affidavit, Agent Elio stated that Mirnasiri “has no
9
The government represented to the defense the First 302 Report was a “draft” of the Second 302 Report. The
government did not offer an explanation why a “draft” would have been revised on March 16, 2017, over 18 months
after the report was first drafted on October 9, 2015. The government has also represented that there is no metadata
available.
19
criminal history and I am not aware of any information that would adversely affect the credibility
of CW-1’s information.” Dkt. No. 3-1 at ¶ 5. Agent Elio also relied heavily on his analysis of
telephone records, “wherever possible,” to corroborate the information provided by cooperating
witnesses Lundrigan and Witham, and Agent Elio used these records to prove the connections
between Lundrigan, the assailant, and Witham, Prime, and Mr. DeCicco around the time of the
assault. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 3-1 ¶¶ 17, 20, 23.
IX. The Government’s Representations About Its Investigation During the Detention
Proceedings
The government moved to detain Mr. DeCicco pretrial. Dkt. No. 18. The detention
hearing was later reopened after a hearing on the defendant’s motion to reopen detention hearing.
See Dkt. Nos. 34, 83, 119. During these hearings, the government made a series of
representations that have since been shown to be inaccurate in light of recent productions of
evidence.
A. The Government’s Representation that the FBI First Talked to Mirnasiri on

December 28, 2014
Consistent with the timeline inferred from the Second 302 Report, the government has
consistently represented throughout multiple hearings that the first contact between the FBI and
Mirnasiri with respect to the investigation in this case was on December 28, 2014. This
representation was deliberately made to support the government’s argument that the strength of
its extortion case should not be discounted it did not have time to deploy its customary
investigative techniques of interviews, consensually recorded calls, body wires, or Title III
wiretaps, in the period between Mirnasiri’s interview with Agent Chizmadia on December 28,
2014, and Mirnasiri’s assault on January 11, 2015. For example, on October 5, 2017, the
government argued that “the FBI goes and talks to [Mirnasiri] in December of 2014 before he’s
beaten . . . the fact that they didn’t wire him up between the end – I think it was December 28
20
and the day he gets beaten on January 11” should not have been held against the government’s
case. Ex. 21 at 67:9-15. The government also had the following colloquy with the Court:
THE COURT: Right. I’m considering the strength of the evidence as

to the charge in the indictment and not does it make
out some other charge.
...
Tell me if this is in the record. I’m thinking of the Exhibit
1, the police report. Do they at some point interview Kim
DeBenedictis, or do they just go with the photo array
that’s shown to the woman who works at the flower shop
in Lynn?
GOVT: They don’t. They turn it over to the FBI, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. So Kim DeBenedictis is not interviewed.
GOVT: Not by Saugus P.D.
THE COURT: Is she interviewed by the FBI when it goes from Saugus
P.D. to the FBI?
GOVT: No. There was no time in there, Your Honor, before
he got assaulted.
THE COURT: All right.
GOVT: I think he was interviewed December 28. The assault
was January 11. So it was over the holidays.
THE COURT: All right.
Ex. 21 at 73:17-74:15 (emphasis added).
On November 3, 2017, the government presses this point multiple times, stating that,
Between the time when the FBI interviews CW-1 and the time
when he’s beaten, it’s 13 days, and that includes New Year’s and
Christmas vacation. They simply didn’t have a chance to pursue
this investigation before Mr. DeCicco took matters again into his
own hands.
Ex. 15 at 55:24-56:5 (Nov. 3, 2017); and:
THE COURT: Oh, in other words, the threats were not on December 28.
He’s simply reporting it on December 28, because that’s
when’s interviewed.
21
GOVT: Yes, Your Honor. Saugus P.D., the task force officer, he
turns it over to the FBI, and they ultimately get to talk
to CW-1 on December 28; and therein,
THE COURT: Okay.
GOVT: -- there he recounts that he’s received threats that he
believes are from Mr. DeCicco and his associates.
Ex. 15 at 30:10-20 (emphasis added).
As Mirnasiri’s phone records now show, he was in contact with Agent Chizmadia concerning
this case as early as August 27, 2014, and certainly no later than October 8 and 9, 2014, when his
records show him calling Agent Chizmadia immediately after finishing a call with DeCicco.
B. The Government’s Representation that Mirnasiri and Mr. DeCicco Did Not
Talk between August 4, 2014 and January 11, 2015
In addition to representing that the FBI did not talk to Mirnasiri before December 28,
2014, the government also represented that Mirnasiri and Mr. DeCicco did not talk to each other
between the flower incident and the assault. This representation was in support of the
government’s theory that the only interactions that Mirnasiri had with Mr. DeCicco during that
time related to the supposed ownership dispute of AEG, providing the straight-line inference as
to the intent behind the January 11 assault. In truth, Mirnasiri and Mr. DeCicco spoke regularly
between August 4, 2014 and January 2015: constructively and antagonistically at various times,
given their complex, neighborly relationship and rivalry. Indeed, after sending the flowers, Mr.
DeCicco called Mirnasiri the very next day, explaining that he was behind it and was entirely
unapologetic about it.10 Yet the government represented, in response to a direct question about
the interactions between Mr. DeCicco and Mirnasiri between the delivery of flowers and the
assault, that they had no contact:
10
Mirnasiri did not mention to the Saugus PD that he had talked with Mr. DeCicco to the Saugus PD the day before
when he was being interviewed on August 6; he did, however, then report that Mr. DeCicco purportedly wanted to
be partners with him in AEG. It was later that month that Mirnasiri repeatedly attempted to contact SA Chizmadia.
22
THE COURT: All right. One of the things I’m going toward is this. The
flowers are sent in August. It sounds like right after
the dealership opened. And the assault is on January
11.
My question is what’s going on in the interim?
GOVT: He’s doing business, Your Honor. And he hasn’t paid
attention to the threat. He’s not talking to Mr. DeCicco.
He’s not giving him a piece of the business.
Ex. 15 at 31:17-25.
C. The Government’s Representation that the FBI Approached Mirnasiri, and

Not the Other Way Around
Finally, the government represented in briefing and during argument that Mirnasiri was
approached by the FBI in this investigation, and not the other way around, to support its
argument that Mirnasiri did not manipulate law enforcement, nor was he vindictive, nor biased
against Mr. DeCicco. The government wrote in its opposition brief to reopening the detention
hearing:
Defendant’s assertion that CW-1 “manipulates law enforcement” is argument, not

evidence . . . In fact, CW-1 did not report Defendant’s attempts to get a piece of
CW-1’s dealership initially. Even after receiving the flowers and threatening note
on August 4, 2014, CW-1 did not identify Defendant as the possible culprit until
after Saugus Police obtained a description of the woman who purchased the flowers
. . . Only then, when asked why he thought Defendant would have sent the flowers
and threat, did CW-1 tell Saugus Police that Defendant wanted to be a partner in
the business . . . There is no evidence that CW-1 knew this information would
render the case a federal Hobbs Act extortion case, and in fact it was the Saugus
Police who referred the case to the FBI, not CW-1. . . . The FBI subsequently
reached out to CW-1 about the incident, not the other way around. The actual
facts of this case do not support Defendant’s baseless and repeated allegation that
CW-1 is “vindictive,” or that he reported this incident to the FBI in order to punish
Defendant.
Dkt. No. 87 at 16 (emphasis in original). The government tried to drive this point home during
the final detention hearing, arguing:
I think what Mr. Sheketoff said is he should have known immediately that this was
a federal extortion and reported it to the FBI. What he did was as soon as he got
the flowers, he reported it to the Saugus P.D. He wasn’t working for the FBI at the
23
time. That’s who you report getting a threat . . . you report it to the Saugus P.D. It
was the Saugus P.D. that called the FBI when they realized that this could be a
federal crime . . . And then the FBI goes and talks to [Mirnasiri] in December of
2014 before he’s beaten[.]”
Ex. 15 at 66:22-67:6 (emphasis added). Yet Mirnasiri’s phone records are strongly indicative
that these representations were not true: after the flower delivery but before Saugus PD referred
the case to the FBI, it was Mirnasiri who repeatedly contacted Agent Chizmadia, not the other
way round. See Section V, supra.
X. The Government’s Failure to Produce or Suppression of Material and Exculpatory

Evidence During Pretrial Discovery
While the automatic discovery rules in this district mandate that the government produce
documents and things that are required to be produced under Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a) without need
for a request from the defense, the defense has indeed made specific requests for (1) Mirnasiri’s
phone records; (2) Mirnasiri’s communications to others regarding Mr. DeCicco, including
specifically communications with the FBI; and (3) notes and the information therein underlying
Agent Chizmadia’s various, inconsistent reports of interviews of Mirnasiri. See Ex. 5. The
Failure to Obtain, or Suppression of, Mirnasiri’s Phone Records, and The Government's
Prejudicial, Suspicious, and Eve-of-Trial Production
The government did not produce Mirnasiri’s phone records until May 17, 2018, and when
it did, they were incomplete. The defense did not obtain a complete set of Mirnasiri’s phone
records until May 22, 2018, the day before the final pretrial conference.
The circumstances under which Mirnasiri’s phone records were sought and produced in
this case are troubling. First, the government represented that it never was in possession of
Mirnasiri’s phone records, stating that they (1) subpoenaed the wrong phone number; and,
24
regardless, (2) subpoenaed the phone records too late, in April 2017,11 because the provider
overwrites the records after 24 months (making August 2016 the latest that the government could
have sought to obtain them). But the government had been working with Mirnasiri directly in
this case since August 27, 2014 (when they first made contact), or December 28, 2014 (when
Mirnasiri was interviewed), or July 2015 (when he was re-opened as a CHS).12 The government
also had been diligent in subpoenaing the phone records of every other conceivable witness in
this case, including Mr. DeCicco, Prime, Witham, Lundrigan, Scourtas, and DeBenedictis, to
name a few. But for whatever reason, the FBI purportedly determined not to obtain Mirnasiri’s
phone records, in a case that involved threatening phone calls in the context of a potential
extortion.
Second, on May 4, 2018, when the defense sought the government’s assent to file a
motion for a Rule 17(c) subpoena for Mirnasiri’s telephone records, the government readily gave
its assent. The defense filed the assented-to motion on that same day.13 See Dkt. No. 180. But
then, unbeknownst to the defense, the government filed its own subpoena to T-Mobile seeking
the same records. See Ex. 23. And on May 17, 2018, the government produced Mirnasiri’s
phone records to the defense. The production contained a cover document from T-Mobile
purporting to report that “no records were found” for Mirnasiri’s number. See Ex. 24.
Consistent with the reply that the government had received from T-Mobile in response to its
11
The government inexplicably waited until after the charges were filed in March 2017 before subpoenaing this
evidence in April 2017.
12
The defense understands that Mirnasiri has been using the same mobile phone from 2014 until the present.
13
The defense ultimately subpoenaed the wrong provider and obtained no records in response to its Rule 17(c)
subpoena, believing from investigation that Mirnasiri’s phone provider was Tracfone/Omnipoint, a prepaid phone
service.
25
April 2017 grand jury subpoena, T-Mobile explained that it overwrites its records after 24
months. Yet the 2014-2015 records accompanied the May 2018 subpoena response.
Third, the production on May 17, 2018 was incomplete. The phone records that were
missing coincided with the most critical juncture of the case: the January 8, 2015 statement,
which would have reflected records for December 9, 2014-January 8, 2015, shortly before the
January 11, 2015 assault. Instead of the January 8, 2015 statement, however, the December 8,
2014 statement was produced in its place, and therefore was produced twice, making it difficult
on a preliminary review to discern that the section was missing. See Ex. 26 (comparing
USAO_DECICCO_00025283 with USAO_DECCICCO_00025321). When confronted about
this irregularity, the government agreed to “follow-up” with T-Mobile, and within 48 working
hours, the government produced the missing statement. See Ex. 12.
Given these myriad issues, on the evening of May 23, 2018, the defense requested to
inspect the originals of the production. On May 24, 2018, the government represented there was
“nothing to inspect” because the records were produced by T-Mobile to the government
electronically rather than in hard copy. See Ex. 7. The government then forwarded the apparent
production emails from T-Mobile to the defense for reference, but given the time restraints, the
defense has been unable to obtain any independent forensic review of the records. See Ex. 28.
The government has since been interviewing telephone providers and producing additional
telephone record and other information throughout the morning of May 24, 2018—at this
eleventh hour, almost five years after the beginning of the relevant time period. See Ex. 29
A. The Failure to Produce Mr. DeCicco’s Recorded Statements
To this days, the government still has not produced critical statements made by Mr.
DeCicco in the months between the flower delivery and the assault, which were due with
automatic discovery on May 26, 2017. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(1); L.R. 116.1, 116.2. These
26
statements include at least one, arguably case-dispositive voice message that Mr. DeCicco left in
Mirnasiri voice mailbox on December 9, 2014, directly preceding Mirnasiri’s assault. In this
voice message, Mr. DeCicco told Mirnasiri that he had heard about Mirnasiri’s backstabbing and
gossip, and strongly and profanely advised Mirnasiri to stop talking about him and his family, or
else he would “beat the sh*t out of” him. No reference is ever made to AEG, or wanting to be a
partner in AEG, or wanting to be a partner with Mirnasiri. The records show that, after Mirnasiri
retrieved his voice messages (including Mr. DeCicco’s message) on December 9, Mirnasiri
called Agent Chizmadia repeatedly. Then, immediately after hanging up on his second call with
Agent Chizmadia, Mirnasiri called Mr. DeCicco and left him a voicemail lasting 3 minutes. He
then immediately texted Agent Chizmadia, reporting back that he had left Mr. DeCicco a
voicemail. A similar exercise occurred on October 8, 2014. See Section V, supra. Given these
circumstances, it is strains credulity that the FBI never took possession, custody, or control of
Mr. DeCicco’s statements, especially with a cooperating witness in Mirnasiri. But the
government has not produced them.
B. The Selective Failure to Produce Mirnasiri’s Communications with the

Government
The government’s production of Mirnasiri’s communications with FBI SAs Elio and
Chizmadia have been revealed to be incomplete based on Mirnasiri’s phone records. The
communications produced with respect to Agent Chizmadia begin on January 12, 2015, the day
after Mirnasiri’s assault. The defense now understands, however, that Agent Chizmadia and
Mirnasiri began text messaging in September 2014. See Ex. 22. During the May 23, 2018
hearing before the Court, the government acknowledged that there may be earlier text messages
within its possession.
27
On May 24, 2018, the government produced Agent Chizmadia’s text messages with
Mirnasiri from 2014, stating they were “inadvertently omitted.” See Ex. 27. The texts appear to
show Mirnasiri leaving voicemails with Agent Chizmadia, and also meeting with him in person.
See Ex. 13.
C. The Failure to Interview or Review Information with Agent Chizmadia
During the pretrial conference, the government admitted that it had not spoken with
Agent Chizmadia, even though he was noticed on the defense’s witness list and trial was less
than one week away. (Agent Chizmadia was not noticed on the government’s witness list.) The
government expressed surprise that there were such a high number of text messages and calls
before December 28, 2014, but offered several possible benign—but implausible—explanations:
(1) Mirnasiri may not have been talking about Mr. DeCicco; (2) Mirnasiri and Agent Chizmadia
may not have been talking substantively at all, but instead the short calls were perhaps to set up
meetings; (3) Agent Chizmadia was simply exploring, over 5 months, whether Mirnasiri was
suitable or willing to serve as a confidential human source. This ignores, however, that it was
Mirnasiri who first initiated contact with the FBI after the flower delivery, on August 27, 2014.
Moreover, given that Mirnasiri was not a CHS at the time, it was entirely improbable that the
communications were not related to Mr. DeCicco. Indeed, the obvious reading of the phone
records—especially on October 8, October 9, and December 9, 2014—was that Agent
Chizmadia was closely supervising, if not instructing the communications Mirnasiri was making
to Mr. DeCicco.
D. The Irregular and Untimely Production of Other Key and Exculpatory

Documents
Finally, the production of various (and invariably) exculpatory pieces of evidence have
been untimely, irregular, or both, as follows:
28
1. The March 2017 FBI 302 Reports
The First 302 Report produced with automatic discovery on May 26, 2017 was troubling
on its face, but it was not until the late production of the complete, Second 302 Report that the
irregularity became more acute. At the defense’s request, the government produced the Second
302 Report on March 26, 2018. The Second 302 Report was produced in the middle of a Bates
range, however, that was responsive to a different request that had sought documents about the
alleged incidents of August 4-6, 2014, including deliveries of flowers, pizza, and alleged
anonymous threatening calls.14 Ex. 20. In response to the defense’s request for drafts and
metadata pertaining to the First 302 Report, the government declined to produce, arguing that it
“is not required to provide such information under Local Rule 116.1(c)(1) and Local Rule
116.2(b)(1).” Ex. 32.
The defense then requested production of the missing page of the report, as well as any
metadata, drafts, and notes related to this and other 302 Reports based on (1) the incompleteness
of the report; (2) the inexplicable 18-month delay between the alleged drafting of the report and
its entry into the investigative file; (3) the suspicious and questionable timing of the “date of
entry” one day before the filing of the Criminal Complaint; (4) the absence of any other law
enforcement reports in the production—whether 302 reports, agent notes, or other reports—
contemporaneously documenting the 2014 and 2015 events described in the First 302 Report;
and (5) the apparent violation of FBI policy evidenced by this delay and the FBI’s apparent
failure to prepare separate 302s for each interview of a confidential source. The defense also
requested all documents, reports, and notes within the government’s possession that pertain to
14
The Second 302 Report contains no reference to the August 4-6, 2014 incidents, making its production in the
midst of documents responsive to a request relating to those incidents puzzling.
29
the interviews that the Agent Chizmadia and TFO Frenzo conducted with CW-1 in 2014 and
2015. During the hearing on the defense’s Motion to Compel on May 10, 2018, the government
represented that there was no metadata, and agreed to review Agent Chizmadia’s notes and turn
over any information that reflect inconsistent statements.
On May 21, 2018, the government reported that it had completed its review and was not
required to produce anything. See Ex. 30. However, during the afternoon hearing on May 23,
the government admitted that it had not recently spoken with SA Chizmadia, and expressed
uncertainty about the scope of his role in the investigation of the alleged crime at issue in this
case, despite the fact that trial was merely days away and he was expected to be called as a
witness.
2. The FD-1057 Laboratory Forms
Automatic discovery was scheduled to be produced on May 26, 2017. On February 12,
2018, the government provided a “supplement” to the automatic discovery that included reports
of examinations and tests that the government concedes that the defense was entitled to under
Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(1)(F), but were “inadvertently omitted from prior productions in this
case.” Included in this supplemental automatic discovery were two Form FD-1057 laboratory
forms, dated February 17, 2015 and November 10, 2015 (the “Laboratory Forms”). Ex.2; Ex.
18. The Laboratory Forms both stated that the January 11, 2015 assault against CW-1 was
believed to be “in response to an alleged debt owed by the cooperating witness to the subject.”
Ex. 2 at 2; Ex. 18 at 2.
30
3. Telephone Records
Aside from Agent Chizmadia’s 2014 text messages with Mirnasiri, Scourtas’s phone
records—which are centrally relevant to the events of December 9, 2014, described supra—were
also “inadvertently” produced late on May 16, 2018. See Ex.31.
ARGUMENT
I. Dismissal of the Indictment With Prejudice Is Warranted In Light of the

Government’s Bad Faith Destruction of Critical Exculpatory Evidence
The defense seeks dismissal of the indictment, with prejudice, because Mr. DeCicco has
suffered grave prejudice as a result of “outrageous government conduct . . . [that] amounts to a
due process violation.” United States v. Chapman, 524 F.3d 1073. 1084 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting
United States v. Barrera-Moreno, 951 F.2d 1089, 1091 (9th Cir. 1991)). The government has (1)
destroyed exculpatory evidence; (2) made multiple, material misrepresentations to the Court in
support of its motion to detain Mr. DeCicco pretrial; (3) withheld exculpatory evidence until the
eve of trial, and (4) deliberately failed to investigate facts—and one can only infer because it
knew that the evidence uncovered would have been exculpatory. See Brady v. Maryland, 373
U.S. 83 (1963). The circumstances in this case meet the First Circuit’s standard, where
dismissals should be ordered where there is “serious and blatant prosecutorial misconduct that
distorts the integrity of the judicial process.” See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d
1073, 1088 (1st Cir. 1989). In its zeal to pursue Mr. DeCicco, the government has thrown its lot
in with Mirnasiri: an inveterate liar with a vindictive streak, a deep animus against Mr. DeCicco,
and a track record of manipulating or exploiting law enforcement to settle business and personal
disputes, evidence of which was plainly before the government’s view. The government has lost
sight of its duty to safeguard the constitutional rights of the accused to a fair trial, an effective
defense, and an equal application of the law.
31
As a result of a badly-distorted judicial process, Mr. DeCicco has spent over one year in
pretrial detention, deprived of his liberty upon a liar’s uncorroborated say-so and the
government’s acquiescence. He has been wrongly isolated from his family, who rely on him for
financial and emotional support. His businesses and projects have suffered from his absence,
causing him financial harm. And this does not even begin to scratch the surface of the prejudice
that Mr. DeCicco has suffered in the preparation of his defense in his criminal trial resulting
from the government’s mishandling of evidence, of Mirnasiri, and of the entire investigation
itself. Nothing but dismissal of the indictment would begin to redress these harms.
A. The Government’s Spoliation of Exculpatory Evidence Is a Youngblood

Violation and, Standing Alone, Warrants Dismissal
First, the government knowingly destroyed the voicemails that Mr. DeCicco left for
Mirnasiri on December 9, October 8, and October 9, 2014. These voicemails would have gutted
the government’s theory of the case because they would show that, shortly before Mirnasiri was
assaulted, Mr. DeCicco was incensed at Mirnasiri because of his unceasing smearing of Mr.
DeCicco and his family members. Not only did Mr. DeCicco openly express his disdain and
revulsion of Mirnasiri to Mirnasiri himself, making it unlikely that he would have wanted to seek
a partnership with him, the voicemails portended the reason for the violence that followed, taking
this case squarely out of federal reach. See Scheidler v. NOW, Inc., 547 U.S. 9, 15-16 (2006)
(“We hold that physical violence unrelated to robbery or extortion falls outside the scope of the
Hobbs Act.”). These voicemails—and particularly the December 9, 2014 voicemail, given its
proximity in time to Mr. DeCicco’s outreach to Jeffrey Prime and the January 11, 2015 assault—
are nothing if not exculpatory, and their destruction was massively prejudicial to the defense.
In Femia, the First Circuit fashioned a three-part test from Youngblood and Trombetta to
establish when a constitutional violation is at issue as a result of the destruction of evidence.
32
First, the evidence “must possess an exculpatory value that was apparent before the evidence was
destroyed,” second, the defendant is “unable to obtain comparable evidence by other reasonably
available means,” and third, “bad faith” on the part of law enforcement. United States v. Femia,
9 F.3d 990, 993 (1st Cir. 1993) (quoting Trombetta, 467 U.S. at 488-89 and Youngblood, 488
U.S. at 58). These factors are amply met here. First, the voicemails possess clear exculpatory
value, as already explained above. Second, the defendant is unable to obtain comparable
evidence. The voicemails were contemporaneous snapshots and best evidence of Mr. DeCicco’s
state of mind at the time he left them, and only the recipient, Mirnasiri—and anyone with access
to Mirnasiri’s voice mailbox—would have had the chance to obtain them. Any substitute
evidence—in the form of witness testimony or otherwise—would not carry the same emotional
impact and hallmarks of trustworthiness that the furious voice of Mr. DeCicco’s in a live
recording would.15
Finally, bad faith has been clearly established. As the late-produced phone records newly
show, Agent Chizmadia had access to Mirnasiri for weeks—if not months—before the
voicemails were left. Agent Chizmadia interacted with Mirnasiri in real time in reaction to Mr.
DeCicco’s voicemails in October and December, coaching him on how to respond. It beggars
belief that Agent Chizmadia would not have learned of the contents of the voicemails through
Mirnasiri’s contemporaneous account, through listening to them himself, or most likely: through
collecting them from Mirnasiri’s phone, given their central relevance to the conflict between
Mirnasiri and Mr. DeCicco. Having established possession, custody, and control over the
voicemails, the government’s failure to produce them, as part of automatic discovery, as Brady
15
Moreover, the government is trying to exclude Mr. DeCicco’s out-of-court statements reflecting his loathing of
Mirnasiri as “self-serving” statements. See Dkt. No. 260. While these statements would not be not hearsay as they
are not offered for the truth of the matter asserted, they would necessarily be more antiseptic and less impactful.
33
material, or even in response to the defense’s direct requests, clearly establishes bad faith. But to
compound bad faith further, the government’s misrepresentation that the investigation did not
begin until December 28, 2014 gave the Court and the defense the misleading impression that the
FBI was not even involved by October or early December, severely prejudicing the preparation
of the defense and potentially leading to the loss or destruction of the evidence itself.
Even assuming arguendo that the conduct here “does not rise to the level of a due process
violation,” the Court has the inherent supervisory powers to dismiss the indictment. Id. In order
“[t]o justify dismissal under the Court's supervisory powers, the government’s conduct must be
(1) flagrant and (2) cause substantial prejudice to the defendant.” United States v. Fitzgerald, 615
F. Supp. 2d 1156, 1159 (S.D. Cal. 2009) (citing United States v. Jacobs, 855 F.2d 652, 655 (9th
Cir. 1988) and Chapman, 524 F.3d at 1085). The government’s conduct can be flagrant without
being intentional—“‘reckless disregard’ satisfies the standard for dismissal. Jacobs, 855 F.2d at
655; Chapman 524 F.3d at 1085. The government’s contemporaneous access to the voicemails
in 2014—the key exculpatory evidence in this case—and its reckless disregard in allowing them
to be lost or destroyed, easily meets this standard.
B. The Government’s Misrepresentations to the Court Were Knowing,

Material, and Violated Mr. DeCicco’s Constitutional Due Process Rights,
Independently Warranting Dismissal
Misrepresentations to the tribunal may be considered as a basis for dismissal of an
indictment based on prosecutorial misconduct. See United States v. Chapman, 524 F.3d 1073,
1089 (9th Cir. 2008) (“[T]he dismissal was purely intended to sanction the government's flagrant
Brady/Giglio and procedural violations and the misrepresentations used to conceal these
violations”). The government violated Brady and Giglio when it withheld evidence that Agent
Chizmadia and Mirnasiri were communicating from August 2014 until December 28, 2014. The
government then used affirmative misrepresentations to hide that evidence of their pre-December
34
28 discussions. Were it not for the recent production of Mirnasiri’s phone records, which was
obtained from T-Mobile by the government likely as a result of the defense’s renewed efforts to
subpoena them separately, the government’s serial misrepresentations about the investigation
and about Mirnasiri would not have been brought to light. And were it not for the Court’s
hearing on May 23, 2018, the additional supplemental productions of exculpatory evidence under
Brady and Giglio likewise would have remained concealed from the defense. The indictment
should be dismissed as sanctions for the government’s flagrant willingness to distort the facts in
proceedings that directly impact the liberty rights of the defendant.
C. The Government’s Withholding of Exculpatory Evidence Until the Eve of

Trial Is a Brady Violation, Warranting Dismissal
“The egregious failure of the government to disclose plainly material exculpatory
evidence in this case extends a dismal history of intentional and inadvertent violations of the
government's duties to disclose in cases assigned to this court.” United States v. Jones, 620
F.Supp.2d 163, 165 (D. Mass. 2009) (quoting United States v. Jones, 609 F.Supp.2d 113, 119 (D.
Mass 2009)) (characterizing “[t]his [as] yet another matter that arises out of ‘misconduct
committed by a federal prosecutor who should have known better.’” (citation omitted)).
As argued above, the evidence that was withheld is material, and the withholding of these
materials from the defense has prejudiced its ability to prepare its defense. For example, were
Mirnasiri’s phone records never produced, the defense would have been unable to cross-examine
Mirnasiri or Agent Chizmadia about their extended contact before the December 28, 2014
interview. Similarly, the defense would have been unable to challenge the holes in the
government’s evidence, such as missing notes, 302s, and the lack of basis for the several
misrepresentation sin this case. Finally, the exculpatory voicemails that were destroyed in this
case have substantially prejudiced the defense’s case, as they provided the best evidence of Mr.
35
DeCicco’s intent in this case—the critical element of the attempted extortion charge. “Under the
Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, criminal prosecutions must comport with
prevailing notions of fundamental fairness. We have long interpreted this standard of fairness to
require that criminal defendants be afforded a meaningful opportunity to present a complete
defense. To safeguard that right, the Court has developed ‘an area of constitutionally guaranteed
access to evidence.’” California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479, 485, 104 S. Ct. 2528, 2532 (1984)
(quoting United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal, 458 U.S. 858, 867 (1982)). The violation of this
right here warrants dismissal of the indictment.
D. The Government’s Unjustifiably Reckless and Flawed Investigation Violated

Mr. DeCicco’s Constitutional Rights
While there is no constitutional right to an error-free investigation, “a reckless or
intentional failure to investigate other leads offends a defendant's due process rights.” Wilson v.
Lawrence Cty., 260 F.3d 946, 955 (8th Cir. 2001); see also Sanders v. English, 950 F.2d 1152,
1162 (5th Cir. 1992) (denying qualified immunity where evidence could support a finding that
defendant had deliberately ignored exonerating information indicating he had arrested the wrong
person); Whitley v. Seibel, 613 F.2d 682, 686 (7th Cir. 1980) (noting that while negligent acts in
an investigation do not violate due process, intentional acts do); Brockinton v. City of Sherwood,
Arkansas, 503 F.3d 667, 672 (8th Cir. 2007) (plaintiff “must show that [defendant's] failure to
investigate was intentional or reckless, thereby shocking the conscience” because negligently
failing to investigate further does not violate due process); Thompson v. Sanborn, 568 F. Supp.
385, 388 (D.N.H. 1983) (finding issues with investigation included actions beyond simple errors
in investigation). Furthermore, “as the Supreme Court stated, ‘the individual prosecutor has a
duty to learn any favorable evidence known to others acting on the government's behalf in the
36
case, including the police.’” United States v. Diabate, 90 F. Supp. 2d 140, 142 (D. Mass. 2000)
(quoting Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 437 (1995)).
The government here failed to obtain and investigate Mirnasiri’s phone records, a
decision made even more egregious by its decision to obtain all other witnesses’ phone records.
Indeed, the government has conducted extensive analysis of several phone records plans to use
them as inculpatory evidence against Mr. DeCicco. See Dkt. No. 274. Its decision to refrain
from doing the same with respect to Mirnasiri’s phone records—and especially given that it may
yield exculpatory evidence—offends Mr. DeCicco’s due process rights.
In a factually similar case,16 Russo v. City of Bridgeport, law enforcement failed to
properly investigate a crime, the government failed to produce exculpatory evidence (both on
motion and under their Brady obligations), and the prosecuting attorney purposefully remained
ignorant of the exculpatory evidence until one day before seeking dismissal of the case, which
resulted in an unlawful seven-month incarceration of the defendant. 479 F.3d 196 (2d Cir. 2007).
The Second Circuit highlighted three relevant failures on the part of the government that
evidenced substantive failures in due process for the defendant: (1) “failure to investigate the
tape to see if the tape was in fact exculpatory, [which] would readily support a jury finding of
either intentional violation of, or deliberate indifference to, [defendant]'s constitutional rights;”
(2) “failure to investigate the tape to see if the tape was in fact exculpatory, [which] would
readily support a jury finding of either intentional violation of, or deliberate indifference to,
[defendant]'s constitutional rights;” and (3) “failure to follow police procedures with respect to
the storage of the exculpatory evidence adds further evidence on the basis of which a jury could
16
Although the findings in Russo v. City of Bridgeport were pursuant to an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the
analysis related to substantive due process violations are still relevant to the misconduct at issue here.
37
find deliberate indifference to [defendant]’s incarceration and to his asserted innocence.” Id. at
209-10.
E. Taken as a Whole, the Government’s Misconduct Necessitates the Dismissal

of the Indictment
While each of the categories of misconduct above, standing alone, warrant dismissal of
the indictment—whether to vindicate Mr. DeCicco’s due process rights or to sanction the
government—the combined weight of misrepresentations, Brady violations, and spoliation
together amply cross the threshold required to order dismissal with prejudice. See Chapman, 524
F.3d at 1089 (“[T]he dismissal was purely intended to sanction the government's flagrant
Brady/Giglio and procedural violations and the misrepresentations used to conceal these
violations”).
II. If the Court Needs More Information, An Evidentiary Hearing Is Necessary
To the extent that the Court needs more information to rule on this Motion, especially in
light of the last-minute, relevant productions from the government mere hours before the defense
was due to file these papers, the defense requests an evidentiary hearing to provide the Court
with the full picture, insofar as it is able given the circumstances.
III. If the Case Is to Proceed to Trial, Relief Is Necessary to Redress the Prejudice Mr.
DeCicco Has Suffered as a Result of the Government’s Misconduct
A. Mr. DeCicco’s Pretrial Detention Should Be Reversed
Mr. DeCicco has spent over one year in pretrial detention, deprived of his liberty solely
upon Mirnasiri’s dubious attestations and the government’s eagerness to believe him. He has
been unjustly removed from his family, who depend on him for financial and emotional support.
His businesses and projects have suffered from his absence, causing him financial harm. All of
this is aside from the prejudice Mr. DeCicco has suffered in the preparation of his defense in his
38
criminal trial as a result of the government’s mishandling of evidence. Mr. DeCicco should be
granted pretrial release to allow him to assist in his defense should this case continue to trial.
B. Mirnasiri Should Not Be Allowed to Testify at Trial
The Court should exercise its broad discretion and inherent supervisory powers and
disallow Mirnasiri from testifying at trial. See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 45 (1991)
(discussing the Court’s inherent supervisory powers). The government has irreversibly tainted
Mirnasiri as a witness by concealing and affirmatively misrepresenting Mirnasiri’s role in the
investigation and prosecution. Far from the hapless victim and unwillingly participant in this
federal investigation, as the government has portrayed him, Mirnasiri was actively involved in
recruiting the FBI to investigate Mr. DeCicco and developing evidence against him. See Section
IX, supra. But the government falsely represented that the FBI came to Mirnasiri, and further
falsely represented that he never spoke to the FBI until December 28, 2014, while in fact he had
been setting the stage for carefully-orchestrated contacts with Mr. DeCicco in October and
December, all with the help of the FBI. The government has further ignored the significantly
inconsistent versions of the facts of this case as recounted by the so-called victim, including the
dubious existence of the threatening calls, the ever-changing timeline of when Mr. DeCicco
allegedly made his partnership request, and the non-existent prior report to the FBI establishing
the so called pattern of “harassment” that Mirnasiri claims to have suffered. And yet the
government is prepared to put Mirnasiri on the stand, where his testimony represents the lion’s
share of evidence against Mr. DeCicco. Any disadvantage to the prosecution of this case that
results from excluding Mirnasiri from testifying at trial—which may very well result in
dismissal—is an appropriate sanction in relation to the harm caused by the government.
39
C. The Government Should Be Ordered to Review Its Files and Produce All
Withheld, Material, and Exculpatory Evidence Immediately
The government should be ordered to thoroughly search its files and the files of the
prosecution team and produce all withheld, material evidence immediately, as it should have
done from the beginning of these proceedings. See United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97, 108
(1976) (“[T]he prudent prosecutor will resolve doubtful question sin favor of disclosure.”). The
burden of obtaining and disclosing exculpatory evidence always lies with the prosecution. Kyles,
514 U.S. at 437 (“[T]he individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence
known to the others acting on the government’s behalf in the case[.]”); United States v. Osorio,
929 F.2d 753, 761 (1st Cir. 1991) (“An Assistant United States Attorney using a witness with an
impeachable past has a constitutionally derived duty to search for and produce impeachment
information requested regarding the witness.”).
The government has made multiple assurances throughout this prosecution that it had
reviewed, searched, and produced all relevant, material, and exculpatory evidence, including
notes and electronic devices. Yet the defense continues to receive today a stream of
supplemental disclosures that were “inexplicably” or “inadvertently” omitted from the
government’s prior productions, including the latest disclosure that the government reviewed but
did not produce text messages and emails between Mirnasiri and Agent Chizmadia from
Mirnasiri’s phone, even though the government represented just the day before that it had
completed review of the content of Mirnasiri’s phone, implying that there was nothing further to
produce. Compare Exs. 101 and 102. This but being one example of a string of similar
“inadvertent” omitted disclosures of material information throughout the prosecution, the
defense can no longer take the word of the government that it has complied with its discovery
40
obligations. The government should be ordered by the Court to turn over all withheld material
evidence to allow inspection and independent evaluation of its potentially exculpatory value.
D. If the Government Is Unable to Produce All Material Evidence, the Court

Should Enter a Punitive Jury Instruction Against the Government for
Spoliation
A spoliation instruction should be entered against the government relating to all material
evidence that the government is unable to produce, including the destroyed voicemails of Mr.
DeCicco to Mirnasiri in the relevant time period. United States v. Laurent, 607 F.3d 895, 902
(1st Cir. 2010). “A ‘spoliation’ instruction . . . is commonly appropriate in both civil and
criminal cases where there is evidence from which a reasonable jury might conclude that
evidence favorable to one side was destroyed by the other.” Id.
IV. The Government Should Be Otherwise Sanctioned for this Eve of Trial Ambush
In addition to any or all of the relief requested above, it is within the court’s discretion to
order any other sanctions it deems appropriate, given the facts of the case. Chambers v. NASCO,
Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 45 (1991) (citing Roadway Express v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752, 765); see also
Hutto v. Finney, 437 U.S. 678, 689, n. 14 (1978); see also Jones, 620 F.Supp. at 167
(considering monetary sanctions to reimburse Court “for at least some of the time spent by
Jones’ Criminal Justice Act counsel in dealing with issues caused by her failure to disclose
material exculpatory information”).
CONCLUSION
For these reasons, the motion to dismiss the indictment for government misconduct
should be granted.
41
Respectfully submitted,
GARY P. DECICCO
By his attorneys,
/s/ Thomas C. Frongillo

Thomas C. Frongillo (BBO# 180690)
Caroline K. Simons (BBO# 680827)
Jessica L. Perry (BBO# 696392)
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
One Marina Park Drive
Boston, Massachusetts 02210
frongillo@fr.com
simons@fr.com
jperry@fr.com
TEL: (617) 542-5070
FAX: (617) 542-8906
James J. Cipoletta (BBO# 084260)

Law Offices of James J. Cipoletta
Citizens Bank Building
385 Broadway Suite 307
Revere, Massachusetts 02151
jim@cipoletta.com
Tel: (781) 289-7777
Dated: May 25, 2018 Fax: (781) 289-9468
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true copy of the above document was filed on May 25, 2018
through the CM/ECF system and will be served electronically to registered CM/ECF participants
as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing.
/s/ Thomas C. Frongillo

Thomas C. Frongillo
42
Case 1:17-cr-10092-NMG
SAUGUSDocument
POLICE 304-1
35-14 Filed 05/25/18
DEPARTMENT 04/24/17 Page 1 of 14 Page: 1
' . 1
Call Number Printed: 01/ 11 /2017
For Date : 08/04/2014 Monday
Cal l Number Time Call Reason Action Priority
1500 Other - HARASSMENT REPORT TAKEN 3

Call Taker : Detective FRANK J MORELLO
Primary Id: Detective FRANK J MORELLO
Location/Address: [00 1943]
Calling Party:
Narrative:
called to report that he received a harassing
package and note. Detectives Forni and Morello to
investigate. See incident#
GOVERNMENT
EXHIBIT
1
17-mj-4063-DHH
USAO- DECICCO- 00000002

Saugus Document 35-14 Filed 05/25/18
304-1
Police Department 04/24/17 Page 2 of 14 Page: 1
Incident Report 01/11/2017
Incident#:
Call#:
Date/Time Reported: 08/04/2014 1500

Report Date/Time : 08/05/2014 1023
Occurred Between: 08/04/2014 1200 - 08/04/2014 1300
Status: Incident Open
Reporting Officer: Detective FRANK MORELLO

Assisting Officer: Sergeant KEVIN MURPHY
Detective : Detective FRANK MORELLO
Approving Officer: DETECTIVE LIEUTENANT DAVID GECOYA
Signature:
Signature:
# OFFENSE(S) ATTEMPTED TYPE
LOCATION TYPE: Other/Unknown Zone: test 2
1 HARASSMENT, CRIMINAL N Misdemeanor

265/43A/A 265 43A
OCCURRED: 08/04/20 1 4 1200
2 HARASSMENT, CRIMINAL N Misdemeanor

265/43A/A 265 43A
OCCURRED: 08/04/2014 1200
# VICTIM(S) SEX RACE AGE SSN PHONE
1 w 54 6:
VICTIM CONNECTED TO OFFENSE NUMBER(S): 1 2

CONTACT INFORMATION:
Cal1Back Number (Primary)
# PERSON (S) PERSON TYPE SEX RACE AGE SSN PHONE .,
1 WITNESS w 42
EMPLOYER: TONYS FLORIST LYNN

304-1
Incident Report 01/11/2017
Incident#:
Call#:
OTHER PROPERTIES PROPERTY# STATUS
1 VASE WITH FLOWERS AND CARD Evidenc e (Not Nib rs Reportable)

QUANTITY : 1 VALUE: $40.00
SERIAL J : NOT AVAIL
DATE: 08/05/20 1 4
OWNER:
Attachments for 14-1020 - 0F

Description Type
CARDS PDF
Attachment#: 08975447 2 4E44184A1C316F533FA183 7
PHONE4489 PDF
Attachment#: 4DE3F1A50E374D4 CADD9F602E96EF9FB
PEZNOLA STATEMENT PDF
Attachment#: 8680A3FA5 5Cl40DBA1CFDA5FE2BlC6CE
CARS . COM PDF
Attachment#: A8189917B43544D39AF178575E2637AO

304-1
NARRATIVE FOR DETECTIVE FRANK J MORELLO
Ref:
08/04/2014 1500
1. On the above date and time Det. S.Forni and I responded to the to take a report of
harassment. Upon our anival we spoke with (02/22/60). l stated that he received
flowers and a decorative glass cross. The card attached to the flowers read "Congrats Gary- We all know who's
place that is. We hope this cross will help you get rid of that muslim prick- From all route one auto dealers."
is of Middle Eastern descent, but claims to not be a religious man. The flowers were delivered by
Tony's florist which is located at 696 Western Ave. in Lynn. Shortly after receiving the flowers took a
call from a blocked number. The male caller said "fucking muslim, I'm going to fucking kill you". A third
incident occuned sh01tly after that when $75.00 worth of pizza was delivered to his store that he did not order
with payment due upon delivery. The pizza was ordered by telephone. The caller ID on the phone showed
781-849-4489.
2. was asked ifhe had any prior incidents of harassment that were similar to this one. He told us that
he had one prior incident that involved a neighbor of his. That neighbor is now identified as Gary DeCicco
(08/31/58). He told us that he had contacted the FBI about the matter and it stopped shortly after.
3. Detective Forni and I went to Tony's Florist at 696 Western ave. in Lynn. We spoke with the owners who
told us that Stephanie Russo (11/05/71) was the clerk that took the order. They provided us with Stephanie's
telephone number in the event we wanted to speak with her ). They also described the woman
that ordered the flowers as having long straight blond hair, thin, approximately 33 years old and well dressed.
They said that she was very polite and easy to deal with. They could offer us no more details and refered us to
speak with Stephanie. We checked area businesses for exterior cameras and found none that would have
captured any useful footage.
4. Upon our return to the station I contacted Stephanie Russo by telephone. Stephanie told me that she had
taken the order from the woman and was shocked that there had been a problem. She described the woman as
being in her mid to late twenties, neatly dressed and pleasant to deal with. She told me that the woman picked
out the flower anangement and vase and asked for a quote. When she got the price she left in the direction of
the Santander bank located at 35 Market Sq. and returned a short time later with cash. Russo did not observe
her entering a vehicle when she left. Det. Forni also checked the phone number used to order the pizzas.
' returned to The Flatley Company with a line status as "active land line".
08/06/2014 1300
5. I returned to the to speak with again today because he received more

threatening and harassing messages. informed me that the business has received a phone call from a
man wanting a credit card number to pay for the pizzas that they had ordered. told me that his assistant
had taken the call and told him that it sounded like a male with a Greek accent. The call came in at 1201 and
was from a blocked number. A second call came to cell phone at approximately 1300 hrs. A male

304-1
Ref:
voice told that the cross was for him and that he was going to get burned on the cross. . also
provided me with a printed copy of a review of his dealership posted on cars.com. Cars.com is a web site
visited by millions of car shoppers each month. It contains pricing information, dealer reviews, editorial
content and other research tools for shoppers. One of the features of this site allows shoppers to post comments
about the car dealer. A posting was made on 07/31/14 that painted the dealership in a very poor light.
believes that this was an attempt to hurt his business. He told me that the person posting the review had to be
lying because he never had an Audi Q7 for sale at his dealership as the post suggests. had contacted
Cars.com and spoke with "Matt" at and asked that the post be removed. Matt infmmed him that
the IP address of the person that posted the review would be available to the police if needed. A copy of that
posting is in the case file as well as attached to the report as a PDF file.
6. After speaking with about the new incidents I asked ifhe had any idea who the slim blond female
that purchased the flowers might be. immediately told me that he did have an idea who it might be.
He told me that a former employee of his was likely to be a suspect. He told me that
worked for him years ago and was now dating Gary DeCicco. led me to believe that
liked to attach herself to wealthy men who would "take care of her". He also indicated that this
was likely not an exclusive relationship as DeCicco had different girlfriends. also told me that a girl
named also lived with Gary. is believed to be . shows an
address out of ., Nahant, the same address as DeCicco.
7. When I asked . why DeCicco would be interested in harassing him he told me that he was involved
with the sale of the property that the dealership was built on. told me that DeCicco owned the land,
but the sale was made through i also told me that DeCicco wanted to be a partner in the business,
but at the time he had no need for one. also mentioned that he had seen DeCicco driving by the
building recently.
08/07/2014 1131
8. A photo array has been prepared to show to Stephanie Russo. The array contains a photo of
A vedisian and a photo of . This airnys will be shown to Russo as soon as an
appointment with her can be an·anged.
08/21/2014
9. Detective Gaeta and I went to Tony's Florist today to show Stephanie Russo a photo array. Det. Gaeta was
unawai·e who the suspect(s) were in the photo anay. I waited outside in the cai· while Det. Gaeta went into the
business. When he returned, he told me that Stephanie had picked picture number four and told him that she
was sixty percent sure that the person who had purchased the flowers was in that photograph. She initialed and
dated the back of the picture. Photograph number four is a a drivers license image of

304-1
Ref:
08/27/2014
10. I contacted Cassie Kelleher from Santander Security today to request video footage from 08/04 to determine
if withdrew the money for the purchase at the flower shop. A message was left on her voice mail
to contact me. Kelleher's contact number is
09/02/2014
11. I spoke with Cassie Kelleher today. She inf01med me that those records could only be released after the
subpoena process was completed. At this time the case will be forwarded to the FBI by Det. Donovan for further
investigation.
Detective Morello
09/24/2014
12. I spoke with again today regarding continued harassment that he is receiving. inf01ms
me that there have been multiple incidents where a person claiming to be himself orders services. These
services have ranged from food deliveries to a contractor showing up at the to measure
the prope1iy for a fence, to mulch being delivered at his house. . informed me that he now believes the
person responsible for these incidents is a former employee named Saad MOUSTAFA
13. told me that he arrived at the conclusion that MOUSTAFA was responsible for some of the events
based on a voice identification that he did over the telephone in his office. explained that he was
contacted by the Saugus Chamber of Commerce representative TelTi Peznola about a recent application made in
his name. i explained that he had made no such application to the chamber. Peznola went to meet
at his office. Also present was secretary Connie Michaud. called a telephone
number that he knew MOUSTAFA would answer and placed the call on speaker. Immediately upon
MOUSTAFA answering Peznola identified the voice on the telephone as the person that she had been dealing
with that was trying to open a membership with the Saugus Chamber of Commerce. Michaud also immediately
recognized the voice as a person that had called and had attempted to obtain credit card number over
the telephone for payment of a pizza delivery. Michaud suspected that the caller was misrepresenting himself
and did not give him any information.
14. believes that MOUSTAFA is responsible because of past issues between the two of them.
Moustafa was only employed by : for 5-6 weeks. became distrustful of MO USTAFA after he
learned that MOUSTAFA did not believe in paying taxes and held anti american views. also told me
that MO USTAF A claimed to have been a room mate with either the cousin or nephew of Ayman Al Zawahiri
who is the leader of Al Qaeda. In the past MO USTAF A has accused of assaulting him. The incident

304-1
Ref: 14-1020-0F
went to court, but was dismissed because eye witness testimony contradicted MOUSTAFA's claims.
MOUSTAFA told that he was going to make life difficult for him. did not have the time to
pursue harassment charges or a 258E order at the time because his new dealership on Route One was being built
and he had no time to spend on the matter. The hanassment began when his dealership opened for business.
15. Due to the fact that there is another agency cunently investigating this and related matters I will be waiting
to speak with SA Jesse Chizmadia so that my investigation does not interfere with or reveal the presence of his
investigation. This report will be updated as neccessary.
10/02/2014
16. I spoke with Theresa Peznola today. Peznola told me that she received a call from a man claiming to be
. This call was made from a blocked number. This person wanted to set up a meeting to join the
Saugus Chamber of Commerce. Peznola went to meet at his business. When she met him he denied
ever having called her. While the two were in his office made a telephone call and asked Peznola to
listen to the voice and tell him if she recognized the voice as the person that ananged the meeting. Peznola
confirmed that that it did sound like the person that she spoke with. Peznola told me that she was 70-80 percent
sure that the voice she heard at office was the same person had tried to open an account with her.
10-16-2014
17. At this time SA Chizmadia from the FBI Boston Field Office is handling this case. All info1mation from
SPD records have been turned over to SA Chizmadia.
Detective Frank Morello

304-1
NARRATIVE FOR DETECTIVE THOMAS P GAETA
Ref: 14-1020-0F
On 8/21/14 Detective Morello and I went to Tony's Florist to show Stephanie Russo a photo anay. I was
unaware of who the suspect was in the photo anay. Detective Morello waited in the cruiser while I went inside
to show Ms. Russo the anay. Before showing Ms. Russo the photo airny I informed her that I would be showing
her a series of photographs. I fmther informed Ms. Russo that the suspect may or may not be in the photographs
that she is about to view. I showed Ms. Russo the photographs one by one. Ms. Russo identified photograph
number four as the person that she believed purchased flowers from her. I asked Ms. Russo how sure she was
and she stated sixty percent. I asked Ms. Russo to initial and date the back of the picture.
I returned the photo an-ay to Detective Morello and inf01med him that Ms. Russo identified photograph number
four and she was sixty percent certain that she was the person that purchased the flowers.
Detective Thomas Gaeta

Case 1:17-cr-10092-NMG Document 304-1
35-14 Filed 05/25/18
04/24/17 Page 9 of 14
Saugus Police Department
Images Associated with 14-1020-0F
USAO_DECICC0_00000010
35-14 Filed 05/25/18
04/24/17 Page 10 of 14
C{)n.yr&l.:/-z;. (],""--':} --
'Ne.. ?Lll /0,,_o w t,J /,co 's

<j) Let_<:!_e, '-t-lrlod- ( S, t.,0.e._
f+D{2·(..,. .IV\. L~ C Vi) S' 'S' W { [ (
'\?o v.... &e-+- r2- tel ~ of
1
• [\9-f f
"~:',. TJ,vv+ /)1\ LL$ LU'Vl .p e..t cK .
. - 'f12-o,V\ &- U {2-T. I Av-..h d w.l ~ i
I
\ \
F lowcn, o Gifts " Gourn ie l l:las ke l~ 800-634·5627

696 W ES T ERN A V E NUE TEL (78 I) 5 92· 0 220
LY N N , M ASS . O 19 0 5·2299 F A X (78 1J 599·3 18 0
••.\!.__., f-10\ver · • (,ifts • C1nurn ,1 13;-iskds

y·
/ll/fl''\ ) i]
!\!lilt ;u}"8
{>'Jo \\IES1 l"llN 1\VlNLIC • LYNN, MA·;:,, Ol <JO;,-:l;!'J!J
/lOO (,'.N-56:.!7 • TEL.. (7S I) !i'J? 02:.!0 • F1\X (7l>I) 59') 1JSO
_ -, _ _ _ _ 1<1111,v.101,~tihP.ll_or_i~l_,·rn~
.
35-14 Filed 05/25/18
04/24/17 Page 11 of 14
(t)nJ ,--a{<;. Q,(ILr:} ·-

A)e_ CLll /<-h..o tA) tJ ho 's
q) lA._(!_e_ Yk_od- l S , W -e..
ftD f-<-.,. ·-fk. 1.-,5 C l"1) S' S lAJ ( {(
••
1
/VL[ r v,1) (A__ ,9-e-+- rLtol olf
. ~"'"' 1)vv+ fh~L$ UIY\. Pf2-lLK · ,
•J:'- pP-.1w\ CA.U (LT./ fn1,.:hclet-tl~ ;
\
I
I
I
L1'lo1n' rs Gifl s O Go 11n11e l Bas ket s 800-63 4·5627

696 WESTERN AVENUE TEL (78 I J 592·0220
LYNN , MASS. 01905·2299 FAX (781) 599· 3 1 BO
rluwe rs " ( 1ifls • C:iournwl n~1sk •ti;

(,% IVESll'l!N i\\lENUL: • LYNN. ~ 11\',S. () I'JO;, i'Z<J<J
800 r, ,M-[,(,;>7 • TEL. (7S l) !;9'.· U'.l:.l(J • FA>; (78 1) S1J<J-:!l.'ifl
11w1V. lo 11vl l ,e/lor isl.crn ,1
~ ~ ~~ ~
35-14 Filed 05/25/18
04/24/17 Page 12 of 14
Connie Michaud
From: feedback@cars.com
Sent: Thursdav. Julv 31. 2014 4:52 PM
To:
Subject: has received a review on Cars.com(1 stars)
has received a 1 star review by a consumer on Cars.com. As you know,

your careful consideration of a review is highly recommended:
do not expect to negotiate the inflated price By Vincent from Boston, MA I July 29, 2014
went to buy an Audi Q7. the prices were way too high. when I showed them comparable cars in
the market for $3,000 less I was sworn at and told to never come back. be prepared to pay
extra because they have a fireplace in their showroom.
Rating from Vincent
Overall: 1
Customer Service: 1 out of 5
Buying Process: 1 out of 5
Quality of Repair: 1 out of 5
Overall Facilities: 2 out of 5
To reply to this review please visit My Dealer Center at http://dealers.cars.com.
If you are unable to click the above link, you can simply paste the URL into your browsers
address bar.
(Cars.com Dealer ID: 193477)
Copyright, Cars.com Division of Classified Ventures, LLC. All rights reserved.

175 W. Jackson Blvd, Suite 800, Chicago, IL 60604.
To change the email address for these notifications please contact support@cars.com. ~s:I'f
AAfreSJ"

35-14 Filed 05/25/18
04/24/17 Page 13 of 14
VOLUNTARY STATEMENT
(UNDER ARREST)
Report#_ _ _ _ __
Name: ·-rf!Jtttsu ' l~Ztl6 I~ SS#~-- ~--
Address:J DOB:_ _, -
City:S'U'-@lJ State: y(}(t ZipCode/)/t.;{)k, Telephone:
I ~·r.. . . .,_f1~lf!:~-)..-ci_,___./t..___.z.,,j'"""'l,~~/.~{J...>~----'
am about to make lmown to,
Officer: 01(rreljr) of the Saugus Police Department the
following facts. I volunteer the following information ofmy own free will, for whatever
it may se1·ve.
(over)
I have read the following statement consisting of ( ) page(s), each page of which bears
my signature, and corrections, if any, bear my initials. I ce1·tify that the facts contained
herein are tme and correct. 0 d- ,. ,,/ I\ i
1 1
~ J
Dated:_L___!__ / _Le T i m e : ~ M
Witness: Witness: ~
Signature of person giving voluntary statement: 71{J1L<4 L~ ~
C:\Dorummls,md Sr./li11~\/lll Vurs\D0(11111t11fs\jo,mJ\rn/1111ldt)llllllt'r,1rr(J/.dor

35-14 Filed 05/25/18
04/24/17 Page 14 of 14
Page 1 of 1
·------·-"'
Search Type: Phone
Reference:
(78 1} 8~9~1489
I recor<l ngyregated.
Source: Rc1•erse Phone Gateway Detail
Nnmc: IIUJ:J A l_l fY_l'O l
Phone: - --:--:--
Line Slat us: Active Landlinc
Ported: N
Opcrnling Compnny
Name: V,;u1on th,! \Yh.mland ha·.
Affi liated To: Y<_H !l'U
Phone: l.8.J!fil..,!M1-'61l1J
Fax: j.l.15)'1-J'l-t,<J fr!
0 11crnling Compa ny Conlncl

Contact Name: Verizon Legal Compliance
Conine! Address:
(1 '" lflll l to. I~ I )il)<JIA I I •.
Snn Anec h• TX 7~•102
Expand the result group lo view more detailed infonnnlion from this source
https://clear.thomsonreuters.com/clr/a/2AC4F8CF511 F285180997A8DA05COD2C.cache.ht... 8/4/2014
Case 1:17-cr-10092-NMG Document 304-2 Filed 05/25/18 Page 1 of 4
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Fish & Richardson P.C.
One Marina Park Drive
Boston, MA 02210-1878
617 542 5070 main
61 7 542 8906 fax
BY HAND AND E-MAIL
March 6, 2018
Kristina E. Barclay
Assistant U.S. Attorney
U.S. Attorney's Office
John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse
1 Courthouse Way, Suite 9200
Boston, MA 02210
Re: United States v. Gary DeCicco, Crim. No. 17-10092-NMG
Dear Kristina:
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16, Fed. R. Crim. P. 26.2, Local Rules of Criminal Procedure 116.1,
116.2, and 116.3, and principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland, 373
U.S. 83 (1963), United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S.
150 ( 1972), this is a formal request for discovery on behalf of defendant Gary DeCicco in this
case. This request supplements prior discovery requests submitted by Mr. DeCicco on or about
June 12, 2017 and January 8, 2018.
DOCUMENTS AND OBJECTS MATERIAL TO PREPARING THE DEFENSE
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(l)(D)(i), the defense requests production of books, papers,
documents, data, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or places in the government's
possession, custody, or control that constitute items "material to preparing the defense" as
follows:
REQUEST 1
All documents and objects regarding Sahar LLC's purchase of property located at 173 Main
Street, Saugus, MA from Olde Saugus Land Company, as described in Paragraph 5 of the
Affidavit of FBI Special Agent Matthew Elio ("Elio Affidavit") dated March 16, 2017 and
Paragraph 5 of the IRS Memorandum oflnterview of CW-1 dated January 17, 2017 (the "IRS
Memorandum"), including, without limitation, CW-1 's obtaining of all necessary permits
required for construction of an automobile dealership on 173 Main Street, as described in
Paragraph 6 of the Elio Affidavit and Paragraphs 7, 8, and 10 of the IRS Memorandum.
REQUEST2
All documents and objects pertaining to architectural plans for Auto Excellence Group including,
without limitation:
fr.com
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 2
(1) all communications (Yvritten and electronic) between CW-1 (and his counsel) <1nd
DiLullo Associates; and
(2) all notes, records, and writings reflecting any and all disputes between CW-1 and
DiLullo Associates.
REQUEST3
All documents and objects pertaining to estimates that CW-1 obtained from contractors and
suppliers for the construction of Auto Excellence Group.
REQUEST4
All documents and objects pertaining to disputes between CW-1 and/or any entity controlled by
CW-1 and contractors and suppliers arising out of the construction of Auto Excellence Group
including, without limitation:
(1) all communications (written and electronic) between CW-1 (and his counsel) and
any contractor who bid, contracted, or performed work at Auto Excellence Group;
(2) alleged threats by Peter Varone to "shut down" the construction project, as
described in Paragraph 13 of the IRS Memorandum;
(3) the alleged meeting at the office of Attorney Welsh at which Peter Varone, CW-1
and Attorney Welsh attended, as described in Paragraph 15 of the IRS
Memorandum;
(4) all lawsuits or threats to file lawsuits, and written demands by contractors against
CW-1 or any entity controlled by CW-1 for alleged nonpayment, including
mechanics liens or notices of contracts filed against 173 Main Street, Saugus;
(5) all judgments in favor of contractors and against CW-1 and/or any entity
controlled by CW-1;
(6) all threats made by CW-1 to any contractor, including, without limitation, threats
to report any contractor to law enforcement authorities;
(7) alleged payment of kickbacks, as described in Paragraph 11, of the IRS

Memorandum;
(8) disputes between Mr. DeCicco and CW-1 regarding Olde Saugus Land
Company's performance under the purchase and agreement for the property at
173 Main Street, including CW-1 's claim that Olde Saugus Land Company
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 3
breached an obligation to pave the property, as described in Paragraphs 7, 20, and

21 of the IRS Memorandum; and
(9) documents and objects regarding CW-1 's alleged call or calls with Rick Scourtas
concerning statements that Mr. DeCicco made as described in Paragraph 21 of the
IRS Memorandum, including interview reports of Mr. Scourtas and telephone
records of the alleged calls or calls.
REQUEST 5
The defense requests all books, papers, documents, data, photographs, and tangible objects
regarding CW-1 claim that Mr. DeCicco requested to be CW-1 's partner in connection with Auto
Excellence Group, as described in Paragraph 7 of the Elio Affidavit, including, without
limitation:
(1) All e-mails, text messages, or other documents between CW-1 and Mr. DeCicco
discussing Mr. DeCicco's alleged partnership request;
(2) All e-mails, text messages, or other documents between CW-1 and any person
other than Mr. DeCicco in which CW-1 discussed Mr. DeCicco' s alleged
partnership request; and
(3) All documents and objects memorializing Mr. DeCicco's alleged partnership
request to CW-1.
R EQUEST 6
regarding CW-1 claim that he informed the general contractor to tell Mr. DeCicco that CW-1 did
not want Mr. DeCicco near Auto Excellence Group, as described in Paragraph 9 of the Elio
Affidavit, including, without limitation:
( 1) All e-mails, text messages, or other documents between CW-1 and the general
contractor; and
(2) All e-mails, text messages, or other documents between CW-1 and Mr. DeCicco.
REQUEST7
regarding any alleged demand for money or property that Mr. DeCicco made to CW-1 during the
timeframe alleged in Count 1 (2013 to 2015).
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page4
REOUEST8
regarding any alleged demand for money or property that Mr. DeCicco made through any third-
party to CW-1 during the timeframe alleged in Count 1 (2013 to 2015).
REQUEST9
regarding all communications between Mr. DeCicco and CW-1from2013-2015, the timeframe
of Count 1, including, without limitation, e-mails, text messages, telephone records, instant
messages, Skype, SMS, social media messaging (e.g., Facebook, Linkedln, etc.), and videos.
REQUEST 10
regarding Mr. DeCicco's purchase of vehicles from CW-1from2013-2015.
REQUEST 11
regarding the following four alleged events involving CW-1 at Auto Excellence Group from
August 4-6, 2014, as described in the Saugus Police Department Narrative for Detective Frank J.
Morello ("Det. Morello's Narrative"):
A. Delivery of flowers, a cross, and a handwritten note to Auto Excellence Group on August
4, 2014;
B. An anonymous call on August 4, 2014;
C. Delivery of pizza on August 4, 2014; and
D. Additional alleged threatening and harassing messages on or about August 6, 2014.
This request includes, without limitation, the following:
(1) All documents and objects in the possession, custody, or control of the Saugus
Police Department, the FBI, and the Massachusetts State Police;
(2) All documents and objects regarding statements made by CW-1 and any other
witnesses regarding the alleged incidents;
(3) All documents and objects regarding the delivery of flowers, a cross, and a
handwritten note to Auto Excellence Group on August 4, 2014, including
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 5
telephone records showing that CW-1 culled the florist after receiving the flowers,
as described in Paragraph 4 of the IRS Memorandum;
(4) All documents and objects regarding an alleged anonymous call made to Auto
Excellence Group on August 4, 2014 after the delivery of the flowers, including
(a) law enforcement's efforts to identify the alleged anonymous caller and the
telephone number from which the alleged call was made, and (b) telephone
records showing the call was received by CW-1 or Auto Excellence Group;
(5) All documents and objects regarding the delivery of pizza to Auto Excellence
Group on August 4, 2014, including telephone records showing the telephone
number of the caller who allegedly placed the order;
(6) All documents and objects regarding CW-1 's statement to the Saugus Police that
CW-1 had a prior similar harassment incident involving his neighbor, as described
in Paragraph 2 of Det. Morello's Narrative;
(7) All documents and objects regarding CW-1 's statement to the Saugus Police that
he had contacted the FBI about the prior harassment incident and it stopped
shortly thereafter, including FBI Form 302 Reports, agents' handwritten notes, or
any other evidence that CW-1 had made such a report to the FBI;
(8) All documents and objects regarding the FBI's efforts to investigate the alleged
harassment incident reported to the Bureau by CW-1 and the results of that
investigation;
(9) All documents and objects regarding how and when Gary DeCicco was identified
to the Saugus Police as the person involved in the alleged harassment incident as
described in Paragraph 2 of Det. Morello's Narrative (i.e., "That neighbor is now
identified as Gary DeCicco (08/31/58)");
(10) All drafts and metadata ofDet. Morello's Narrative showing when Detective
Morello added the above sentence to Paragraph 2, which appears under the date of
August 4, 2014, but indicates that it was inserted at a later date;
(11) All documents and objects regarding an alleged call received by CW-1 's assistant
regarding payment for pizza, including telephone records showing the telephone
number of the caller who allegedly placed the call requesting payment;
(12) All documents and objects regarding an alleged threatening call received by CW-
1 on his cell phone at approximately 1 p.m. on August 6, 2014, including (a) law
enforcement's efforts to identify the alleged anonymous caller and the telephone
number from which the alleged call was made, and (b) telephone records from
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 6
CW-1 cell phone showing thut CW-1 actually received a call on the date and time
described in Det. Morello's Narrative;
(13) All documents and objects regarding law enforcement's efforts to investigate and
identify the person who posted information about Auto Excellence Group on
Cars.com as described in Paragraph 5 of Det. Morello's Narrative;
(14) All documents and objects regarding the identification of Kimberly DeBenedictis
as the person who purchased the flowers that were delivered to Auto Excellence
Group;
(15) All documents and objects regarding the Saugus Police Department forwarding of
its file to the FBI for further investigation on September 2, 2014, including all
documents provided to the FBI;
(16) All documents and objects regarding the alleged continued harassment that CW-1
reported to the Saugus Police as described in Paragraphs 12 and 13 of Det.
Morello's Narrative, including, without limitation, documents pertaining to CW-
1's disputes with Saad Moustafa and related court proceedings; and
(17) All documents and objects regarding the Saugus Police Department's cooperation
in the investigation with the FBI as described in Paragraphs 15 and 17 of Det.
Morello's Narrative.
REQUEST 13
regarding CW-1 's alleged report to the FBI on December 28, 2014 that "he was receiving threats
from DECICCO and his associates related to CW-1 's refusing 'to give part' of his business to
DECICCO," as described in footnote 2 to the Elio Affidavit.
REQUEST 14
regarding an alleged incident that occurred at Auto Excellent Group on or about January 11,
2015, during which CW-1 was struck by a person unknown to CW-1, including, without
limitation:
(1) all audio recordings (and transcripts of any such recordings) made during the
incident;
(2) alleged instructions given by CW-3 to CW-2 regarding the incident, including the
instruction that CW-2 tell CW-1 that "this would teach CW-1 'how to talk to a
lady,"' as described in Paragraph 19 of the Elio Affidavit;
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 7
(3) telephone records for the period of 2013 to 2015 of all individuals allegedly
involved with the incident (CW-2, CW-3, CW-4, Mr. DeCicco), including CW-
1's cellular phone records;
(4) CW-1 's report to the FBI on February 11, 2015 that he had been assaulted at his
place of business, as described in Paragraph 15 of the Elio Affidavit;
(5) the alleged meeting between CW-1 and an alleged associate of Mr. DeCicco on
January 12, 2015, as described in Paragraph 24 of the Elio Affidavit;
(6) the Saugus Police Department's investigation of the incident; and
(7) the statement in the FBI' s Form 1057 Report dated February 17, 2015: "It is
believed that the assault was arranged by the same subject of the above captioned
investigation in response to an alleged debt owed by the cooperating witness to
the subject."
REQUEST 15
regarding telephone calls made by CW-2 related to the investigation in this case, as described in
Paragraph 17 of Elio' s Affidavit.
R EQUEST 16
regarding the recorded conversation between CW-3 and CW-4 (referenced as Co-Conspirator 1),
as described in Paragraph 25 of the Elio Affidavit.
R EQUEST 17
regarding all alleged payments by Mr. DeCicco to CW-4, including those described in Paragraph
26 of the Elio Affidavit.
REQUEST 18
regarding all communications (e-mails, text messages, telephone records, instant messages,
Skype, SMS, social media messaging (e.g., Facebook, Linkedln, etc.), and videos) between CW-
1 and/or Auto Excellence Group and any other person regarding Mr. DeCicco from 2013 to the
present, including, without limitation, the following people:
• The United States Attorney's Office

FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 8
• The FBI
• The IRS
• The Massachusetts State Police
• The Saugus Police Department
• Any other law enforcement agency
• Charles Lightbody
• Rick Scourtas
• George Mastoras
• Connie Michaud
• Peter Varone, Sr .
• Peter Varone, Jr .
• Kim DeBenedictis
• Silvia Corina Milian
• Gary DeCicco
• Atlantis Marina
REQUEST 19
regarding all communications (e-mails, text messages, telephone records, instant messages,
Skype, SMS, social media messaging (e.g., Facebook, Linkedin, etc.), and videos) for the
following people from 2013-2015, including, without limitation, the following:
• CW-1
• Auto Excellence Group
• Connie Michaud
• Rick Scourtas
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 9
• Peter Varonc, Sr.
• Peter Varone, Jr.
• George Mastoras
• Kim DeBenedictis
• Gary DeCicco
• Atlantis Marina
• Charles Lightbody
• Silvia Corina Milian (from 2013 to the present)
REOUEST20
The defense requests all books, papers, documents, data, photographs, and tangible objects on
CW-1 's cell phone(s) of Gary DeCicco, Pamela Avedesian, Linda DeCicco, and Victoria
Laurano from 2010 to present, including, without limitation, a video of Mr. DeCicco's arrest
taken by CW-1 on or around March 17, 2017.
REQUEST21
regarding financial records and business records of Auto Excellence Group sufficient to show its
financial condition for the years 2014-2017, including the dealership's record book, which are
required to be maintained pursuant to Massachusetts law, and federal and state income tax
returns.
REQUEST22
regarding financial records and business records of prior automobile dealership businesses
owned and/or operated by CW-1 (including Allston Motor Sports) before he formed Auto
Excellence Group sufficient to show the financial condition of those businesses for the years
2008-2014, including the dealerships' record books, which are required to be maintained
pursuant to Massachusetts law, and their federal and state income tax returns.
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 10
REQUEST23
regarding CW-1 's employment of Kimberly DeBenedictis, as described in Paragraph 6 of Det.
Morello's Narrative, including all payments made to Ms. DeBenedictis.
The indictment charges Mr. DeCicco with attempting to extort CW-1 from 2013 to 2015. The
government commenced its investigation in this case in 2014. Since that time and possibly
earlier, the government has known that communications between CW-1 and Mr. DeCicco are
highly relevant to the alleged crime. The government now claims that telephone records of CW-
1 no longer exist because it inexplicably waited until April 4, 2017 to issue a subpoena for those
records, almost three years after it initiated the investigation and well after the filing of
complaint. The missing telephone records are material to the preparation of the defense. The
defense requests all papers, documents, data, and tangible objects concerning the government's
attempts to obtain CW-1 's telephone records for the period 2013 to 2015, including its requests
directly to CW-1 himself to provide the records .
REQUEST24
regarding recorded statements of Mr. DeCicco. During the timeframe identified in the
indictment (2013 to 2015), federal agents and the Massachusetts State Police intercepted and
recorded electronic communications of Mr. DeCicco, including during in the summer of 2013 .
They are discoverable under Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(l)(E)(i), as well as Fed. R. Crim. P.
16(a)(l)(B)(i) and Local Rule 116.l(c)(l)(A).
REQUEST25
showing that the alleged actions of Mr. DeCicco in the criminal complaint and/or the indictment
affected interstate commerce.
DOCUMENTS AND OBJECTS THE GOVERNMENT INTENDS TO USE IN ITS CASE-

IN-CHIEF
R£OUEST26
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(l)(D)(ii), the defense requests production of books, papers,
possession, custody, or control that the government intends to use in its case-in-chief, including,
without limitation, documents and objects regarding the topics identified in Requests Numbers 1
to 25.
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 11
CONSENSUAL INTERCEPTIONS
REQUEST27
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(l)(E) and Local Rule 116.l(c)(l)(D)(i), the defense requests
all interceptions of wire, oral, or electronic communications, relating to the charges in the
indictment, made with the consent of one of the parties to the communication in which Mr.
DeCicco was intercepted or which the government intends to use in its case-in-chief, including,
without limitation:
(1) All consensual interceptions made by CW-1 of Mr. DeCicco from 2013 to 2015;
and
(2) All unsuccessful attempts by law enforcement to obtain consensual interceptions

of Mr. DeCicco from 2013 to 2015 in connection with the alleged attempted
extortion.
EXPERT WITNESSES
REQVEST28
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(l)(G), the defense requests a written summary of any
testimony that the Government intends to use under Fed. R. Evid. 702, 703, or 705 in its case-in-
chief.
DEFENDANT'S ORAL STATEMENTS
REQUEST29
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(l)(A), Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(l)(B)(ii), Fed. R. Crim. P.

16(a)(l)(E)(i), and Local Rule 116.2, the defense requests production of all statements that Mr.
DeCicco allegedly made to law enforcement authorities from 2013 to 2015, including statements
memorialized in agents' handwritten notes, FBI Form 302 Reports, Massachusetts State Police
Reports, and/or reports of other law enforcement authorities. During the timeframe of the
alleged attempted extortion, federal agents and the Massachusetts State Police approached Mr.
DeCicco and requested him to cooperate on at least two instances, including during the summer
of 2013 and after Mr. DeCicco's arrest on March 17, 2017.
INFORMATION TENDING TO CAST DOUBT ON DEFENDANT'S GUILT
Local Rule l 16.2(b)(l)(A) requires the government to disclose information that would tend
directly to negate Mr. DeCicco's guilt concerning any count in the indictment, as well as any
essential element in any count. See Local Rule 116.2(a)(l). In addition to the general
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 12
requirement of Local Rule 116.2(b)(l)(A), the defense requests disclosure of the following
information:
REQUEST30
Information regarding CW-1 's inconsistent statements to the FBI as to why CW-1 believed he
was assaulted on January 11, 2015, including without limitation any investigation thereof.
REQUEST 31
In the government's automatic discovery letter dated May 26, 2017, the government states that
Mr. DeCicco told CW-4 that a neighbor was harassing his wife or daughter, and asked if he
knew anybody who could beat him up. The defense requests all information regarding
statements made by Mr. DeCicco to others that CW-1 should be beaten and/or was beaten
because CW-1 had made offensive statements about Mr. DeCicco, Kimberly DeBenedictis,
and/or any of Mr. DeCicco's family members.
REQUEST32
Any information that government agents and attorneys have communicated to witnesses and/or
their counsel skepticism or disbelief at certain assertions made by witnesses or otherwise
questioned witnesses' truthfulness while being interviewed, proffering, or testifying before the
grand jury. Such information includes, without limitation, cursing at witnesses, threatening to
prosecute witnesses if they do not change their account of events, and warning witnesses to be
careful what they say to defense attorneys or investigators or they will be prosecuted.
The favorable information being provided by such witnesses to the government is exculpatory,
and the government's reaction demonstrates its awareness of the exculpatory nature of the
statements. In addition, disclosure of these statements will permit the defendant to investigate as
may be warranted to determine whether there were any promises, rewards, inducements, or
threats offered to change testimony, or whether there was any government conduct understood
by a witness to be meant to change a witness's testimony. Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264
(1959); United States v. Vavages, 151F.3d1185, 1190 (9 1h Cir. 1998) (violation of due process
where prosecutor contacted witness's counsel, expressed his belief that the witness's anticipated
testimony was false, and informed him of consequences of perjurious testimony, as it was "no
more than a thinly veiled attempt to coerce a witness off the stand"); United States v. Sutton, 542
F.2d 1239, 1243 (4th Cir. 1976) (reversing conviction where government failed to disclose
agent's "effort to induce (or coerce)" witness's testimony and case was otherwise wholly
circumstantial).
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 13
REOUEST33
The defense requests a description of every time any government agent or attorney ( 1) instructed,
advised, or otherwise communicated to a person (or that person's counsel or employer) that the
person should not talk to Mr. DeCicco, his counsel, or his investigators, or that they should cease
such communication; (2) discouraged any person (or that person's counsel or employer) from
speaking with Mr. DeCicco, his counsel, or his investigators; (3) criticized, condemned or
otherwise negatively reacted to a person (or that person's counsel or employer) having spoken
with or contemplated speaking with Mr. DeCicco, his attorney, or his investigators; or (4)
discouraged a witness or potential witness (or that person's counsel or employer) from providing
exculpatory statements, documents, or other evidence. Sutton, 542 F.2d at 1243; United States v.
Linder, No. 12 CR 22, 2013 WL 812382 at *44 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 5, 2013), appeal dismissed (July
2, 2013) (prosecution may not interfere with witness's free choice to speak with defense
attorney; such interference can amount to denial of due process in violation of Fifth Amendment
or defendant's Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process of witnesses in his favor.") (citing
cases).
PROMISES, REWARDS, AND INDUCEMENTS TO GOVERNMENT WITNESSES
Local Rule 116.2(b)(1 )(C) requires the government to disclose any promise, reward, or
inducement given to any witness whom the government anticipates calling in its case-in-chief.
In addition to the general requirements of Local Rule 116.2(b)(1 )(C), the defense requests
disclosure of the following information:
REQUEST34
All information showing that the government has agreed that it would not prosecute CW-1 for
any possible federal crimes committed by CW-1.
REQUEST 35
All information showing that the government has agreed that it would not refer CW-1 to state
prosecutors for prosecution for any possible state crimes committed by CW-1.
INFORMATION CASTING DOUBT ON CREDIBILITY OF GOVERNMENT

WITNESSES
Local Rule 116.2(b)(2)(A) requires the government to disclose information that tends to cast
doubt on the credibility or accuracy of any witness or evidence that the government anticipates
calling or offering in its case-in-chief. In addition to the general requirements of Local Rule
116.2(b)(2)(A), the defense requests disclosure of the following information:
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 14
R F.QUEST 36
The defense requests all information regarding payments made by CW-1 to witnesses and
potential witnesses from March 17, 2017 to the present, including, without limitation, payments
by CW-1 to Silvia Corina Milian.
REQUEST37
The defense requests all Giglio information pertaining to law enforcement agents involved in the
investigation including, without limitation, the following:
(1) FBI Special Agent Matthew Elio;
(2) IRS Special Agent Sandra Lemanski;
(3) FBI Special Agent Jesse Chizmadia;
(4) Members of the Massachusetts State Police; and
(5) Members of the Saugus Police Department.
REQUEST38
The defense requests production of the following information pertaining to CW-1 :
(1) All FBI policies, procedures, regulations or rules regarding the handling of
confidential human sources in effect from 2006 to the present (during which CW-
1 was an FBI confidential source), including all applicable versions of the FBI
Confidential Human Source Policy Manual;
(2) CW-1 's entire confidential source file;
(3) CW-1 's confidential source agreement with the FBI;
(4) Promises, rewards, inducements, or anything of value made by the FBI or any
other government agency to CW-1, including any agreement to share proceeds of
forfeiture 28 U.S.C. §§ 524(c)(l)(B) and (c)(l)(C);
(5) All documents and information regarding the deactivation of CW-1 as an FBI
source in or around 2011, as noted in Paragraph 5 of the Elio Affidavit;
(6) All FBI OIA Admonishments (FD-1040a) signed by CW-1;
(7) All documents and information regarding any unauthorized illegal activity or
incidents of misconduct by CW-1 while serving as an FBI confidential source;
FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 15
(8) All documents and information regarding the FBI's reopening or reactivation of
CW-1 as a source in July 2015;
(9) All documents and information regarding CW-1 ' s threatening call to Larry
Cunningham on January 15, 2010 (the "January 15, 2010 Incident");
(10) All of CW-1 's statements and/or disclosures to the government regarding the
January 15, 2010 Incident;
(11) All documents and information supporting the government's representation to the
Court in connection with a hearing regarding Mr. DeCicco's pre-trial detention
that Mr. Cunningham had called CW-1 a "sand n*gger" shortly before CW-1 left
the threatening voicemail;
( 12) All documents and information regarding any court orders filed against CW-1,
including, without limitation, any domestic violence restraining orders pursuant to
G.L. c. 209A, including a restraining order obtained by Silvia Corina Milian
against CW-1;
(13) Any statements, reports, or complaints made by CW-1 to the FBI regarding Mr.
DeCicco at any time;
(14) All oral and written communications supporting the government's representation
to the Court in connection with a hearing regarding Mr. DeCicco's pre-trial
detention that "[t]he FBI subsequently reached out to CW-1 about the [August 4,
2014 Incident], not the other way around." ECF No. 87 at 16;
(15) Any and all drafts and versions, including any and all metadata, FBI Form 302,
Page 1 of 2 of which bears the date March 15, 2017, noting it was drafted in 2015
(USAO_ DECICC0_00001262) (partial);
(16) Any and all drafts and versions, including any and all metadata, IRS
Memorandum of Interview of CW-1 bearing the date January 17, 201 7
(USAO_DECICC0_00001263-1269);
(17) All documents pertaining to Auto Excellence Group's floor plan used in 2014,
including the application for the floor plan; and
(18) Federal and state tax returns of CW-1from2008 through 2014.

FISH.
FISH & RICHARDSON
Kristina E. Barclay
March 6, 2018
Page 16
GOVERNMENT WITNESSES' BIAS OR PREJUDICE AGAINST THE DEFENDANT
Local Rule l l 6.2(b)(2)(D) requires the government to disclose information reflecting bias or
prejudice against Mr. DeCicco by any witness whom the government anticipates calling in its
case-in-chief. In addition to the general requirements of Local Rule l 16.2(b)(2)(D), the defense
requests disclosure of the following information:
R EQUEST 39
The government has identified CW-1 as a confidential source for federal law enforcement for
many years. The defense requests all recorded statements of Mr. DeCicco and attempts to record
Mr. DeCicco made by CW-1 at any time for law enforcement. This request specifically includes
recordings both related to this indictment and unrelated to this indictment.
REOUEST 40
The government has identified CW-1 as a confidential source for federal law enforcement for
many years. The defense requests all information that CW-1 has provided to any law
enforcement authority regarding Mr. DeCicco at any time. This request specifically includes
information both related to this indictment and unrelated to this indictment. Such information is
relevant and exculpatory as it shows CW-1 ' s bias against Mr. DeCicco.
MISSING PAGES OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED
The government produced an FBI Form 302 Report dated March 15, 2017, which is missing the
second page. Please produce the missing page.
GOVERNMENT'S DUTY TO PRESERVE NOTES
Pursuant to Local Rule 116.9, the defense requests the government preserve all contemporaneous
notes, memoranda, statements, reports, surveillance logs, recordings, and other documents
memorializing matters relevant to the charge in the indictment.
Thank you for your timely attention to this matter.
Very truly yours,
4..UnnA.L-4, ~'7J~
Thomas C. Frongillo
cc: Clerk of the Court

James J. Cipoletta
Caroline K. Simons
Statement for Account number Bil l close date
MEDI MIRNASIRI 236797294 Aug 08, 2014
Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
The date and time correst2onds to the local time where the mobile was located.
Date and time Number Description Type Min Amount
08/02/14, 10:12 AM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL
08/02/14, 11 :36 AM 123 Vm Retrieval (G)
08/02/14, 2:40 PM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL
08/02/14, 2:47 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
08/02/14, 2:56 PM (440) 716-2700 to Trinity/OH (A) 9
08/02/14, 3:06 PM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL 4
08/02/14, 5:51 PM (781) 558-8518 Incoming 3
08/02/14, 6:04 PM (781) 284-1556 Incoming
08/02/14, 7:28 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming 13
08/02/14, 8:10 PM (857) 247-4360 to Boston/MA (F) 1
08/02/14, 8: 11 PM (857) 247-4360 to Boston/MA (F) 1
08/02/14, 8: 11 PM (857) 247-4360 to Boston/MA (F)
08/02/14, 8:12 PM (857) 247-4360 to Boston/MA (F)
08/02/14, 8:13 PM (617) 970-3245 to Eastboston/MA (F)
08/02/14, 8:14 PM (781) 558-8518 to Saugus/MA (A)
08/02/14, 8:14 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (A) 3
08/02/14, 8:17 PM (781) 558-8518 to Saugus/MA 12
08/02/14, 9:13 PM (781) 771-4456 to Lynn/MA (F) 2
08/03/14, 11 :02 AM 123 Vm Retrieval (G) 2
08/03/14, 11 :42 AM 123 Vm Retrieval (G)
08/03/14, 12:23 PM (617) 982-8080 Incoming (F)
08/03/14, 1: 14 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
08/03/14, 1: 16 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 6
08/03/14, 6:21 PM (781) 760-2680 to Winchester/MA
08/03/14, 10:49 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 28
08/04/14, 4:07 AM (800) 932-3822 Incoming
08/04/14, 9:15 AM (617) 278-9300 to Brookline/MA
08/04/14, 9:46 AM (617) 970-3245 to Eastboston/MA (F)
08/04/14, 10:16 AM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL
08/04/14, 10:17 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
08/04/14, 10:21 AM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL 3
08/04/14, 10:25 AM (617) 731-1700 Incoming 4
08/04/14, 10:36 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
08/04/14, 10:49 AM (617) 926-1250 to Watertown/MA 5
08/04/14, 11 :23 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 5
08/04/14, 11 :28 AM (781) 953-7103 Incoming (F) 3
08/04/14, 11 :35 AM (781) 760-2323 to Winchester/MA
08/04/14, 11 :36 AM (781) 953-7103 to Revere/MA (F) 6
08/04/14, 11 :48 AM 8005241539 1-800# (A) 26
08/04/14, 12:14 PM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL 11
08/04/14, 12:41 PM (781) 929-2917 Incoming 6
08/04/14, 1 :06 PM (561) 767-0490 Incoming 3
08/04/14, 2:48 PM (617) 314-1448 Incoming 2
08/04/14, 2:57 PM (781) 231-4111 Incoming 4
08/04/14, 3:17 PM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL 3
08/04/14, 3:42 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F) 3
08/04/14, 3:52 PM 123 Vm Retrieval (G) 2
08/04/14, 4:33 PM (617) 314-1448 to Boston/MA 4
08/04/14, 5:20 PM (617) 799-4825 to Boston/MA 2
08/04/14, 7: 11 PM (561) 767-0490 to Boytonbch/FL
08/04/14, 7:14 PM (561) 767-0490 Incoming 2
08/04/14, 7:50 PM (561) 767-0490 Incoming
08/04/14, 7:51 PM (561) 767-0490 to Boytonbch/FL
08/04/14, 7:55 PM (561) 767-0490 Incoming
08/04/14, 9:02 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming
08/04/14, 9:03 PM (617) 699-7798 to Boston/MA
08/04/14, 9:40 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming
08/04/14, 11 :06 PM (610) 509-9722 to Allentown/PA
08/05/14, 8:15 AM (781) 760-6535 Incoming 3
08/05/14, 8:20 AM (781) 760-6535 to Winchester/MA 5
08/05/14, 8:48 AM 123 Vm Retrieval (G)
08/05/14, 8:57 AM (781) 844-9253 Incoming 5
08/05/14, 9:14 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
08/05/14, 9:53 AM (617) 910-6056 to Hyde Park/MA
08/05/14, 10:01 AM (617) 278-9300 to Brookline/MA 6
08/05/14, 10:08 AM (617) 910-6056 Incoming 2
08/05/14, 10:20 AM (781) 389-9270 to Winchester/MA 3
PageA15 of A52
Type: (A) Call Waiting (B) Call Forward (C) Conference Call (E) Data/Fax (F) Mobile2Mobile (G) Voicemail
(H) Free Calls (I) Intl Disc Call (J) Intl Disc Call to Mobile (K) WPS Call (M) AnyMobile (R) Roaming (T) T-Mobile Number
(V) myFaves Call (WJ Wi-Fi Call (X) T-Mobile @Home Call

Statement For: MEDI MIRNASIRI
Mobile Number: (781) 244-4474
Account Number: 236797294
Customer Service Number 1-800-937-8997

Jun 09, 2014 Page A 36 of 108
6/05/14 Boston, MA 11 :30 AM 617-888-6394 3 $ $ $

6/05/14 Boston, MA 11 :33 AM 617-293-4 704 (F) $ $ $
6/05/14 Southgate, MA 11 :34 AM 508-761-6778 (A) $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 11 :34 AM 781-844-9253 (A) 10 $ $ $
6/05/14 Lynn, MA 12:01 PM 781-254-1212 $ $ $
6/05/14 Brighton, MA 12:02 PM 617-782-8222 5 $ $ $
6/05/14 Concord, MA 12:08 PM 978-580-7732 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 12:24 PM Blocked NBR 4 $ $ $
6/05/14 Lynn, MA 12:28 PM 781-254-1212 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 12:30 PM 617-768-7000 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 12:33 PM 781-844-9253 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Boston, MA 12:37 PM 617-839-7284 $ $ $
6/05/14 Vm Retrieval 12:39 PM 123 (G) 6 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 12:48 PM 781-853-9495 3 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 1 :02 PM 978-314-7288 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 1 :10 PM 617-839-7284 5 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 1 :22 PM 617-768-7000 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 1 :33 PM 617-201-6573 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 2:02 PM 781-888-3338 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Boston, MA 3:04 PM 617-828-591 0 $ $ $
6/05/14 Boston, MA 3:05 PM 617-828-591 0 $ $ $
6/05/14 Boston, MA 3:29 PM 617-875-4993 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Malden, MA 3:57 PM 617-605-4500 5 $ $ $
6/05/14 Miami, FL 4:02 PM 786-326-2803 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 4:08 PM 401-241-6828 (F) $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 4:14 PM 781-953-7103 (F) $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 4:40 PM 781-888-2200 (A) 10 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 4:49 PM 781-760-2319 (A) 11 $ $ $
6/05/14 Everett, MA 5:09 PM 617-389-3506 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Everett, MA 5:15 PM 617-389-3506 $ $ $
6/05/14 Watertown, MA 5:16 PM 617-926-1250 $ $ $
6/05/14 Lynn, MA 5:20 PM 781-599-0096 $ $ $
6/05/14 Revere, MA 5:21 PM 781-953-7103 (A) 4 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 5:24 PM 617-513-5944 (A) 9 $ $ $
6/05/14 Revere, MA 5:33 PM 781-953-0013 3 $ $ $
6/05/14 Naples, FL 5:37 PM 239-285-1666 (A) 19 $ $ $
6/05/14 Watertown, MA 5:57 PM 617-926-1250 (A) 3 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 5:58 PM 617-513-5944 (A) 3 $ $ $
6/05/14 Malden, MA 6:02 PM 617-605-4500 $ $ $
Call Type: (A) Call Waiting (B) Call Forward (C) Conference Call (E) Data/Fax (F) Mobile2Mobile (G) Voicemail (H) Free Calls (I) Intl Disc Call
(J) Intl Disc Call to Mobile (K) WPS Call (M) AnyMobile (T) T-Mobile Number (V) myFaves Call (W) Wi-Fi Call (X) T-Mobile @Home Call


Jun 09, 2014 Page A 37 of 108
6/05/14 Incoming 6:02 PM 978-500-9000 2 $ $ $

6/05/14 Saugus, MA 6:04 PM 781-558-521 0 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 6:06 PM 781-760-2319 13 $ $ $
6/05/14 Brighton, MA 6:25 PM 617-782-8222 5 $ $ $
6/05/14 Brighton, MA 6:29 PM 617-782-8222 (A) $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 6:29 PM 617-584-5928 (A) 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Saugus, MA 6:31 PM 781-558-521 0 $ $ $
6/05/14 Revere, MA 6:32 PM 781-853-841 4 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Brighton, MA 6:51 PM 617-782-8222 6 $ $ $
6/05/14 Newton, MA 7:00 PM 617-527-2717 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Boytonbch, FL 7:05 PM 561-767 -0490 (A) 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 7:07 PM 561-767 -0490 (A) 4 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 7:14 PM 781-771-4456 (F) 10 $ $ $
6/05/14 Saugus, MA 7:25 PM 781-558-521 0 $ $ $
6/05/14 Winchester, MA 7:32 PM 781-760-2319 $ $ $
6/05/14 Needham, MA 7:36 PM 781-727 -6036 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Revere, MA 7:37 PM 781-953-7103 (F) 5 $ $ $
6/05/14 Malden, MA 8:50 PM 617-605-4500 2 $ $ $
6/05/14 Incoming 10:33 PM Blocked NBR $ $ $
6/06/14 Incoming 7:47 AM 781-888-3338 9 $ $ $
6/06/14 Boston, MA 8:05AM 857-206-4819 $ $ $
6/06/14 Revere, MA 8:06AM 781-953-7103 (F) 7 $ $ $
6/06/14 Lynn, MA 8:36AM 781-581-1212 $ $ $
6/06/14 Incoming 8:56AM 781-231-4111 3 $ $ $
6/06/14 Hyannis, MA 9:01 AM 508-280-1312 2 $ $ $
6/06/14 Incoming 9:09AM 561-767 -0490 $ $ $
6/06/14 Boston, MA 9:16 AM 617-828-591 0 $ $ $
6/06/14 Lynn, MA 9:21 AM 781-771-4456 (F) 3 $ $ $
6/06/14 Malden, MA 9:25AM 617-605-4500 2 $ $ $
6/06/14 Revere, MA 9:37 AM 781-953-7103 (F) 3 $ $ $
6/06/14 Winchester, MA 10:14 AM 781-760-2680 16 $ $ $
6/06/14 Incoming 10:34 AM 978-580-7732 $ $ $
6/06/14 Incoming 10:39 AM 978-500-9000 2 $ $ $
6/06/14 Incoming 10:54 AM 617-605-4500 $ $ $
6/06/14 Incoming 11 :03 AM 781-760-2680 3 $ $ $
6/06/14 Delray Bch, FL 11 :05 AM 561-715-8034 (F) 4 $ $ $
6/06/14 Naples, FL 11 :09 AM 239-285-1666 8 $ $ $
6/06/14 Matawan, NJ 11 :56 AM 732-591-0842 6 $ $ $
6/06/14 Winchester, MA 12:34 PM 781-760-2680 8 $ $ $


Jun 09, 2014 Page A 39 of 108
6/07/14 Winchester, MA 10:42 AM 781-389-3900 2 $ $ $

6/07/14 Revere, MA 10:43 AM 781-953-7103 (F) $ $ $
6/07/14 Revere, MA 11 :07 AM 781-953-7103 (F) $ $ $
6/07/14 Incoming 11 :09 AM 781-953-7103 (F) $ $ $
6/07/14 Incoming 11 :11 AM 617-782-8222 2 $ $ $
6/07/14 Watertown, MA 12:06 PM 617-393-2229 2 $ $ $
6/07/14 Watertown, MA 12:08 PM 617-926-1250 $ $ $
6/07/14 Incoming 12:19 PM 978-580-7732 $ $ $
6/07/14 Brighton, MA 12:25 PM 617-782-8222 $ $ $
6/07/14 Concord, MA 12:25 PM 978-580-7732 7 $ $ $
6/07/14 Cambridge, MA 12:36 PM 617-768-7000 $ $ $
6/07/14 Incoming 2:51 PM Blocked NBR 5 $ $ $
6/07/14 Vm Retrieval 3:31 PM 123 (G) 2 $ $ $
6/07/14 Saugus, MA 5:26 PM 781-558-851 8 6 $ $ $
6/07/14 Lynn, MA 5:32 PM 781-771-4456 (F) $ $ $
6/07/14 Lynn, MA 5:33 PM 781-771-4456 (F) $ $ $
6/07/14 Lynn, MA 5:33 PM 781-771-4456 (F) 12 $ $ $
6/07/14 Incoming 8:52 PM 617-605-4500 4 $ $ $
6/08/14 Boston, MA 9:42AM 617-901-7121 $ $ $
6/08/14 Eastboston, MA 9:57 AM 617-970-3245 (F) 2 $ $ $
6/08/14 Boston, MA 10:33 AM 617-594-9097 (F) 3 $ $ $
6/08/14 Keys, FL 10:36 AM 305-602-0669 $ $ $
6/08/14 Incoming 10:39 AM 617-584-5928 6 $ $ $
6/08/14 Brighton, MA 11 :08 AM 617-782-8224 $ $ $
6/08/14 Brighton, MA 12:52 PM 617-782-8224 2 $ $ $
6/08/14 Boston, MA 3:01 PM 617-816-3230 2 $ $ $
6/08/14 Brighton, MA 4:19 PM 617-782-8224 2 $ $ $
6/08/14 Brighton, MA 4:38 PM 617-782-8222 2 $ $ $
6/08/14 Incoming 7:22 PM 781-760-2323 2 $ $ $
6/08/14 Ipswich, MA 7:50 PM 978-500-9000 2 $ $ $
6/08/14 Malden, MA 7:54 PM 617-605-4500 $ $ $
lsuBTOTAL 4,700 $ $ $
I included Messages with Zero Charges

MEDI MIRNASIRI 236797294 Aug 08, 2014
Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
08/05/14, 10:23 AM (617) 910-6056 Incoming 2
08/05/14, 10:58 AM (617) 223-6221 to Boston/MA
08/05/14, 11 :08 AM (978) 500-9000 to Ipswich/MA 2
08/05/14, 11:17 AM (978) 500-9000 to Ipswich/MA
08/05/14, 11:19AM (561) 767-0490 to Boytonbch/FL
08/05/14, 11 :42 AM (978) 500-9000 Incoming 9
08/05/14, 12:42 PM (781) 284-9600 to Revere/MA
08/05/14, 12:58 PM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL 7
08/05/14, 1 :24 PM (781) 599.5333 to Lynn/MA
08/05/14, 1 :47 PM (703) 996-1100 to Dulles/VA
08/05/14, 1 :48 PM (508) 280-1312 to Hyannis/MA 2
08/05/14, 1 :50 PM (908) 725-2200 to Somerville/NJ 6
08/05/14, 2:04 PM (603) 765-6905 to Nashua/NH
08/05/14, 2:06 PM (617) 605-4500 to Malden/MA 5
08/05/14, 2:12 PM (617) 605-4500 to Malden/MA 7
08/05/14, 2:40 PM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL
08/05/14, 2:41 PM (978) 790-557 4 Incoming 4
08/05/14, 2:44 PM (781) 599.5334 Incoming
08/05/14, 2:46 PM (617) 314-1448 to Boston/MA 4
08/05/14, 3:03 PM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL
08/05/14, 3:10 PM (703) 609-8122 Incoming 2
08/05/14, 3:34 PM (978) 500-9000 Incoming
08/05/14, 7:43 PM 123 Vm Retrieval (G)
08/05/14, 7:45 PM (781) 581-0929 to Lynn/MA
08/05/14, 7:53 PM (561) 767-0490 Incoming 2
08/06/14, 8:15 AM (617) 970-3245 to Eastboston/MA (F) 7
08/06/14, 8:59 AM (781) 760-2680 to Winchester/MA
08/06/14, 9:07 AM (508) 270-5491 to Framingham/MA 2
08/06/14, 9:13 AM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL
08/06/14, 9:44 AM (617) 699-7798 Incoming
08/06/14, 9:52 AM (617) 605-4500 Incoming
08/06/14, 9:54 AM (617) 635-4500 to Boston/MA 3
08/06/14, 11 :23 AM (781) 929-2917 to Norwood/MA
08/06/14, 11 :27 AM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL
08/06/14, 11 :51 AM (781) 929-2917 Incoming 6
08/06/14, 1 :56 PM 123 Vm Retrieval (G) 3
08/06/14, 3:02 PM (508) 761-6778 to Southgate/MA 2
08/06/14, 3:27 PM (269) 266-3021 to Bridgman/Ml
08/06/14, 3:29 PM (781) 953-7103 to Revere/MA (F) 2
08/06/14, 3:37 PM (978) 314-7288 Incoming 2
08/06/14, 4:03 PM (781) 953-7103 to Revere/MA (F)
08/06/14, 4:07 PM (781) 953-7103 Incoming (F)
08/06/14, 4:09 PM (781) 953-7103 Incoming (F) 11
08/06/14, 4:38 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F) 3
08/06/14, 5:20 PM (617) 782-8222 to Brighton/MA
08/06/14, 6:05 PM (781) 820-7148 to Saugus/MA 2
08/06/14, 7:31 PM (781) 953-7151 to Revere/MA 2
08/06/14, 8:56 PM (781) 760-2319 to Winchester/MA
08/06/14, 8:57 PM (781) 760-2319 to Winchester/MA 18
08/07/14, 8:48 AM (617) 970-3245 to Eastboston/MA (F) 2
08/07/14, 8:51 AM (617) 799-4825 to Boston/MA
08/07/14, 8:52 AM (617) 799-4825 to Boston/MA 3
08/07/14, 8:59 AM (786) 326-2803 to Miami/FL 1
08/07/14, 11 :23 AM (617) 278-9300 to Brookline/MA 4
08/07/14, 11 :26 AM (617) 605-4500 to Malden/MA 2
08/07/14, 11 :39 AM (781) 581-0929 Incoming
08/07/14, 12:18 PM (781) 367-1456 Incoming 10
08/07/14, 2:34 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
08/07/14, 4:18 PM (781) 760-2323 to Winchester/MA 2
08/07/14, 5:21 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F)
08/07/14, 5:24 PM (617) 926-1250 to Watertown/MA 2
08/07/14, 6:27 PM (617) 970-3245 to Eastboston/MA (F) 2
PageA16 of A52

From: Thomas Frongillo

Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 10:35 AM
To: Ashley Deaso
Subject: Fwd: Supplemental discovery
Attachments: USAO_DECICCO_00025510.pdf; ATT00001.htm
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA)" <Ibrahim.Salah@usdoj.gov>
Date: May 22, 2018 at 10:30:38 AM EDT
To: Caroline Simons <simons@fr.com>, "frongillo@fr.com" <frongillo@fr.com>, "jperry@fr.com"
<jperry@fr.com>, James Cipoletta <jim@cipoletta.com>
Cc: "Barclay, Kristina (USAMA)" <Kristina.Barclay@usdoj.gov>
Subject: Supplemental discovery
Good morning, attached please find the missing phone records associated to CW‐1 that T‐Mobile just
provided to me.
Thank you,
Ibrahim Salah
Legal Administrative Specialist
U.S. Attorney's Office, D-MA
1 Courthouse Way, Suite 9200 | Boston, MA 02210
Email: ibrahim.salah@usdoj.gov
Phone: 617-748-3171
Fax: 617-748-3954
1
Date UTC BB ID BB User Type of Message To (Raw) From (Raw) Body
2014‐08‐27 14:15:02, Wed 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 2 NEW VMAIL 0 URG 0 FAX *86
2014‐09‐30 18:19:16, Tue 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 I'm here please come.
2014‐09‐30 18:27:46, Tue 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Outgoing 7812444474 On way
2014‐09‐30 18:28:11, Tue 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 Ok
2014‐10‐09 17:10:25, Thu 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Outgoing 7812444474
2014‐10‐09 17:11:04, Thu 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 No
2014‐10‐09 17:11:50, Thu 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Outgoing 7812444474 You can call if you want to see if he's running late.
2014‐10‐09 17:12:31, Thu 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 Ok
2014‐11‐04 21:14:06, Tue 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Outgoing 7812444474 Are you busy?
2014‐11‐04 21:29:13, Tue 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 Yes I call u later
2014‐11‐24 19:41:16, Mon 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 2 NEW VMAIL 0 URG 0 FAX *86
2014‐12‐04 13:38:46, Thu 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 2 NEW VMAIL 0 URG 0 FAX *86
2014‐12‐10 00:21:41, Wed 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 He didn't answer and it went to voice mail. I did leave him a message.
2014‐12‐10 00:36:19, Wed 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Outgoing 7812444474 Ok, let me know if he calls back, I will touch base in the morning.
2014‐12‐10 00:57:20, Wed 4729 Chizmadia, Jesse S. Incoming 7812444474 Ok tks,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, . CRIMINAL NO. 1:17-cr-10092-NMG

Plaintiff .
. WORCESTER, MASSACHUSETTS
v. . NOVEMBER 3, 2017
.
GARY P. DeCICCO, .
Defendant .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TRANSCRIPT OF DETENTION HEARING

BEFORE THE HONORABLE DAVID H. HENNESSY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
For the Government: UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE

BY: Kristina E. Barclay, AUSA
One Courthouse Way, Suite 9200
Boston, MA 02210
617-748-3371
kristina.barclay@usdoj.gov
For the Defendant: Robert L. Sheketoff, Esquire

One McKinley Square
Boston, MA 02109
617-367-3449
sheketoffr@aol.com
Court Reporter:
Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording,

transcript produced by transcription service.
2
1 I N D E X
2 EXHIBITS DESCRIPTION MARKED IN EVIDENCE
3 Government’s:
4 100 Plan 8 x 13 6 6
5 101 Plan Dated 8/14/13 6 6
6 102 Plan Dated 11/11/13 6 6
7 108 Text Messages 17 17
8 109 Affidavit of Jane Doe 1 19 19
9 110 Complaint: Comm. of Massachusetts
10 vs. Car Center USA 20 20
11 111 Mass. Attorney General's Office Press 21 21
12 Release
13 112 Lien 24 24
14 Defendant’s:
15 103 Audio Recording 12 12
16 104 Transcript 12 12
17 105 Letter dated 5/26/17 13 13
18 106 Letter Dated 6/26/17 13 13
19 107 Letter Dated 7/15/17 13 13
20
21
22
23
24
25
Judy Bond, CERT

Certified Federal Court Transcriber
judy@bondcourtreporting.com
3
1 COURT CALLED INTO SESSION
2 (10:04:54 P.M.)
3 THE CLERK: Court is now in session. Please be
4 seated. The Honorable David H. Hennessy presiding. Today's
5 November 3, 2017, in the case of the United States vs. Gary
6 DeCicco, Criminal Action Number 17-10092.
7 Could counsel please identify yourself for the
8 record?
9 MS. BARCLAY: Good morning, Your Honor. Kristina
10 Barclay for the United States, and I'm joined at counsel
11 table today by Special Agent Matt Elio from the FBI and
12 Special Agent Sandy Lemanski from IRS.
13 MR. SHEKETOFF: Good morning, Your Honor. Robert
14 Sheketoff and Carlos Apostle for the defendant, who's also
15 present.
16 THE COURT: Good morning.
17 MR. APOSTLE: Good morning.
18 THE COURT: Okay. As the parties are aware, on
19 October 13 I granted the defendant's motion to reopen the
20 detention hearing. I know there was some question about
21 what my intention was thereafter, but I think it puts us
22 back in to the posture of an open detention hearing. If you
23 have evidence you want to present, you present it. If you
24 have evidence you want to present, present it. I'll hear
25 argument.
Judy Bond, CERT

4
1 The government has the burden to establish by a
2 preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is a flight
3 risk. I think that question is now reopened.
4 The government has the burden to establish by
5 clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is an
6 unacceptable danger; and again, I think that question is
7 reopened.
8 So with that, Ms. Barclay?
9 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, the government would
10 introduce exhibits that were turned over in discovery.
11 These are architectural plans. There are three documents.
12 And I don't know whether Your Honor wants to start
13 the detention exhibit at -- I believe we were at 4 after the
14 March hearing.
15 THE COURT: Okay.
16 MS. BARCLAY: Or whether you want to restart it
17 for today.
18 THE COURT: You know? Just to distinguish them,
19 why don't we start at like 100. 100, 101. I mean I know
20 it's far from where we were, but I'm anticipating the
21 defendant may want to offer exhibits that were part of his
22 submission in support of the motion to reopen, so I don't
23 want to --
24 I want to try and keep the numbers straight.
25 MS. BARCLAY: Okay. May I approach, Your Honor?
Judy Bond, CERT

5
1 THE COURT: Yeah, sure.
2 MS. BARCLAY: And once those are numbered and
3 passed up, Your Honor, I'll call your attention to a few
4 items --
5 THE COURT: Okay.
6 MS. BARCLAY: -- on there.
7 THE COURT: Okay. So for the record 100 is the
8 Auto Excellence, the 8 1/2 by 11.
9 GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT NO. 100, MARKED & ADMITTED
10 THE COURT: 101 is larger Auto Excellence.
11 MS. BARCLAY: You might be able -- for the two
12 larger ones, Your Honor, if you look at the bottom, on the
13 second one there's a date. I believe it says 8/14/13. And
14 then on the second one is says 11/11/13.
15 THE COURT: Okay. That's fine. So before I hear
16 you on this, any objection?
17 MR. SHEKETOFF: No.
18 THE COURT: Okay. These are admitted.
21 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, I would proffer that
22 these documents were produced by DiLullo Associates. They
23 are the architects who worked on the design for the victim's
24 car dealership. And these are three sets of plans.
25 The first set of plans is the pricing set, August
Judy Bond, CERT

6
1 2, 2013. And if you turn to the third page, you'll see the
2 mezzanine floor, and you'll see there's a label break room
3 and office. Two different labels there.
4 THE COURT: Yes.
5 MS. BARCLAY: If you look at Exhibit 101, that is
6 the set that's dated August 14, 2013, also from DiLullo
7 Associates. And if you look at the second page or the
8 mezzanine floor there, you'll see there are two labels. One
9 says "Gary's Office," and one has CW's first name, and it
10 says that it's his office right next to it.
11 THE COURT: Okay.
12 MS. BARCLAY: Then Exhibit 102, Your Honor --
13 THE COURT: Yes.
14 MS. BARCLAY: -- is dated approximately three
15 months later, November 11, 2013. And if you look at the
16 second page, again the mezzanine floor. "Gary's Office" has
17 been changed to "Conference," but CW-1's office remains
18 labeled with his first name.
19 THE COURT: All right. And Ms. Barclay, just
20 direct me again 102, where is the date on it that you were
21 referencing?
22 MS. BARCLAY: If you look at the front page --
23 THE COURT: Yes.
24 MS. BARCLAY: -- in the --
25 If you turn it this way, Your Honor, length wise.
Judy Bond, CERT

7
1 THE COURT: Uh-huh.
2 MS. BARCLAY: And you go to where there are a
3 number of different lines?
4 THE COURT: Yes.
5 MS. BARCLAY: You'll see that that one contains a
6 second entry. The first entry says updated per owner review
7 8/14/13, and the second one says -- I believe it says window
8 something confirmed.
9 THE COURT: Okay.
10 MS. BARCLAY: So that's different than the 101.
11 THE COURT: I see. So how does this square with
12 DiLullo's testimony that there's never been -- he's never
13 seen plans that either -- I think he used the term either
14 jokingly or seriously indicated that the office was Gary's.
15 MS. BARCLAY: Well, Your Honor, the affidavit of
16 Mr. Cinotti is misleading; in that, Mr. DiLullo --
17 It was his firm that worked on this project, but
18 it was actually an individual by the name of John Lloyd who
19 prepared these plans.
20 THE COURT: Okay. Right.
21 MS. BARCLAY: And you know, I'm happy to proffer
22 Mr. Lloyd's testimony, but I think it's sufficient to say,
23 Your Honor, that these three plans corroborate CW-1's
24 statements to the agents that Gary's name showed up on an
25 office on the architectural plans, and that he asked -- had
Judy Bond, CERT

8
1 to ask that it be removed.
2 THE COURT: Okay.
3 MS. BARCLAY: That's the second and third of
4 these.
5 You know, Your Honor, it says in the affidavit
6 that Mr. DiLullo spoke to the FBI twice. What it doesn't
7 say is the second time he spoke to the FBI he actually
8 called them back and said, "I forget. It was John Lloyd who
9 actually worked on this. You've got to talk to him."
10 THE COURT: Okay.
11 MS. BARCLAY: But there's nothing about Mr. Lloyd
12 in the affidavit which again makes it misleading. It was
13 not Mr. DiLullo who had these conversations.
14 THE COURT: So was Lloyd interviewed?
15 MS. BARCLAY: Yes, Your Honor.
16 THE COURT: And what does Lloyd say?
17 MS. BARCLAY: Lloyd testified, Your Honor, that
18 Mr. DeCicco asked him to put his name on the office.
19 He also testified that Mr. DeCicco was interested
20 in the plans, met with him several times without CW-1
21 present, and he couldn't tell what exactly Mr. DeCicco's
22 interest was in the business, but he certainly had some sort
23 of interest in it.
24 THE COURT: Okay. And I know it's in front of me.
25 I can't read it. What's the date of the plan, Exhibits 101?
Judy Bond, CERT

9
1 MS. BARCLAY: 101 is August 14, 2013. So it goes
2 August 2, August 14, and November 11.
3 THE COURT: Okay. August 14, two thousand?
4 MS. BARCLAY: '13.
5 THE COURT: Okay. All right.
6 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, in terms of additional
7 evidence, I'd like to have the opportunity to rebut whatever
8 evidence Mr. Sheketoff offers on behalf of Mr. DeCicco.
9 At this point I think that's all the government
10 has, but we would argue, obviously, based on Mr. Baldi's
11 testimony, these exhibits and the failure of the defense to
12 impinge CW-1's credibility, that the weight of the evidence
13 is actually stronger today than it was on March 22, 2017.
14 THE COURT: Okay.
15 MS. BARCLAY: So we'd, like I said, reserve the
16 right to present additional rebuttal documents.
17 THE COURT: All right. I'm planning to consider,
18 if they're offered, the exhibits that the defendant
19 submitted in support of the motion to reopen, assuming that
20 they're offered. So just keep that in mind in terms of the
21 scope of your rebuttal.
22 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, I would object to your
23 consideration of any of that information that could have
24 been known on March 22 pursuant to your order. That would
25 be the affidavit of Noelle Spinoza, information from the
Judy Bond, CERT

10
1 Varone's, mutual friends and associates.
2 I believe there's a significant amount of evidence
3 in there that -- or information in there that was either
4 known or could have reasonably been known with due diligence
5 on March 22, so I think unfortunately I'd have to go piece
6 by piece.
7 THE COURT: Okay. I think I did clarify that the
8 parties would be limited to information that was not known
9 on March 22 or that could have been known.
10 Mr. Sheketoff?
11 MR. SHEKETOFF: So I'd move to strike the three
12 exhibits of the --
13 THE COURT: Yeah, right.
14 MR. SHEKETOFF: -- the government just offered.
15 THE COURT: Right. Why isn't this out of the
16 picture then, the drawings?
17 MR. SHEKETOFF: So, Your Honor, could I --
18 MS. BARCLAY: Yeah, Your Honor, I actually don't
19 think the government had the drawings at that point and had
20 not --
21 I don't think we had talked to Mr. Lloyd by then,
22 so this was actually --
23 Because it was a complaint arrest, and this was
24 done rather quickly.
25 MR. SHEKETOFF: So, Your Honor, the purpose of
Judy Bond, CERT

11
1 this hearing is to make a fair determination.
2 THE COURT: Right.
3 MR. SHEKETOFF: It's not, it seems to me, to press
4 technicalities. Maybe they didn't have it, maybe they did,
5 maybe by due diligence they could have had it. I don't
6 intend to expand the record beyond what's already in front
7 of you except in a minor way.
8 I have the actual tape recording of what CW-1 said
9 in 2010 to the victim in that case and the actual police
10 report. I don't intend to play it for you, but I intend to
11 make it available so you can listen to it, because --
12 THE COURT: Is that the --
13 MR. SHEKETOFF: -- it may change your impression.
14 THE COURT: I'm sorry. Is that the exhibit that's
15 the subject of, I think it's Exhibit 12 or 13, that was
16 appended to the motion to reopen?
17 MR. SHEKETOFF: Yes.
18 THE COURT: In other words, is --
19 Okay. I've reviewed it. I mean, you can offer it
20 and --
21 MR. SHEKETOFF: Thank you. It's a little bit
22 easier to read. It's the full police report and the actual
23 tape recording of what was left on the phone.
24 THE COURT: Any objection?
25 MS. BARCLAY: Yeah, I would object, because it's
Judy Bond, CERT

12
1 not admissible evidence. There's no evidence that Mr. --
2 that CW-1 lied in connection with this.
3 And he was clearly not the aggressor on January
4 11, 2015, so there's no self-defense issue here.
5 So the fact that he may have left a threat on
6 someone's voicemail and then accepted responsibility for it
7 and took a CWOF on it is not relevant or admissible.
8 THE COURT: All right. I'm going to accept it.
9 It's admitted. So this would be exhibit -- let's call it
10 104 for the -- I'm sorry -- 103 for the police report, 104
11 for the recording.
12 DEFENDANT EXHIBIT NO. 103, MARKED & ADMITTED
14 MR. SHEKETOFF: And, Your Honor, I have three
15 discovery letters from the U.S. Attorney's Office to Mr.
16 Sheketoff that I'd like to mark, because they do discuss --
17 the only part that's relevant that I see is they do discuss
18 exculpatory evidence.
19 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Barclay, do you know which
20 documents are being offered?
21 MS. BARCLAY: Yes, Your Honor.
22 THE COURT: Okay.
23 MS. BARCLAY: Again, this is exculpatory evidence.
24 It's not the scope of the evidence that the government has
25 in this case.
Judy Bond, CERT

13
1 THE COURT: Let me see it.
2 MR. SHEKETOFF: There are three of them.
3 THE COURT: All right. I have letters dated May
4 26, June 26 and July 15 all of 2017. I'll admit them as
5 105, 106 and 107.
9 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Sheketoff, anything else?
10 MR. SHEKETOFF: No, except I also proffer the
11 exhibit that you mention attached to the motion to reopen.
12 THE COURT: I think I'm going to go ahead and
13 consider them. First of all, I've probably read every one
14 of them twice. And let's be realistic. To say that I'm
15 going to push them out of my mind or the calculus is going
16 to be a difficult matter. If there's something in there
17 that's critical; you know, I'll carefully consider it.
18 MR. SHEKETOFF: As other affidavits, Your Honor,
19 they're just affidavits, and there's been no
20 cross-examination of them, so they are what they are, and
21 you give them as much weight as you deem appropriate in the
22 circumstances.
23 THE COURT: Is CW-4 who submitted an affidavit, is
24 he Mr. DeCicco's employee?
25 MR. SHEKETOFF: No. He's a tenant, Your Honor.
Judy Bond, CERT

14
1 THE COURT: Okay. Why do you say he's an
2 employee?
3 MS. BARCLAY: He was his employee. He was an
4 employee at Pulaski and for other projects at that time.
5 That Mr. DeCicco hired him --
6 THE COURT: Okay.
7 MS. BARCLAY: -- to -- or used him to facilitate
8 the assault. I believe he was doing work for him up until
9 the time Mr. DeCicco was arrested, although I could be
10 wrong.
11 THE COURT: Do you dispute that?
12 MR. SHEKETOFF: He did some part-time work.
13 THE COURT: Okay.
14 MS. BARCLAY: And, Your Honor, if Your Honor is
15 going to consider all of the exhibits including Mr.
16 Cinotti's affidavit, then I also have additional exhibits
17 for rebuttal.
18 THE COURT: Okay. Fire away.
19 MS. BARCLAY: Okay. I have -- I would proffer
20 with regard to P. J. Varone Junior, he states in Mr.
21 Cinotti's affidavit, although not in his own affidavit, that
22 he -- I believe he says -- it's in document 847, paragraph
23 3. He added that he worked for his father during the entire
24 project.
25 Your Honor, Mr. Varone Junior testified before the
Judy Bond, CERT

15
1 grand jury. He was asked, "With regard to Auto Excellence
2 group, and your dad was the GC?"
3 He said, "Yeah."
4 I asked, "And did you actually do any construction
5 work on the project?"
6 And he said, "No, but I was there a lot. I was
7 doing -- into the barber thing."
8 He was a barber at the time, Your Honor.
9 THE COURT: I'm sorry. Which paragraph of Cinotti
10 did you want me to look at? I remember the Varone
11 statement. This is Peter Junior; right?
12 MS. BARCLAY: Right. That was paragraph 3, Your
13 Honor.
14 THE COURT: Paragraph 3. Okay. I have it.
15 Hang on a second, Mr. Sheketoff. Okay.
16 MR. SHEKETOFF: Your Honor, these are grand jury
17 minutes that I don't have. And normally I would -- when
18 some portion is proffered, I would want to see what's in the
19 rest of it to see if there's some context that changes it in
20 any way, so. I'd like to see his grand jury testimony, if
21 we're going to proffer portions of it.
22 THE COURT: What do you say?
23 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, this is a particular
24 statement that's being discredited by a particular statement
25 in the grand jury. I don't think Mr. Sheketoff is now
Judy Bond, CERT

16
1 entitled to all of Mr. Varone's testimony in the grand jury.
2 That's essentially asking for early discovery.
3 THE COURT: All right. I'm going to deny
4 production of it. I'm going to consider the statement for
5 what it's worth. I mean, it seems to me the point of the
6 Cinotti affidavit and Peter Varone Junior's statement is
7 that he was -- whether he was working on the project or
8 cutting hair, he's at the project a lot. He met with the
9 CW, and CW never said to him that the defendant was
10 pressuring him to be a partner in the dealership.
11 I mean, I don't know that what's being offered,
12 his grand jury testimony changes that, but it's my take on
13 it.
14 I'm not going to order it produced.
15 MS. BARCLAY: Okay.
16 THE COURT: Okay. What else do you have?
17 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, with regard to Mr. T.,
18 this is paragraph 30 of Mr. Cinotti's affidavit. I would
19 offer a series of text messages between that individual and
20 CW-1.
21 THE COURT: Is T. the former car salesman?
22 MS. BARCLAY: He was employed by CW-1 for several
23 months as a salesman earlier in 2017 according to Cinotti's
24 affidavit.
25 THE COURT: I take it that's a mistake; right?
Judy Bond, CERT

17
1 MS. BARCLAY: The 2017?
2 THE COURT: Yeah. I guess not. I guess it could
3 be --
4 Never mind. Sorry.
5 MS. BARCLAY: Okay. And I'm not sure what exhibit
6 number we're up to. Is that --
7 THE CLERK: 108.
8 MS. BARCLAY: 108?
10 MR. SHEKETOFF: Can I have a clarification about
11 who's yellow and who's --
12 MS. BARCLAY: Yes, I will do that right now, Your
13 Honor. If you look at the yellow, I would proffer that that
14 is a salesman known as Mr. T., and the blue is CW-1.
15 And I would call your attention, Your Honor, I
16 believe the allegation is that CW-1 threatened to report Mr.
17 T. to Homeland Security as an illegal alien. If you take a
18 look at this string of texts, Your Honor, it's actually Mr.
19 T. asking to be paid. CW-1 saying, you know, give me -- or,
20 send me your check, and I will take a look at it, and if I
21 owe you money, I will pay you money. Mr. T. says --
22 THE COURT: Where are you?
23 MS. BARCLAY: If you take a look at --
24 Let me see, Your Honor. It's not numbered. Three
25 texts down on the fifth page.
Judy Bond, CERT

18
1 Mr. T. says, "If you don't pay me, I'm going to go
2 directly to the labor department, and I will shut your shit
3 down."
4 And CW-1 continues to try to work this out, and
5 ultimately after multiple texts back and forth CW-1 talks to
6 the payroll company.
7 If you look to the second to last page, it's not
8 until several texts in to the exchange and after Mr. T. had
9 threatened to call the labor department and shut CW-1 down
10 that CW-1 says, "I'm going to report you to immigration and
11 Social Security Department."
12 So it's in the context of a --
13 THE COURT: Okay.
14 MS. BARCLAY: -- extensive business dispute in
15 which threats go back and forth.
16 I would also proffer to Your Honor that CW-1 ran
17 into that individual after the investigator talked to him at
18 Porsche Boston, and Mr. T. told CW-1, "me and the private
19 investigator are going to" -- and I quote -- "fucking take
20 you down."
21 THE COURT: And when was this?
22 MS. BARCLAY: What's that, Your Honor?
23 THE COURT: When?
24 MS. BARCLAY: Within the last few months.
25 Your Honor, with regards to --
Judy Bond, CERT

19
1 THE COURT: So "me and the investigator,"
2 referring to?
3 MS. BARCLAY: The private investigator.
4 THE COURT: Mr. Cinotti?
5 MS. BARCLAY: Yes.
6 THE COURT: So what does Mr. T. have to do with
7 Mr. Cinotti?
8 MS. BARCLAY: Mr. Cinotti interviewed him.
9 THE COURT: All right.
10 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, with regard to Jane Doe
11 1, I have a sworn affidavit from the woman who's known as
12 Jane Doe 1 in the Cinotti affidavit.
13 THE COURT: So this is the former girlfriend of
14 CW-1 who started DiVenuti?
15 MS. BARCLAY: Yes, Your Honor. Exactly.
16 THE COURT: All right. This is Exhibit 109.
18 MS. BARCLAY: And I'll give Your Honor a minute to
19 read it.
20 (Pause in the proceedings.)
21 THE COURT: All right. I got it.
22 MS. BARCLAY: I would also note, Your Honor, that
23 Jane Doe 1 works for the car dealership where Mr. DeCicco's
24 one of his best friends. He owns the dealership. And
25 that's where she was interviewed by the private
Judy Bond, CERT

20
1 investigator.
2 THE COURT: Mr. Aswad?
3 MS. BARCLAY: Mr. Aswad, yes.
4 Your Honor, --
5 Should I move on?
6 THE COURT: Yes.
7 MS. BARCLAY: Respect to Car Dealer K., I have two
8 exhibits for Your Honor. This is the individual who stated
9 that CW-1 went on Channel 56 in a special report by Shannon
10 O'Brien.
11 THE COURT: Right.
12 Is this Mr. -- who is he? Sorry. Who's the
13 witness?
14 MS. BARCLAY: He's referred to in the affidavit as
15 Car Dealer K., but his name is Nader, N-A-D-E-R --
16 THE COURT: Okay. I just need to know -- okay. I
17 got it.
18 MS. BARCLAY: And his last name is Affoussi,
19 A-F-F-O-U-S-S-I.
21 MS. BARCLAY: And Your Honor there are two
22 exhibits with respect to that individual.
23 THE COURT: 110 and 111.
24 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, 110, is that the
25 complaint? Is that what was labeled as 110?
Judy Bond, CERT

21
2 THE COURT: Yes.
3 MS. BARCLAY: So, Your Honor, I'd just point out
4 that this is a complaint, Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs.
5 Car Center USA. And if you read down, you also see Mr.
6 Affoussi's name in there individually and as president of
7 Car Center USA.
8 Paragraph 1 it says this is a civil action brought
9 in the public interest by the Attorney General on behalf of
10 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts pursuant to General Laws
11 93A, Section 4, of the Consumer Protection Act.
12 This was filed in Suffolk Superior Court on March
13 3, 2014. And if you take a look at paragraph 27, it's on
14 page 7 of the complaint, the Office the Attorney General has
15 received approximately 70 written complaints against
16 Defendants, most alleging facts similar to those described
17 above.
19 MS. BARCLAY: And number 111 --
20 THE COURT: Yes.
21 MS. BARCLAY: -- is a press release from the
22 Attorney General's Office dated February 18, 2005,
23 describing a contempt judgment filed in Suffolk Superior
24 Court related to this lawsuit, and it details exactly what
25 the defendants were alleged to do. On the first page of
Judy Bond, CERT

22
1 that press release there's four stars, four asterisks there.
3 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, the government did try
4 to find the tape of this interview with Shannon O'Brien with
5 Channel 56. It seems that when Channel 56 was bought over
6 by Channel 7, there's nothing left.
7 So I guess, you know, the government's position is
8 that Shannon O'Brien was working at the time as a consumer
9 advocate for Channel 56. CW-1 was a former employee of a
10 company that was under investigation. Suffice it to say
11 it's more likely that he was talking to Ms. O'Brien about
12 these matters as opposed to making allegations that Mr.
13 Affoussi was associated with terrorists and question why a
14 Channel 56 would run that in a consumer protection segment
15 anyway.
16 THE COURT: So CW-1 admits that he was the person
17 who was interviewed?
18 MS. BARCLAY: Yes, he does, Your Honor. He worked
19 for this individual. He left because of their unfair and
20 deceptive trade practices, and he gave an interview with
21 Shannon O'Brien.
22 THE COURT: All right. And does he agree that his
23 voice and his appearance was disguised for the interview?
24 MS. BARCLAY: Yes.
25 THE COURT: Okay. And finally, does he agree that
Judy Bond, CERT

23
1 he said that the car dealer K. is the roommate or the nephew
2 of --
3 MS. BARCLAY: That's a different --
4 THE COURT: Oh, it is.
5 MS. BARCLAY: That's Salesman M.
6 THE COURT: Oh, that's M. Okay.
7 So the interview with Shannon was not an interview
8 during which he made statements regarding somebody's alleged
9 association with Al-Qaeda.
10 MS. BARCLAY: There's no evidence of that, Your
11 Honor. The evidence is that he was giving an interview to
12 Shannon O'Brien about the practices at this business which
13 ultimately the AG's office --
15 MS. BARCLAY: -- suited for.
17 MS. BARCLAY: With respect to Larry, I believe his
18 last name is Cunningham, that's paragraphs 36 and 37. I
19 would just note for the Court that Mr. Cunningham and the
20 lieutenant to whom Mr. Cinotti talked have been friends for
21 twenty plus years. He's the one who filed the complaint.
22 I would also note that Mr. Cunningham admitted to
23 agents that he was one of Mr. Affoussi's biggest customers.
24 So when Mr. Affoussi got shut down, that was a problem for
25 Mr. Cunningham.
Judy Bond, CERT

24
2 MS. BARCLAY: With respect to Salesman M., this is
3 the person whom CW-1 told Saugus P.D. had -- I believe he
4 had stated to CW-1 that he was the roommate of someone who
5 was related to an Al-Qaeda leader or something like that.
6 CW-1 also told the Saugus P.D. --
7 If you look at detention Exhibit 1 from the first
8 detention hearing, the Saugus P.D. report he also told him
9 that this individual Salesman M. did not believe in paying
10 taxes, and we have a notice of federal tax lien that was
11 filed with the Registry of Deeds Southern Middlesex County
12 for that individual requesting that he owes $78,000 in
13 taxes.
14 And finally, Your Honor, we have --
15 THE COURT: Okay. So what are we up to? 112.
17 MS. BARCLAY: This is a purchase and sale
18 agreement for the property. Many of the allegations or the
19 statements made --
20 THE COURT: Purchase and sale for what property?
21 MS. BARCLAY: I'm sorry? This is for the property
22 where the car dealership which Mr. DeCicco sold to Mr. -- to
23 CW-1.
24 THE COURT: Okay.
25 MS. BARCLAY: And, Your Honor, a number of people
Judy Bond, CERT

25
1 were asked by Mr. Cinotti whether Mr. DeCicco had anything
2 to do with the permitting process, and it's the government's
3 position that these are people who wouldn't necessarily know
4 that anyway, but I call your attention to -- it's the fifth
5 page of that document. "Paragraph 46" is written in.
6 Actually, there's an addendum to purchase and
7 sale. I'm sorry, Your Honor. It's a little confused.
8 THE COURT: Okay. But I'm looking at what's
9 handwritten in as "Paragraph 46."
10 MS. BARCLAY: And it says both parties agree to
11 assist in permits for auto dealer and building.
12 THE COURT: Okay. Why does CW-1 say or think that
13 Mr. DeCicco assisted him in getting the permits?
14 MS. BARCLAY: I believe that there were -- that
15 there --
16 Mr. DeCicco had a relationship with Fred Varone
17 who's the building inspector for Saugus and that he -- I
18 believe that he promised CW-1 that he would help him get the
19 permits.
20 THE COURT: Okay. But let me ask a different
21 question. Did CW-1 ever say to you why he believes --
22 whether it's right or wrong -- that Mr. DeCicco discharged
23 his obligation to help CW-1 get the permits to build?
24 MS. BARCLAY: CW-1 stated that Mr. DeCicco told
25 him that by hiring Peter Varone who was the brother of Fred
Judy Bond, CERT

26
1 Varone, that they would enable him to get the permits, and
2 ultimately he did get the permits.
3 THE COURT: Okay.
4 MS. BARCLAY: So it is his belief that he's had
5 relationships, Mr. DeCicco. Through these relationships Mr.
6 DeCicco was able to get him --
7 THE COURT: Okay. And that's Senior; right?
8 Peter Senior?
9 MS. BARCLAY: Yes.
11 MS. BARCLAY: That's all, Your Honor.
12 THE COURT: Mr. Sheketoff, do you want to respond
13 to any of that?
14 MR. SHEKETOFF: Well, --
15 THE COURT: Let me just -- if this is helpful, I
16 understand the CWs credibility is an issue insofar as he
17 makes this statement that Mr. DeCicco wanted in on the car
18 dealership and the CW did not want him there. I guess I'm
19 looking at other evidence of that. And of course this is a
20 matter that goes to one factor that I have to consider; and
21 that is, the strength of the evidence.
22 Having said that, I'm not trying to discourage you
23 from pursuing whatever you want. I'm just --
24 MR. SHEKETOFF: So I agree that that is the focus
25 of my attention on the weight of the evidence is CW-1's
Judy Bond, CERT

27
1 credibility.
2 So just in brief rebuttal, there is an affidavit
3 from the woman that got the restraining order, so she's
4 contradicted Cinotti's affidavit with an affidavit from this
5 woman --
6 THE COURT: Right. This is Exhibit 109?
7 MR. SHEKETOFF: Yes.
8 THE COURT: Okay.
9 MR. SHEKETOFF: You there's also an affidavit that
10 is part of the record that shows that she did get a
11 restraining order against him at the Waltham District Court,
12 and she did file an affidavit that she signed at the time
13 that supported that restraining order --
15 MR. SHEKETOFF: And that affidavit reads, "I have
16 been receiving threatening text messages from CW-1; wherein,
17 the last text he said I'm going to get you. I know that
18 when he says things like that, he means that he will hurt
19 me. During the time I dated him, he almost hit me twice,
20 and I'm afraid he will hurt me. He has spoken to my sister
21 and friends and has threatened to come and find me."
22 So whatever the finer details of when you're
23 confronted with the FBI, if I remember things the same way
24 you told the investigator or not, that affidavit was long
25 before this litigation.
Judy Bond, CERT

28
1 THE COURT: And just so I can put a note here,
2 what exhibit is that of 84? Do you have it at the top?
3 MR. SHEKETOFF: It says document 84-9.
4 THE COURT: Okay.
5 MR. SHEKETOFF: Signed 8/11/17.
6 THE COURT: Right.
7 MR. SHEKETOFF: I'm not as organized as the
8 government.
9 This is one of my -- my wife would say there are
10 many major weaknesses, but this is one of them.
11 THE COURT: Okay. I'm sorry --
12 MR. SHEKETOFF: One that I actually recognize.
13 THE COURT: My wife says my weakness is I don't
14 listen.
15 Is it 84-9?
16 MR. SHEKETOFF: Yes, Your Honor.
17 THE COURT: Thank you.
18 MR. SHEKETOFF: I'm willing to swap.
19 (Pause in the proceedings.)
20 MR. SHEKETOFF: Okay. I think that's really all I
21 want to specifically address.
22 THE COURT: Okay. I just have a couple of
23 follow-up questions then.
24 Ms. Barclay, the Elio evidence at page 5, note 2,
25 says, in substance, -- I just have a note here -- that on
Judy Bond, CERT

29
1 December 28 CW was receiving threats.
2 MS. BARCLAY: I'm sorry?
3 THE COURT: It says, in substance, that the CW
4 received threats. I actually don't have it in front of me.
5 I just put a note down to ask you about it. I think that's
6 Exhibit 3. Let me see.
7 In any case, I wanted you to address that. What
8 threats was he receiving? Were these by phone?
9 MS. BARCLAY: I'm not sure -- are you talking
10 about the Elio affidavit or the Saugus police report?
11 THE COURT: I'm sorry. I'm talking about the Elio
12 affidavit.
13 I now have it. No, I don't have it. I thought it
14 was an exhibit to the motion to reopen.
15 MS. BARCLAY: I have it right here, Your Honor.
16 THE COURT: Okay.
17 MS. BARCLAY: It's Document No. 3-1. It was
18 attached to the complaint.
19 THE COURT: Oh, that's what it is.
20 MS. BARCLAY: You might be looking at Ms.
21 Lemanski's affidavit was a detention exhibit. That's
22 Exhibit 1.
23 THE COURT: No. I think I mean 3-1. Let me go to
24 it. Page 5, is there a footnote?
25 MS. BARCLAY: Yes.
Judy Bond, CERT

30
1 THE COURT: Good. What does it say?
2 MS. BARCLAY: "CW also reported to the FBI on
3 December 28, 2014, that he was receiving threats from
4 DeCicco, and his associates related to a CW-1 refusing to
5 give part of his business to DeCicco."
6 THE COURT: Right.
7 MS. BARCLAY: This, Your Honor, is after Saugus
8 P.D. turns the case over to the FBI, and then the FBI goes
9 to talk to CW-1.
10 THE COURT: Right. Oh, in other words, the
11 threats were not on December 28. He's simply reporting it
12 on December 28, because that's when's interviewed.
13 MS. BARCLAY: Yes, Your Honor. Saugus P.D., the
14 task force officer, he turns it over to the FBI, and they
15 ultimately get to talk to CW-1 on December 28; and therein,
16 --
17 THE COURT: Okay.
18 MS. BARCLAY: -- there he recounts that he's
19 received threats that he believes are from DeCicco and his
20 associates.
21 THE COURT: All right. Is there anything in
22 particular that's going on with the auto dealership business
23 in December of '14 and the beginning of January of '15 prior
24 to January 11?
25 MS. BARCLAY: Anything in particular meaning?
Judy Bond, CERT

31
1 THE COURT: So high volume of sales is the --
2 There's some indication the business is doing
3 particularly well, that it's showing a particular line of
4 cars that --
5 MS. BARCLAY: Well, the business did open in
6 August of 2014. That's, I believe, when he opened his doors
7 for business. That's when the flowers were delivered. And
8 so he's only been in business for a couple of months before
9 the assault.
10 But, Your Honor, if you drive by the dealership,
11 you can see the inventory from outside. I don't know
12 exactly --
13 THE COURT: Okay.
14 MS. BARCLAY: -- what it was at that point and
15 what the sales were, but there are expensive cars on display
16 in huge windows through the building.
17 THE COURT: All right. One of the things I'm
18 going toward is this. The flowers are sent in August. It
19 sounds like right after the dealership opened. And the
20 assault is on January 11.
21 My question is what's going on in the interim?
22 MS. BARCLAY: He's doing business, Your Honor.
23 And he hasn't paid attention to the threat. He's
24 not talking to Mr. DeCicco. He's not giving him a piece of
25 the business. He's operating in full view of the entirety
Judy Bond, CERT

32
1 of Route 1, and it's open and notorious.
2 And at that point, you know, it's the government's
3 position and the government would argue that this gets under
4 Mr. DeCicco's skin, because he is owed a piece of that
5 dealership, and he's operating in full view of everyone.
6 THE COURT: CW-2 says that it was about one to two
7 months before the January assault that he was offered -- or
8 told about the assault. CW-4 says it was shortly before
9 January 11 that Mr. DeCicco contacted him to have the CW
10 beaten up.
11 Do you have a better sense of which of those is a
12 better estimate?
13 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, I don't have a better
14 estimate. I believe that the phone calls among these
15 individuals that were key to sort of figuring out who was
16 involved in the assault started in -- I believe it was
17 December. I don't have them in front of me, Your Honor.
18 I'm happy to provide that --
19 THE COURT: In other words, phone records that
20 show that these parties are in communication.
21 MS. BARCLAY: Right. And obviously CW-4 would
22 have been in communication with Mr. DeCicco, because he was
23 his employee.
24 But it's the communication between CW-4 and CW-3
25 and CW-3 and CW-2 that I believe that reflects a gap before
Judy Bond, CERT

33
1 they are in contact about this issue.
2 THE COURT: All right. Then it would appear that
3 CW-4's estimate that the conversation with Mr. DeCicco to
4 have the CW beaten up was not shortly before 1/11, before
5 January 11. I mean, I guess it depends on what you mean by
6 shortly before.
7 MS. BARCLAY: Yeah, I mean, I think it depends
8 what shortly before. Like I said, Your Honor, I don't want
9 to misstate the phone records. I'd have to go back and find
10 them. But I think they start in December. But we're happy
11 to submit that as a supplemental affidavit or exhibit to the
12 Court.
13 THE COURT: I could just take a statement, and if
14 there's a challenge to it or if Mr. Sheketoff doesn't have
15 the --
16 If he has the records, just direct him to what it
17 is that you're referring to. And if he doesn't and you want
18 to share them, and then just give me a statement.
20 THE COURT: I would like to know that.
22 THE COURT: All right. And I'll give you a chance
23 to respond.
24 And I'm going to give both sides a chance to argue
25 now; but Mr. Sheketoff, what I'm struggling with a little
Judy Bond, CERT

34
1 bit, -- and this what I was struggling with on the whole
2 decision about whether or not to reopen -- is I think a fair
3 reading of the record is that the --
4 Of course the defendant doesn't dispute that he
5 sent the flowers with that message, nor --
6 I mean, this is not quite as clear, but I don't
7 know that the defendant is disputing that he hired CW-4 and
8 got -- however the others got involved. We'll just put that
9 aside. That he hired CW-4 to assault CW-1. That's my
10 reading of even the defendant's own submissions.
11 And I know that that came before your time on the
12 case, and so I'll just ask you to think about this. I want
13 to hear from the government first, it's their burden. But I
14 have to consider the strength of the evidence, and I'm going
15 to. I have to consider the safety of the community, and I'm
16 going to. And just putting aside the strength of the
17 evidence for a moment, I have evidence that the defendant
18 hired somebody to give this guy a pretty good beating, and
19 that is -- that's kind of the heart of the concern for
20 safety of the community. Whether I find that this was about
21 an extortion or about an inappropriate comment to a woman,
22 that's what I have.
23 And so my concern is, you know, how do I protect
24 the community --
25 And it comes in the context of someone, as I said
Judy Bond, CERT

35
1 in the original ruling, who has the ability and the
2 financial wherewithal to hire other people to do his dirty
3 work for him.
4 So I'm going to give you a chance to address it,
5 but I wanted to alert you to it, because that's an important
6 concern I have in my ultimate decision.
7 MR. SHEKETOFF: So while I'm not conceding other
8 elements of the case, I think I made it clear when we were
9 before you in Boston that the thrust of any defense that I
10 would have would be there was no intent to extort. That's
11 where I would fight the case, Your Honor.
13 MR. SHEKETOFF: So I'm not pretending otherwise.
14 And if the government had no evidence of any kind
15 that there was an intent to extort, they wouldn't have
16 gotten an indictment. I concede that. But I've been doing
17 this for a long time, and this is an unusual federal case,
18 because --
19 And I was anxious today to hear the government if
20 they were going to proffer to you we actually have someone
21 else that Mr. DeCicco told that he wanted a piece of that
22 business. You heard Baldi say he had heard rumors about
23 that. But they didn't proffer that at all.
24 So in the end it comes down to whether or not CW-1
25 is believable on this topic. There was an interview of him
Judy Bond, CERT

36
1 on December 28. The last time we were here the government
2 said, well, it was a short period of time between December
3 28 and January 11. You know, we really couldn't wire him up
4 or make a phone call. That's the holiday season.
5 Well, I reject that. But I also say to you that
6 in the Saugus police discovery -- and I didn't hear any
7 proffer about this -- one of the Saugus police reports say
8 it was turned over to the FBI in October of 2014, not in
9 December.
10 I don't know what they did between October and
11 December. And this is somebody that they had a previous
12 longstanding relationship with. It's not like either the
13 FBI or CW-1 was unfamiliar with each other.
14 So, to me, this is an extremely triable case, and
15 I think -- I believe that you see that that is a realistic
16 statement. It's not, you know, just made up. I'm not
17 saying the government doesn't have a case; I'm saying I have
18 a chance to win this case.
19 And if you listen to that tape recording where
20 CW-1 leaves a message for a business associate of his, I
21 think you'll get an impression that I hope the jury will
22 get. Whether I get that into evidence or not at trial about
23 who this guy is and whether or not he's trustworthy. As
24 trustworthy as the agents suggested in their affidavits, but
25 for the complaint and for the detention hearing, he's not a
Judy Bond, CERT

37
1 trustworthy person, and he's cheating everybody out of
2 money. It's not just the Varones. There's consistent theme
3 here.
4 In any event, all I'm really trying to say is I
5 have a realistic chance of winning this case on that issue.
6 That doesn't address your other concern which is
7 if my client hired somebody to beat this man up, how can you
8 be certain that he's not going to do something similar if
9 he's released. And on that topic I would say -- I think I
10 said it at the last one when we were in Boston that he could
11 probably do the same thing from jail if that was his real
12 goal.
13 Second, we have a concept of forfeiture by
14 wrongdoing.
15 Third, there are conditions. You know, he cannot
16 have a phone. You know, he can have a sign-in log at the
17 house. You can fashion conditions that make that much less
18 likely.
19 And most of these witnesses have already testified
20 to the grand jury.
21 I don't know. You know, I think about this case.
22 I had a murder case in Dedham a few years ago where my
23 client's brother was a central figure for the Commonwealth,
24 and he died of a heart attack in his early 40s, and they had
25 to nolle pros the case. Of course the State Police thought
Judy Bond, CERT

38
1 he had been murdered, but it turned out it was natural
2 causes, even though he was in his 40s, and the case
3 dissolved. I don't --
4 I mean, I'm not going to do this, but I think
5 about these cases. What would I do to dissolve this case?
6 I don't think there's a way to dissolve this case. I think
7 there's a way to defend it, which is to say there was no
8 intent to extort, but I don't think there's a way to
9 dissolve it to make it go away by paying somebody or doing
10 anything like that at this point.
11 From my practice in Suffolk Superior Court I find
12 the worse witnesses for the defense are the witnesses that
13 tell the government the story they want to hear and then get
14 influenced by fear to tell a different story, and the jury
15 not only thinks that the first story's the true story, they
16 think that my client is so bad, that he has moved -- you
17 know, moved these people out of fear to try and help him.
18 And those cases always end in disaster for me. I think
19 that's the worse set of circumstances.
20 So at this point in time we have a trial date in
21 February. I don't think that there are -- that it's --
22 I don't see the way to use your power and
23 influence to make this case go away, and even if he was so
24 inclined. The last time he had a federal case and it got
25 probation, he was never violated. That case was pending for
Judy Bond, CERT

39
1 a long time. So I think there are --
2 If anything happened to CW-1 now, there's no
3 question that he would be the prime suspect. He'd be locked
4 up again immediately, and I'm going to lose my forfeiture by
5 wrongdoing.
6 I mean, I have a witness that I look forward to
7 cross-examining, because he's their whole case. And you can
8 see whether every detail of the Cinotti affidavit is correct
9 or not, and he's relying on what people tell him on a
10 specific point in time, and a lot of these people have
11 various influences on them, you know, pushing them in
12 different directions, including their general inclination to
13 be honest. He's just reporting what he's told.
14 I want that guy on the witness stand. You know, I
15 have a chance to convince a jury that when you have to
16 believe beyond a reasonable doubt that this guy's telling
17 the truth and that's all you've got when the FBI had an
18 opportunity to record a phone call or put him on a wire,
19 then I wish I was in that position more frequently than I
20 am. It's usually the skill of the prosecutor to say play
21 the next tape recording. You know, I say to my client, "How
22 am I going to explain that one?," and it's inexplicable. So
23 I apologize.
24 THE COURT: I appreciate that what was referred to
25 the FBI, whether it was October or December, was flowers and
Judy Bond, CERT

40
1 the note, and we don't have violence at that point.
2 MS. BARCLAY: Yeah.
3 THE COURT: I also appreciate the fact that I
4 understand the Saugus police report correctly that CW did
5 not volunteer the defendant as a source of the threat until
6 Saugus shared with the CW a description of the woman who
7 purchased the flowers at the -- and had them sent. So I got
8 that. You don't need to address it.
9 MS. BARCLAY: And only at that point does he say
10 he wanted a piece of my business, and that's what the card
11 says, so it's corroborated by the defendant's own words.
12 And Your Honor, while I appreciate that Mr.
13 Sheketoff has a breadth of experience beyond my own, I do
14 suggest that this case -- this hearing is limited to this
15 case and these facts and not Mr. Sheketoff's opinion about
16 how it compares to other cases he's seen or tried or won or
17 lost. And so the focus here is on the evidence in this
18 case.
19 And we're really only talking about motive, as
20 Your Honor said, for the purposes of this hearing. The
21 defendant is not challenging the evidence that he hired
22 someone to viciously assault CW-1.
23 And the evidence of the motive before this Court
24 now is you have CW-1's description of conversations with the
25 defendant and with Peter Varone Senior. I think,
Judy Bond, CERT

41
1 unfortunately, Your Honor, Mr. Varone Senior is unable to
2 communicate because of a fall off of a ladder, but it's not
3 as if CW-1 didn't say that he did talk to someone else about
4 this.
5 You also have his account of seeing plans with
6 "Gary's Office" on them and asking for it to be removed.
7 Those are corroborated by the plans which reflect exactly
8 that, and the information from Mr. Lloyd that Gary DeCicco
9 asked him to put his office on those plans.
10 You have Mr. Baldi's testimony a couple of weeks
11 ago that Mr. DeCicco walked him through the dealership when
12 it was being built when CW-1 wasn't there, almost as if Mr.
13 DeCicco owned the place.
14 You also have Mr. Baldi's testimony that DeCicco
15 made repeated derogatory comments about how CW-1 was
16 operating the business, selling Ferrari's in the winter,
17 things like that, and about CW-1 owing Varone money for
18 construction at the business.
19 You have DeCicco's own words in the card delivered
20 with the flowers.
21 And then, Your Honor, I would point to the
22 affidavit of girlfriend -- I believe it's Girlfriend 1. I'm
23 not sure. It's Document No. 84-5, Kimberly DeBenedictis is
24 his name, and as something that was attached to the brief.
25 She's in the car with Mr. Baldi and Mr. DeCicco when they
Judy Bond, CERT

42
1 ordered the flowers. Mr. DeCicco dictates the card to her,
2 and all she says about it, "I am the person who purchased
3 the flowers that were delivered to CW-1's car dealership in
4 Saugus. I do not remember Gary ever saying that he wanted
5 an ownership interest in CW-1's Saugus dealership."
6 She doesn't say it was a joke, it was a practical
7 -- you know it was a prank, anything like that.
8 The defendant has also made no showing that CW-1
9 is not a credible witness. There's no evidence that he's
10 lied or that he actually has reports anyone to authorities
11 out of some vindictive motive. At the most, he left a
12 threatening message for a business associate, and then he
13 owned up to it without offering any excuses to the Kingston
14 P.D. He also tried to warn customers about the business
15 practices of Nader Affoussi who admitted that he defrauded
16 hundreds of customers.
17 And the rest of it, Your Honor, his employees,
18 ex-girlfriends, neighbors; it's either petty irrelevant,
19 unreliable, or it doesn't go to CW-1's credibility at all.
20 The fact that he had two restraining orders taken out
21 against him, he doesn't deny that, Your Honor. He hasn't
22 denied it to anyone.
23 As this Court has stated on several occasions, the
24 card accompanying the flowers that DeCicco admittedly
25 dictated and had sent to the victim is basically an
Judy Bond, CERT

43
1 admission he wanted a piece of the business. He addressed
2 it to Gary and said we all know whose place that is.
3 This wasn't a joke or a prank. You don't follow
4 up a prank with a vicious beating.
5 And DeCicco all but admits that he ordered and
6 paid for that beating. You follow up a threat with action,
7 and that's what the card was. It was a threat.
8 And, Your Honor, I just want to call --
9 I believe in your order reopening the detention
10 hearing you said that Mr. Baldi testified that it was a
11 prank, but I also want to just point out that he said -- he
12 testified several times that DeCicco said let's send some
13 flowers, because CW-1 is busting Peter Varone's balls. I
14 believe is what he said. That's on page 16 of the
15 transcript. And that he believed DeCicco was pissed that
16 Varone didn't get paid, and that's why DeCicco sent the
17 flowers.
18 So he's not saying it's just a prank. He's saying
19 it's about the business or that Mr. DeCicco is telling him
20 it's about the business.
21 And you know, I think that what Mr. Baldi believed
22 or what Mr. DeCicco told Mr. Baldi about the flowers is not
23 really relevant. It doesn't change the import of Mr.
24 DeCicco's own words in the card.
25 And tellingly, although Mr. Baldi makes the prank
Judy Bond, CERT

44
1 phone calls that involve pizza, he doesn't make the
2 threatening phone call; the phone call on August 6, 2014,
3 where someone tells CW-1, "You fucking Muslim. I'm going to
4 kill you." That came from a blocked number.
5 The government hasn't been able to identify who
6 that came from yet, but Mr. Baldi clearly said that that was
7 not him.
8 THE COURT: I thought one of the calls came from
9 Baldi's business number.
10 MS. BARCLAY: The pizza call.
11 THE COURT: Oh. Okay.
12 MS. BARCLAY: And there's one critical fact that
13 supports this analysis of Baldi's testimony that Mr. DeCicco
14 is not bringing him in on everything, especially not the
15 fact that he's trying to extort an ownership interest from
16 CW-1 because he's afraid that Baldi's going to take his
17 million dollars and run; and that is, Mr. DeCicco didn't
18 tell Baldi he was going to hire someone to beat CW-1, and he
19 doesn't tell him that it happened after the fact. He talks
20 about other things and other violent acts with Mr. Baldi but
21 not that. And he was not bringing him in to the fold and
22 telling him everything, because he knew it would scare Baldi
23 away, and he'd take his million dollars, and he'd run.
24 Your Honor, this is isn't a trial; this is
25 detention. An indictment charging DeCicco with extortion
Judy Bond, CERT

45
1 has been returned. A grand jury's found probable cause.
2 And, you know, Baldi and none of the evidence that
3 you've heard here today detracts significantly from the
4 weight of the evidence in this case. In fact, the case is
5 stronger today for the reasons I said at the beginning of my
6 argument than it was on March 22. That's the weight of the
7 evidence, Your Honor.
8 Turning to the other factors, the Court heard Mr.
9 Baldi testify to the following information that is new since
10 the March 22, 2017, detention hearing.
11 Mr. DeCicco has millions of dollars in assets that
12 he has hidden in the names of his girlfriends and children.
13 He pocketed $200,000 of the 900,000 that Mr. Baldi
14 gave him to payoff a loan on Pulaski. He told Mr. Baldi it
15 was going to a certain individual, but only 700 went to that
16 individual. Mr. Baldi didn't realize that until he was
17 working with investigators looking through the records.
18 Mr. Baldi and Mr. DeCicco forged leases and
19 submitted fake leases and a falsified rent roll to multiple
20 banks and ultimately secured a $5.5 million mortgage on
21 Pulaski Street using those documents.
22 Mr. DeCicco told many people that he still had
23 ownership of a moving company, even though Joe Porter bought
24 the company from DeCicco years earlier. And that's
25 significant in terms of the weight of the evidence, Your
Judy Bond, CERT

46
1 Honor.
2 Mr. DeCicco bragged about committing student loan
3 fraud for one of his daughters.
4 He admitted to Mr. Baldi that he did not want the
5 IRS to know about his assets, because he did not want to pay
6 taxes.
7 Mr. DeCicco bragged about sticking a gun down
8 someone's throat, knowing the Hells Angels who would help
9 him if he needed it and having someone beaten up so they
10 would not show up in court to testify against his brother.
11 And that's page 49 of Mr. Baldi's transcript of that
12 hearing, Your Honor.
13 As Your Honor said at the outset, this is a
14 violent beating. Mr. DeCicco hired someone to beat CW-1,
15 and there's very little dispute that that happened. He also
16 has a history of getting others to commit crimes. Take Mr.
17 Baldi, for example.
18 But there's also the short sale, Your Honor.
19 There's the tax issues that he has and --
20 And, Your Honor, we would suggest that contrary to
21 --
22 While there were no formal filings with regard to
23 him being on pretrial release and on probation, I believe
24 that --
25 I've gotten information from the probation office
Judy Bond, CERT

47
1 that they've reviewed the file; and, in fact, he wasn't
2 entirely compliant. They had difficulty with a number of
3 things with Mr. DeCicco while he was on pretrial release and
4 while he was on probation. And I'm not sure how we can get
5 that information to Your Honor, but he wasn't entirely
6 compliant with his conditions.
7 It's the government's position that Mr. DeCicco is
8 not just a danger to CW-1, Your Honor; he's a danger to the
9 community. And that's what Your Honor found in addition to
10 him being a danger to witnesses and the victim in this case,
11 that he's a danger to the community.
12 This is someone who lies whenever it suits him and
13 whenever it will make him money and make his life easier,
14 and he cannot be trusted to obey the conditions of release.
15 No conditions of release will guarantee the security and
16 safety of the community.
17 And, Your Honor, I'd also suggest that he's a
18 flight risk. We have spent years trying to figure out where
19 all of his assets are. We're still doing that, Your Honor.
20 It's no secret. Special Agent Lemanski testified there's an
21 ongoing tax investigation. Every time we turn around
22 there's another asset in someone else's name or some other
23 business's name.
24 I understand he has significant ties to the
25 community, and I don't dispute that. But I also suggest,
Judy Bond, CERT

48
1 Your Honor, that this defendant is facing a significant
2 sentence in this case. He's facing other investigations.
3 He has an incentive to flee, and he certainly has the
4 capability to flee and the resources to flee.
5 THE COURT: What are the advisory guidelines?
6 It's a 20-year max?
7 MS. BARCLAY: It is, Your Honor. I don't have my
8 guidelines book with me, Your Honor. I apologize. I
9 normally bring that with the file. Sorry about that.
10 THE COURT: Anything else?
11 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, I can submit that when
12 we submit the phone records.
13 THE COURT: Okay. That's fine.
14 MR. SHEKETOFF: Whatever my particular win/loss
15 record is, this is a very triable case.
16 And Your Honor, you've been around nowhere near as
17 long as me, because you're much younger, but there are
18 federal cases that are completely untriable. This is not
19 one of them.
20 And if you listen to that tape recording, the idea
21 that this is a good person who's lived a good life, CW-1 --
22 and is going to make a good impression on the jury seems to
23 me to be farfetched.
24 THE COURT: You do have the note to contend with.
25 I mean, --
Judy Bond, CERT

49
1 MR. SHEKETOFF: I'm sorry?
2 THE COURT: You do have the note to contend with.
3 You say what you want. Maybe it's just an unfortunate
4 choice in words, but it has to do with ownership of the
5 dealership.
6 MR. SHEKETOFF: So it does. And that's the joke,
7 and that's why he latches onto that to make it a federal
8 case, because that's what makes it a federal case. He takes
9 a joke, and he turns it into a federal case. That's going
10 to be my argument to the jury.
11 Because this is someone that my client never saw
12 eye-to-eye with, thought was --
13 This is in the record that you have before you.
14 -- thought was a fool in terms of a businessman.
15 There's not a shred of evidence that this business made any
16 money whatsoever. There's not --
17 My client's got millions of dollars of real estate
18 all over the place, and he wants to force his way in to this
19 dealership when he has another dealership that he has this
20 kind of relationship with and has had it for years, and
21 these people don't get along with each other? What sense
22 does that make?
23 THE COURT: What sense do any of these cases make?
24 People have millions of dollars, and it doesn't stop them
25 from committing crimes. We've all seen that.
Judy Bond, CERT

50
1 MR. SHEKETOFF: It's not like he had --
2 There's no evidence he had a real financial motive
3 to take a piece of this dealership, --
4 THE COURT: Okay.
5 MR. SHEKETOFF: -- because there's no real
6 evidence that this dealership made any money whatsoever. I
7 mean, he's selling in December and January. He's got these
8 very fancy cars that no one's going to buy in the winter
9 months in his showroom. He doesn't know what he's doing.
10 So of course the government has some case. I'm
11 not suggesting they have no case. I'm just suggesting that
12 this is an extremely triable case.
13 Okay. And you've heard it all already, so you
14 know.
15 This is someone who has a relationship with the
16 FBI. In October the Saugus police tell the FBI that there
17 is a real threat here in our view. This guy wants in on the
18 business, and he got these flowers and this note.
19 That's in October, and they don't even bother to
20 see him until December, and nothing of significance has
21 happened in between those dates. He's continuing to live
22 right down the street from my client.
23 It's strange credulity that no one could think to
24 put a wire on this guy and say after the car -- after the
25 case had been turned over to the FBI, Gary, let me tell you,
Judy Bond, CERT

51
1 let me meet with you, I'm willing to do this now, I see the
2 light. He could have made a simple phone call. He didn't
3 have to be in his presence.
4 And the other thing that gets me is that he's such
5 a threat to this guy, and he's beaten on January 11 of 2014.
6 When is Mr. DeCicco arrested? Two plus years later.
7 They're neighbors. They allow them to be in the same
8 neighborhood together. Literally the backyard of CW-1 looks
9 into the pool area of Mr. DeCicco, and they allow that to go
10 on for two years and two months.
11 So I don't see where he's a danger to --
12 Where is any other violence on his record? You
13 know, he had somebody beaten up because they were making
14 comments about his girlfriend and perhaps his daughter.
15 We'll see where the evidence goes.
16 And we have someone that has problems with women
17 and has problems with expressing himself about what he's
18 going to do to people. And that's CW-1, not just my client.
19 He's got extremely strong roots in this community.
20 He doesn't have three passports like Paul Manafort.
21 And there are conditions --
22 And I don't think he's facing anywhere near the
23 time that Paul Manafort's facing.
24 There are conditions of release. We have a trial
25 date in February. Everybody in this room knows that when
Judy Bond, CERT

52
1 your client can walk in and out of the courtroom, can meet
2 with you on a regular basis, you have a much better chance
3 of prevailing at trial. It's a tremendous advantage or
4 disadvantage depending on what happens.
5 Both of his daughters are here today and other
6 family members.
7 You can put him on a bracelet, put him on a
8 curfew. You can take away his cell phone. You can do a
9 number of things, Your Honor, that guarantee that he's not
10 going anywhere.
11 In fact, the first time you found that he was
12 unlikely to go anywhere, and the representations about all
13 the money he has and the tax fraud count that was going to
14 be forthcoming were all made the first time around too.
15 So I know he doesn't have the money that Paul
16 Manafort has.
17 And so I'd ask you to release him on whatever
18 conditions you consider to be appropriate, Your Honor.
19 THE COURT: Ms. Barclay, I'll give you a chance to
20 respond, but suppose I set a very high cash -- a very high
21 cash performance bond. So you violate the conditions of
22 your pretrial release; you lose the money. Defendant can't
23 go back to the neighborhood at least until after the trial,
24 and if it's he doable -- I have no idea -- his phone gets
25 monitored so you know who he's in touch with.
Judy Bond, CERT

53
1 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, this is the defendant
2 who can find a way. He can find a way to accumulate
3 millions of dollars in assets and not pay a $350,000 tax
4 lien. He can find a way to hold a marina in his long-term
5 girlfriend's name, and then presumably -- and then buy it
6 from her -- this is evidence from the first hearing -- for
7 $3.2 million so that he can wash the cash he gets from the
8 fraudulent loan from Pulaski and essentially use the 1031
9 exchange so that he doesn't have to pay any taxes on that.
10 THE COURT: But consistent with that -- I
11 understand that -- you can make the argument that someone
12 who loves money that much, is not going to engage in conduct
13 that's going to result in a loss of a very significant
14 amount of cash.
15 MS. BARCLAY: Mr. DeCicco figures out a way to get
16 around every restriction that the law puts in place on him,
17 whether it's using a three-way call from prison to get his
18 one girlfriend back on the phone bill through the other
19 girlfriend, whether it's using one girlfriend to pay the
20 rent of another girlfriend by telling her it's a mortgage
21 payment, using an employee to help him move money back and
22 forth through girlfriends, whether it's having prison
23 meetings --
24 We have videos of him and a girlfriend talking
25 through the glass so that it's not recorded.
Judy Bond, CERT

54
1 So Your Honor, this is someone who knows and has
2 gamed every restriction and law that has gotten in the way
3 of him succeeding, whether it's financially, criminally or
4 judicially.
5 It's the government's position that there is no
6 set of conditions, Your Honor, that is going to
7 THE COURT: No, I understand that.
8 MS. BARCLAY: -- to keep the community safe from
9 Mr. DeCicco.
10 And the fact that he, you know, will have access
11 to potential witnesses --
12 I mean, the government knows who its witnesses
13 are, but that doesn't mean that Mr. DeCicco once he's out
14 can't round up his own slew of witnesses and tell them what
15 to say; which again, is something that we wouldn't put past
16 him at this point.
17 THE COURT: But that's something he could do from
18 jail. I mean, in theory.
19 MS. BARCLAY: The government -- maybe he knows
20 that the government's listening to his calls, Your Honor,
21 so. I mean, perhaps he can do it through --
22 He has an attorney friend who is on his call list.
23 Perhaps he's already doing it. I know that he does use that
24 attorney to sort of run around and to pay people to do
25 things for him.
Judy Bond, CERT

55
1 He has found a way, Your Honor, to continue his
2 sort of criminal scheme, so to speak -- not the extortion
3 necessarily -- while he's in prison. He continues to
4 dispose of assets and to transfer money and to generate
5 income through, you know, his girlfriends and those who are
6 loyal to him, including attorneys.
7 Your Honor, with respect to what Mr. Sheketoff
8 said, just a couple of quick points. The government didn't
9 choose CW-1 as its victim. Mr. DeCicco did. Okay? And
10 there's no evidence that CW-1 knew that by saying this had
11 something to do with the ownership of the business that he
12 understood that would make it a federal case. He tells it
13 to the Saugus P.D., and there's also no evidence that the
14 Saugus P.D. turned it over to the FBI, because they
15 recognized it was a criminal case.
16 In reality, Your Honor, and I think if this comes
17 out at trial, if this is an issue at trial, they recognized
18 Mr. DeCicco's name as having been associated with organized
19 crime, and they turned it over to the OC squad at the FBI.
20 It had nothing to do necessarily with the fact that this was
21 now a federal case; it had everything to do with Mr.
22 DeCicco's name and the knowledge of law enforcement
23 regarding his potential associations.
24 The point about the wire, Your Honor, we've been
25 over this a number of times before. Between the time when
Judy Bond, CERT

56
1 the FBI interviews CW-1 and the time when he's beaten, it's
2 13 days, and that includes New Year's and Christmas
3 vacation. They simply didn't have a chance to pursue this
4 investigation before Mr. DeCicco took matters again into his
5 own hands.
6 And the suggestion that they would wire him up
7 after he is viciously beaten and had his jaw wired shut for
8 40 days is preposterous at this point. The FBI is not going
9 to put someone into a situation like that which would be a
10 significant danger to his safety.
11 With respect to the fact that they live near each
12 other, this investigation was entirely covert. The fact
13 that Mr. DeCicco was the subject of the investigation did
14 not become known to Mr. DeCicco. The earliest it could have
15 become known to him is when his girlfriend testified in the
16 grand jury, and I believe that was the day before he was
17 arrested on the complaint.
18 So in the meantime, no one is approaching anyone.
19 In fact, we did not -- the FBI did not approach CW-4 until
20 after Mr. DeCicco was in custody. So they had spoken to
21 CW-1 who -- CW-2 who was in jail, CW-3, and they did not
22 speak to CW-4 because he lived at Mr. DeCicco's residence or
23 his second residence and he worked for Mr. DeCicco, and that
24 was too close and too dangerous for them to talk to him
25 before Mr. DeCicco was in custody.
Judy Bond, CERT

57
1 So it is not as if they just, you know, did
2 nothing here, Your Honor. There were precautions in place.
3 Your Honor, it's the government's position that --
4 the weight of the evidence and all of the other factors, the
5 risk of flight, the nature and seriousness of the offense,
6 the danger posed by Mr. DeCicco to the community and to
7 potential witnesses in this case is too significant for him
8 to be released under any conditions.
9 THE COURT: All right. Thanks everyone. I'm
10 going to take it under advisement. I'll get a decision to
11 you as soon as I can.
12 MS. BARCLAY: Thank you, Your Honor.
13 THE COURT: We're in recess.
14 MR. SHEKETOFF: Thank you, Your Honor.
15 (Court adjourned at 11:30:37 a.m.)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Judy Bond, CERT

58
1 CERTIFICATION
2 I, Judy Bond, a court approved transcriber, certify
3 that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official
4 electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the
5 above-entitled matter.
8 January 16, 2018

Judy Bond
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Judy Bond, CERT

U.S. Department of Justice
William D. Weinreb
Acting United States Attorney
District ofMassachusettsy
Main Reception: (6 17) 748-3100 John Joseph Moakley United States Cour1house
I Courthouse Way
Suite 9200
Boston. Massachusel/s 02210
May 26, 2017
By Hand
Michael Kendall, Esq.

White & Case LLP
75 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
Re: United States v. Gary P. DeCicco

Criminal No. 17-cr-10092-NMG
Dear Counsel:
Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16 and Rules 116. l(C) and 116.2 of the Local Rules of the
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, the government provides the
following automatic discovery in the above-referenced case:
A. Rule 16 Materials
1. Statements of Defendant under Rule l 6(a)(l)(A) & (a)(l )(B)
a. Written Statements
There are no relevant written statements of the defendant Gary P. DeCicco in the
possession, custody or control of the government, which are known to the attorney for the
government.
b. Recorded Statements
There are no relevant recorded statements of the defendant Gary P. DeCicco in the
possession, custody or control of the government, which are known to the attorney for the
government.
c. Grand Jury Testimony of the Defendant
The defendant Gary P. DeCicco did not testify before a grand j ury in relation to this case.
d. Oral Statements to Then Known Government Agents
Attached is the FBI report of the defendant's arrest, as well as notes taken by IRS special
Agent Sandra Lemanski during the arrest, which include notes of statements made by the
defendant [USAO_DECICC0_00000150-152].
The government is unaware of any other oral statements made by the defendant before or
after arrest, in response to interrogation by a person then known to the defendant to be a
govenunent agent, which the government intends to use at trial.
2. Defendant's Prior Record under Rule 16 (a)(] )(D)
Enclosed is a copy of the defendant's prior criminal record

[USAO_ DECICC0_00000153-166].
3. Documents and Tangible Objects under Rule l 6(a)(l )(E)
Enclosed are copies of the following books, papers, documents and tangible items which
are within the possession, custody or control of the government, and which are material to the
preparation of the defendant's defense or are intended for use by the government as evidence in
chief at the trial of this case, or were obtained from or belong to the defendant:
a. Saugus police reports for August 2014 [USAO_DECICCO_OOOOOJ 67-180] and January
11, 2015 [USAO_DECICC0_00000181-185];
b. Video Surveillance of Auto Excellence Group, January 11 , 2015

[USAO_DECICC0_00000186];
c. Audio recording made on January 31, 2017 [USAO_DECICCO_OOOOOl 87] ;
d. Video recordings made on January 31, 2017 [USAO_DECICC0_00000188- 191] ;
e. Documents provided by Daniel DiLullo [USAO_DECICC0_00000192-213] ;
f. Affidavit of Linda DeCicco [USAO_DECICC0_00000214] ;
g. Affidavit of Victoria Laurano [USAO_DECICC0_00000215];
h. Spreadsheet of phone contacts [USAO_DECICC0_ 00000216-221 ];
1. Telephone records for phones subscribed to or used by:
o Gary DeCicco/ Atlantis Marina [USAO_ DECICC0_00000222-501 ];
o Kimberly DeBenedictis [USAO_DECICC0_00000502-567] ;
o CW-4 [USAO_DECICC0_00000568-856];
2
o CW-3 [USAO_ DECICC0_00000857-977];
o CW-2 [USAO_DECICC0_00000978-1084];
J. Records received from the Plymouth County House of Correction

[USAO_DECICCO_OOOOl 140-1227]
o Note that the USAO was unable to access the audio files sent by the PCHC
without converting them to MP3 files. We have enclosed the MP3 files created
by the USAO in the event you cannot access the calls in the original format
[USAO_DECICCO_00001228]
The originals may be inspected by contacting the undersigned Assistant U.S. Attorney
and making an appointment to view the same at a mutually convenient time.
4. Reports of Examinations and Tests under Rule 16 (a)(l )(F)
Enclosed are the following documents:
a. FBI Evidence Logs regarding evidence collection on January 13, 2015

[USAO_ DECICC0_ 00001085-1088]; and
b. FBI laboratory reports regarding evidence collection [USAO_DECICC0_00001089-

1093].
There presently are no other reports of physical or mental examinations or scientific tests
or experiments made in connection with this case.
B. Search Materials under Local Rule 116.l(C)Cl)Cb)
No searches were conducted in connection with investigation of the charges contained in

the indictment in this case.
C. Electronic Surveillance under Local Rule 116. l(C)(l)(c)
No oral , wire, or electronic communications of the defendant as defined in 18 U.S.C. §

2510 were intercepted relating to the charges in the indictment.
D. Consensual Interceptions under Local Rule 116.1 (C)(l )Cd)
There were no interceptions (as the term "intercept" is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2510(4)) of
wire, oral, or electronic communications relating to the charges contained in the indictment,
made with the consent of one of the parties to the communication in which the defendant was
intercepted or which the government intends to offer as evidence in its case-in-chief.
3
E. Unindicted Coconspirators under Local Rule 116. l(C)(l)(e)
There is no conspiracy count charged in the indictment.
F. Identifications under Local Rule 116. l(C)(l )(f)
The defendant was a subject of an investigative identification procedure used with a

witness the government anticipates calling in its case-in-chief involving a Massachusetts
Registry of Motor Vehicles photograph, on January 9, 2017. A copy of the image used in the
identification procedure and the relevant section of the FBI Form 302 memorializing the
identification procedure are enclosed [USAO_DECICC0_00001094-1097]. The witness, CW-3,
later stated that CW-4 told him that the defendant wanted someone beaten up, and explained that
he told agents he did not recognize the picture they showed him because he had not seen the
defendant in years, and that he was hesitant to tell the FBI that the assault was committed for the
defendant "'Cause I don't want to die."
G. Exculpatory Evidence Under Local Rule l l 6.2(B)( 1)
With respect to the government's obligation under Local Rule l l 6.2(B)( 1) to produce
"exculpatory evidence" as that term is defined in Local Rule l 16.2(A), the government states as
follows:
1. The government is aware of the following information that would tend directly to
negate the defendant's guilt concerning any count in the indictment:
• The defendant told CW-4 that a neighbor was harassing his wife or daughter, and
asked if he knew anybody that could beat him up.
In addition, Richard Scourtas, Richard Aswad, Kimberly DeBenedictis, and Peter J.

Varone, Jr. may have information that you consider to be discoverable under Local Rule
l 16.2(B)(l)(a) or (b).
Finally, the government provides the below information in an abundance of caution and
not because it believes it constitutes exculpatory evidence:
• Philip Baldi spent most weekday mornings with the defendant from mid-2013
until the defendant's arrest. Baldi was present when the defendant had
DeBenedictis send flowers to CW- I , and he admitted calling in a pizza order for
deli very to CW-1. During the time period when the defendant sent the flowers to
CW-1 , Baldi recalled that the defendant was getting regular phone calls from
Peter Varone. The defendant told Baldi that Varone was complaining to the
defendant that CW-1 owed Varone money and that CW-1 wasn't paying him.
Baldi didn't think the amount of money that Varone claimed CW-1 owed him was
a lot, Baldi believes it was about $10,000. After the flower incident, the
defendant told Baldi that CW-1 had been saying bad things about the defendant.
The defendant never mentioned anything to Baldi about CW- I harassing
4
Debenedictis, the defendant's daughters, Pam Avedisian or any other female.

Baldi believes the defendant would have told him if CW-1 had been harassing any
of them. Baldi offered that he did not know that the defendant was upset with
CW-1 over the defendant wanting a piece of CW-1 's dealership. Baldi stated that
he never would have been involved with sending the flowers or the pizza to CW-1
had he known that the defendant was upset with CW-1 over a business
connection.
2. The government is unaware of any information that would cast doubt on the
admissibility of evidence that the government anticipates offering in its case-in-chief and that
could be subject to a motion to suppress or exclude.
3. The following promises, rewards, or inducements have been given to witnesses

whom the government anticipates calling in its case-in-chief:
• CW-4 entered into an immunity agreement with the United States Attorney's
Office for the District of Massachusetts on or about April 3, 2017.
• Philip Baldi entered into an immunity agreement with the United States
Attorney's Office forthe District of Massachusetts on or about April 25, 2017.
• Kimberly DeBenedictis testified in the grand jury pursuant to an immunity

Order.
4. The government is aware that the following named case-in-chief witnesses have
criminal records, copies of which are enclosed:
• CW-3[USAO_DECICC0_ 1098-l107]; and
• CW-2[USAO_DECICCO_ l121-1139].
A witness whom the government intends to call as a witness at trial has a criminal record
which includes a 2003 an-est and citation for driving under the influence. Should the defendant
intend to use this information for cross-examination, please so advise the government and we
will seek disclosure pursuant to a protective order.
which includes a 1993 restraining order and a 2010 dismissal for assault. Should the defendant
intend to use this information for cross-examination, please so advise the government and we
will seek disclosure pursuant to a protective order.
which includes a 2003 dismissal for assault and battery and a 2006 dismissal for a compulsory
insurance violation. Should the defendant intend to use this information for cross-examination,
please so advise the government and we will seek disclosure pursuant to a protective order.
5
5. The government is unaware that any of its named case-in-chief witnesses has any
criminal cases pending.
6. The following percipient witness initially failed to make a positive identification

of the defendant with respect to the crime at issue: CW-3 [USAO_DECICC0_00001094-1097].
H. Other Matters
The government is aware of its continuing duty to disclose newly discovered additional
evidence or material that is subject to discovery or inspection under Local Rules 116.1 and
116.2(B)(l) and Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The government requests reciprocal discovery pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure and Local Rule 116.1 (D).
The government demands, pursuant to Rule 12.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure, written notice of the defendant's intention to offer a defense of alibi. The times,
dates, and places at which the alleged offense was committed are set forth in the affidavit filed in
support of the criminal complaint in this case, a copy of which you previously have received.
The password for the enclosed disc is Moakley123!
Please call the undersigned Assistant U.S. Attorney at 617-748-3371 if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
WILLIAM D. WEINREB
Acting United States Attorney
By: ls/Kristina E. Barclav

Kristina E. Barclay
Enclosures:
USAO_ DECICC0_00000150 through USAO_ DECICC0_00001228
6

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, . CRIMINAL NO. 1:17-cr-10092-NMG

Plaintiff .
. BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
v. . OCTOBER 5, 2017
.
GARY P. DeCICCO, .
Defendant .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING

BEFORE THE HONORABLE DAVID H. HENNESSY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
For the Government: UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE

BY: Kristina E. Barclay, AUSA
One Courthouse Way, Suite 9200
Boston, MA 02210
617-748-3371
kristina.barclay@usdoj.gov
For the Defendant: Robert L. Sheketoff, Esquire

One McKinley Square
Boston, MA 02109
617-367-3449
sheketoffr@aol.com
Court Reporter:
Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording,

transcript produced by transcription service.
2
1 I N D E X
2 WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT
3 Defendant’s:
4 PHILLIP BALDI 5 24 51
5 PAGE
6 ARGUMENT BY MR. SHEKETOFF 59
7 RESPONSE 66
8 FURTHER ARGUMENT BY MR. SHEKETOFF 71
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Judy Bond, CERT

3
1 COURT CALLED INTO SESSION
2 (2:22:44 P.M.)
3 THE CLERK: The United States District Court is
4 now in session. Please be seated. The Honorable David H.
5 Hennessy presiding. Today's October 10, 2017, in the case
6 of the United States versus Gary DeCicco, (inaudible) 10092.
7 Would counsel please identify yourself for the
8 record?
9 MS. BARCLAY: Good afternoon, Your Honor.
10 Kristina Barclay for the United States, and with me at
11 counsel table is Special Agent Matt Elio from the FBI.
12 MR. SHEKETOFF: And good afternoon, Your Honor.
13 As you're aware, I've just entered my appearance about a
14 week ago. Robert Sheketoff for Mr. DeCicco. Also with me
15 is Carlos (inaudible), a brand new lawyer, sworn in in June.
16 The defendant is present.
17 And Your Honor, as I understand your order, please
18 correct me if I'm wrong, you're allowing me to put Phil
19 Baldi on the witness stand in order to decide whether or not
20 you're going to reopen this hearing based on his testimony.
21 THE COURT: That's exactly right. And just to
22 bring you up to speed, because I recognize you're new to the
23 case, it was represented to me by Mr. Kendall that Mr. Baldi
24 was not available at the time of the March 22 detention
25 hearing, and his testimony is testimony, among other things,
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
Case 1:17-cr-10092-NMG Document - Direct
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 4 of 75
4
1 about the note and the flowers. So the question is is that
2 going to be material to an assessment.
3 MR. SHEKETOFF: Understood.
4 So Mr. Baldi is present. I'm not sure if he's
5 actually in the courtroom, and he has -- his lawyer, George
6 Vien is also present.
7 I understand from Mr. Vien that he's a recent
8 inductee into Brookline High School Athletic Hall of Fame.
9 I was threatened if I didn't say that, that there would be
10 consequences. So I've said it.
11 And Your Honor, one of the affidavits that you
12 have in front of you is from -- filed earlier is from Mr.
13 DeCicco's sister, Noelle, and she's present in the
14 courtroom. If you want her sequestered, I will ask her to
15 leave. If not, she can stay.
16 THE COURT: I don't see a need for it. What's the
17 government's view?
18 MS. BARCLAY: Umm --
19 THE COURT: I'm not expecting we're going to hear
20 testimony from her, but.
21 MS. BARCLAY: Yeah, no, that's fine, Your Honor.
22 THE COURT: Okay. All right. Let's swear the
23 witness.
24 DEFENDANT WITNESS PHILLIP BALDI SWORN
25 THE CLERK: Please state your name and spell your
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 5 of 75
5
1 last name for the record.
2 THE WITNESS: Sure. My name is Phillip Baldi. My
3 last name is spelled B-A-L-D-I.
4 MR. SHEKETOFF: Thank you, Judge.
5 DIRECT EXAMINATION
6 BY MR. SHEKETOFF:
7 Q. Mr. Baldi, can you tell us how old you are and what
8 town you presently reside in?
9 A. I'm 59, and I reside in Winthrop, Massachusetts.
10 Q. And were you a long-term of employee of some company?
11 A. Yes. The Flatly Company in Braintree, Massachusetts.
12 Q. When were you employed by Flatly?
13 A. From 1986 or so to 2002. Somewhere in there.
14 Q. And what was your final position at Flatly?
15 A. For all but one year I was there I was the chief
16 financial officer. The first year I was the comptroller.
17 Q. So do you understand, as you're testifying today, that
18 the government --
19 THE COURT: One second, Mr. Sheketoff. I just
20 need to move the mic to make sure we're getting his voice.
21 BY MR. SHEKETOFF:
22 Q. You understand, as you're testifying today, that the
23 government has agreed with your counsel that this is covered
24 by your proffer?
25 A. Yes.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 6 of 75
6
1 Q. And you have a proffer agreement with the government;
2 correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 MS. BARCLAY: I would just object, Your Honor.
5 It's an immunity agreement.
6 MR. SHEKETOFF: I'm sorry. Immunity.
7 A. Oh, I'm sorry.
8 Q. And you do have an immunity agreement with the
9 government?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you have testified before the grand jury; correct?
12 A. Correct.
13 Q. Now, when did you first meet my client?
14 A. I believe it was October of 2013.
15 Q. And was that in connection with some business venture
16 of some sort?
17 A. Some years prior to that I had worked on a sale of Tom
18 Flatly's hotels with an attorney, Myra Silverstein, and
19 Larry had told me back then that -- because I left Tom on my
20 own, and he said, jeez, you should talk to Gary. And I
21 didn't do it at that time, but some years later -- you know,
22 back in October of '13 he happened to be out front of my
23 house. I was having some landscaping done. He was talking
24 to somebody. I went out and introduced myself, and he said
25 why don't you come down the office, and we'll get together.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 7 of 75
7
1 Q. All right. And as a result of that meeting and
2 suggestions that had been made to you earlier, did you get
3 involved in some business venture together?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And what was that venture?
6 A. Initially I had a consulting agreement with Gary where
7 he was paying my health insurance, and he was going to give
8 me a 5 percent interest in the Saugus -- a property in
9 Saugus, and if I was able to obtain a -- I think it was a --
10 it might have been a liquor license or a restaurant for the
11 location, the interest would have gone to 10 percent, which
12 I was not able to do at that point.
13 Q. All right. And was there a subsequent venture after
14 that one?
15 A. Yep, we had worked on a number of different things.
16 There was --
17 Oh, there was property in the Bahamas, a great deal of
18 it, that we spent a lot of time researching and trying to
19 get to the bottom of, whether or not the fellow who said he
20 owned it owned it, and of what he did own remained.
21 And we looked at the Saugus property, I guess property
22 in Revere and his property in Winthrop. I helped him with
23 some things at the marina like the parking agreement.
24 And essentially the financial transaction I got into
25 with Gary was to lend him $900,000 as part of the money to
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 8 of 75
8
1 buy out a partner, David Rosenberg, in Saugus -- excuse me
2 -- in Peabody out of the building called the Mills Pulaski
3 LLC. Gary and David both owned 50 percent of it at that
4 time.
5 Q. And subsequent to that loan did you get repaid on that
6 loan?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And did you become some sort of owner of that property?
9 A. Yes. Yes.
10 Q. And as a result of these business dealings, by August
11 of 2014 how often were you seeing Mr. DeCicco?
12 A. You know, three or four times a week probably.
13 Q. Okay. For how many hours a day?
14 A. Two to four, depending.
15 Q. And would you say you became friends?
16 A. Yeah. I mean, we -- we became close business
17 associates. I --
18 Honestly, I use the term love and friends sparingly,
19 so. It's usually reserved for my family or people, you
20 know, that I've known since I was a little kid.
21 Q. Did you learn certain personal things about him?
22 A. Oh, sure. We both did. Yeah, we talked about our kids
23 and a lot of other things, you know.
24 Q. Did he --
25 MR. SHEKETOFF: Beg the Court's indulgence.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 9 of 75
9
1 Q. Did you come to learn that he had a girlfriend who was
2 significantly younger than him?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And what's her name?
5 A. Kim DeBenedictis.
6 Q. Have you met her --
7 A. Oh, sure, yes.
8 Q. When you started to get to know him in October of 2013,
9 did he already have a relationship with her?
10 A. She was in the car when I met him, yeah.
11 Q. And were there conversations about --
12 MR. SHEKETOFF: We're going to refer to the person
13 that was beaten up by agreement as CW-1 if that's okay with
14 the Court.
15 THE COURT: That's fine.
16 Q. Did you learn whether from hearsay or any other source
17 what Kim's relationship was with CW-1?
18 A. You know, in all frankness, the discussion about CW-1
19 for the longest time was about him not paying a fellow by
20 the name of Peter Varone the money that he was due to
21 complete the construction of the building.
22 At some point late, late, late in my relationship with
23 Gary that may have come up, but not in any great --
24 You know, it wasn't -- it wasn't like we talked about
25 that. I mean, and all I was told actually was that she
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 10 of 75
10
1 worked there.
2 Q. All right. And did CW-1 tell you that, or did Gary
3 DeCicco tell you that?
4 A. I've never met CW-1, so that would have been Gary.
5 Q. And how would you describe Kim physically? Is she a
6 beautiful young woman?
7 A. I'd say she's an attractive young woman.
8 Q. Would you call her striking.
9 MS. BARCLAY: Objection.
10 THE COURT: Grounds?
11 MS. BARCLAY: Relevance.
12 THE COURT: He can answer it.
13 A. Yeah, I'd say she's --
14 She's a good-looking kid. Don't get me wrong, I mean.
15 Q. So there was a --
16 Did you know Peter and Fred Varone?
17 A. Yes. Peter I had met a few times with Gary, and Fred a
18 few less times than Peter. I'd say Fred we bumped into
19 maybe three or four times and Peter maybe, you know --
20 Because Peter had a boat down at Gary's marina, so
21 Peter a few more times than that, I guess.
22 Q. Had you ever been present at a conversation with Peter
23 Varone and Gary DeCicco discussed the debt that CW-1 owed to
24 Mr. Varone?
25 MS. BARCLAY: I just object to the leading nature
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 11 of 75
11
1 of the questions, Your Honor.
2 THE COURT: I'll allow it. Were you present for
3 any conversation?
4 A. There's one conversation that I remember fuzzily, is
5 the best way to put it. But yes. The answer is yes.
6 It was at a greasy spoon in Saugus, Mass., called Iron
7 Town.
8 Gary and I walked in. Peter was sitting there, I
9 think, with his son and maybe a couple of other people. And
10 there was a discussion at that time, and Peter was
11 complaining about not getting paid, and --
12 I'm just going to tell you the truth. Gary said why
13 don't you have him beat up, and Peter said, no, no, no.
14 Afterwards Gary said he's too big a pussy to do something
15 like that, so. That was --
16 And the exact amount of what it was, I never thought it
17 was a huge amount of money, but I never knew how much it
18 was.
19 Q. During that conversation did you learn from any other
20 source whether -- how this debt was accruing?
21 A. My understanding was it was a result of moneys that
22 were due for the construction of a building. I understood
23 that Peter was the general contractor, and that he was just
24 not paying him in full.
25 Q. Was there any discussion; and if so, what was said
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 12 of 75
12
1 about subcontractors?
2 A. That Peter wasn't able to pay his subs the amount that
3 he owed them in full; and in fact, I remember saying to
4 Peter why don't you just take out a mechanics lien, because
5 in the event that you do, it is the easiest lien to obtain
6 and the hardest one to get rid of. If he ever -- if CW ever
7 wanted to sell the property or refinance that property,
8 Peter and his subs would get paid in full. And he sort of
9 just shrugged his shoulders when I mentioned that to him, so
10 he didn't seem to be interested in doing that.
11 Q. You're here mostly about the flower incident.
12 Do you recall that incident?
13 A. I do.
14 Q. When in relation to the flower incident was this
15 conversation at this greasy spoon?
16 A. Oh, gee whiz. I'd say probably -- boy, I couldn't
17 really say if it was before or after, to be frank with you.
18 You know, I mean, we were --
19 You know, Gary and I were getting together every, you
20 know, three or four days a week, so it's hard to put a date.
21 I'd be kidding you if I knew exactly when it was.
22 Q. So were there other discussions that you had --
23 Besides this one at the greasy spoon, were there other
24 discussions that you had with Gary DeCicco about CW-1 prior
25 to the flower incident?
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 13 of 75
13
1 A. There were -- I don't remember any conversations with
2 Peter, per se , but I do recall a couple of things. One is
3 hearing half a conversation where Peter called Gary, and
4 Gary saying, you know -- you know, just relaying to me that
5 Peter's bitching about not getting paid by CW-1.
6 And another example or two where we went to --
7 Peter's son had become a partner in a -- a used car
8 business, and Peter's son was continuing to try to do
9 business with CW-1 and sort of complained that he may have
10 been screwed by him. And Gary would say to him, well, if he
11 stiffed your father, why are you -- why are you talking to
12 him?
13 Q. To the best of your memory did Gary ever explain to you
14 or state to you or express his view -- his personal view of
15 CW-1 prior to the --
16 A. Yes. In fact, we -- we -- the route we would take, --
17 we would meet on Route 107 in Saugus, and we would then
18 drive across Saugus to Route 1. And I think it's just sheer
19 coincidence, because we would meet in other places to just
20 take one car up to Peabody. Because I lived in Winthrop; he
21 lived in Nahant. So it was more out of convenience.
22 But we would drive by -- excuse me -- CW-1's place, you
23 know, a couple times a week, and he -- he would tell me that
24 he doesn't know what the heck he's doing in the car
25 business. He's got Ferraris in the window in the middle of
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 14 of 75
14
1 the winter, and nobody's ever going to buy them.
2 And that there was a real estate transaction. My
3 understanding was that Gary owned the land prior to xxxx
4 buying it, and that there was a -- the state was attempting
5 to take a little shop -- dress shop that's on the corner
6 that xxxx -- or excuse me -- CW -- I apologize -- didn't
7 own, and in exchange for that would have given CW a curb cut
8 on Route 1, which the property didn't enjoy. Because you'd
9 have to drive around this exit to get into CW's property.
10 So it would have benefited him by having a curb cut and
11 maybe some additional parking on Route 1 -- directly on
12 Route 1. And he would have had to have surrendered -- the
13 lady would have been paid by the government for the taking,
14 and CW would have had to have surrendered a strip of land to
15 his back parking lot. Which being in the business and
16 knowing how those things work and knowing the benefit of --
17 the value of a curb cut on Route 1, which is --
18 You know, that curb cut, by the way, was already there.
19 It was part of the lady's property, but they were going to
20 trade it off apparently. And this is all on just from what
21 I'm being told.
22 And at that point -- Gary had been working on that
23 himself while he owned it. When CW bought the property, he
24 was, you know, told it's in his best interest to proceed
25 with that. He went to the state and said you're not going
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 15 of 75
15
1 to take this back piece of my land away from me and not pay
2 me for it.
3 And you know, if the State's just doing a pure taking,
4 they have to pay you for it. But if there's a quid pro quo ,
5 and they're trading something for it, especially something
6 that benefits you, you'd be -- it would make a lot of sense
7 for you to enter into that with the State.
8 And he blew it up. So he ends up with the same
9 configuration, the lousy exit, no curb cut on Route 1.
10 And, you know, it is what it is, and that's not --
11 You know, and Gary would say to me he's an idiot for
12 not doing it.
13 Q. Did you ever hear Gary DeCicco express any interest in
14 becoming CW-1's partner in any way?
15 A. Not from -- I have recently heard it from other people
16 but never from Gary or Peter or anybody else.
17 Q. Do you remember the flower incident?
18 A. Oh, yes.
19 Q. Who was in the car?
20 A. Gary, myself and Kim.
21 Q. And where had you been?
22 A. We had been, I believe, in Peabody. We were driving
23 back from Peabody. We were on Route 107 in Lynn. Just
24 prior to getting on -- I don't know the name of the
25 intersection, but there's a flower shop.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 16 of 75
16
1 And there was a -- you know, there was a banter going
2 about. Maybe we should send him some flowers. Blah, blah,
3 blah, blah. He's busting Peter's balls.
4 And I can't remember exactly how it ended up being a
5 white cross, but I don't think that's what Kim originally
6 went in there for, is the best way I can put it, but that's
7 how it ended up. That is the best way to put it.
8 Q. Okay. So you were in the car?
9 A. Yep.
10 Q. What time of day was this?
11 A. I'd say -- usually we were coming back --
12 Kim had to pick her kids up by noon or so. I'd say,
13 you know, one or before. You know, early afternoon or late
14 morning. Something like that.
15 Q. And from your perspective was the stop at the flower
16 shop something that was planned ahead of time?
17 A. Oh, no. No. I don't think so. I don't think so.
18 Q. You said you don't remember the exact details, but the
19 cross was not part of the discussion before --
20 A. I don't --
21 Q. -- Kim went into the --
22 A. For some reason I just don't remember -- or how anybody
23 would know to say to go and get a white cross. You know,
24 that's not like something that would -- it would be a normal
25 thing you'd order, is the best way to put it.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 17 of 75
17
1 Q. Do you have any memory of Kim coming back out to the
2 car after going in to the shop saying something like all
3 they've got is this thing --
4 MS. BARCLAY: Objection.
5 Q. -- and it costs a lot more?
6 MS. BARCLAY: Leading.
7 THE COURT: Just ask it differently. When Kim
8 came in to the shop, did she say anything about what she
9 could or could not purchase?
10 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I believe that did happen.
11 THE COURT: Would you tell us what she said?
12 THE WITNESS: I don't exactly remember, but I
13 think that's how the white cross came up to be frank with
14 you. I don't -- I can't tell you what she said, because I
15 don't recall specifically.
17 Q. So you believe she went in there more than once?
18 A. Yes. That's -- it's vague in my memory, but I think
19 that's how it came up, is the best way I can put it.
20 Q. And do you know how the card got generated? In other
21 words --
22 A. I think she brought it back out with her, and I think
23 Gary kind of told her what to put on the card was what
24 happened.
25 Q. And do you recall what the mood was in the car when
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 18 of 75
18
1 this was going on?
2 A. Yeah. It was, you know, he's a jerk. You know, I want
3 to send them --
4 You know, it was more -- it was a prank. You know,
5 that's --
6 Q. And based from your perspective it was a prank?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. All right. Was it the flower shop or some other way
9 that the flowers got delivered?
10 A. Oh, no. I think it was the flower shop.
11 Q. What happened next after you guys drove away from the
12 flower shop?
13 A. Oh, jeez. I mean, I imagine we got to where we had all
14 parked, and we all went our separate ways.
15 Q. Do you know if any phone calls were made to CW-1 about
16 subs or pizza or anything like that?
17 A. No, not to him. They were made to one or two different
18 sub shops in and around Saugus to be delivered to him.
19 Because Gary had mentioned to me that he didn't like Italian
20 food, and I sent him some Italian -- I -- I -- I called them
21 and had some Italian food delivered. Again, as a --
22 You know, I'm thinking it's like sort of you call a
23 taxi to your neighbor's house when you're in high school,
24 and they show up, and they're beeping the horns, and, you
25 know, nobody knows -- nobody comes out, you know.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 19 of 75
19
1 Same idea. Same --
2 You know, if you had a teacher you didn't like, you
3 might send him, you know, a bunch of food or something to
4 pay for.
5 Q. All right. So when you called the sub shops, --
6 A. Yep.
7 Q. -- was that your initiative based on Gary DeCicco's
8 comment that he didn't like Italian, or did the two of you
9 sort of agree that someone was going to do this?
10 A. I think one of them I did myself. I -- I -- I really
11 --
12 You know, and it was as a result of the ongoing sort of
13 he's a jerk. You know, let's mess with him a little bit is
14 the best way to put it.
15 Q. At some point after this flower delivery --
16 Do you believe that this was in August of 2014?
17 A. It's very possible. I mean, again --
18 But I just don't have a specific recollection. I can
19 tell you that I remember it not being cold out was the best
20 way I can put it. You know, I don't think it was at all in
21 the winter or anything like that. I think it was nice out.
22 Q. Other than the flower delivery and the one or two phone
23 calls to sub or pizza shops, did you ever have any further
24 contact or connection to CW-1?
25 A. There was at least --
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 20 of 75
20
1 When you say to him directly, no.
2 Gary walked me through the building at least one time,
3 and I remember there was a lift for cars to bring it up to
4 the second floor that was being installed at the time.
5 THE COURT: What building are you talking about?
6 Q. At CW-1's building?
7 A. Yes. I'm sorry. I apologize.
9 A. And I have a natural curiosity about --
10 I've been in the real estate business a long time. I'm
11 always wondering about how things were being built. You
12 know, so it's -- you know, it's just something that I --
13 I'll walk through any building that's under
14 construction any day of the week. Yeah, I might be
15 trespassing, but I'm very curious about how they're doing
16 things. Because construction is an evolving business. It's
17 not something that's stagnant.
18 Q. So no more prank calls from you?
19 A. There -- not from me.
20 But I do believe there was one other thing. I think
21 Gary called Davio's and acted as though he were xxxx --
22 excuse me -- CW and said -- made a bunch of disparaging
23 comments about the service, the food, and the this and the
24 that, and that was that.
25 Q. All right. When in relation to the flower incident is
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 21 of 75
21
1 that?
2 A. Right around the same time. All of this happened right
3 around the same time. There wasn't a --
4 I would say everything we're talking about as far as
5 the food, the flowers, you know, calling Davio's all
6 happened within a week. Maybe two tops, but more like a
7 week. Something like that.
8 Q. The Davio's incident you know about, because you were
9 physically present?
10 A. Yeah, I was sitting there.
11 Q. So he made that call in front of you?
12 A. Yeah.
13 Q. Now, at some point after the flower incident did Gary
14 DeCicco say something additionally to you about CW-1?
15 A. The only specific thing that I remember --
16 Now, there may have been other bitching about -- excuse
17 my language -- about Peter not getting paid, and I can't
18 place an exact time with that.
19 -- but was that he said to me something to the effect
20 of xxxx said something bad about me. That's -- and that was
21 it. That was really -- that was for all intents and
22 purposes the last thing I heard about it.
23 Q. To the best of your memory, this was after the flower
24 incident?
25 A. Oh, definitely. Definitely.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 22 of 75
22
1 Q. Do you have an estimate --
2 A. How long afterwards is a tough question for me to
3 answer. I thought about that, and I can't --
4 I would say within two months, but how close I don't
5 know exactly.
6 Q. For any of these -- let me call them prank phone calls,
7 was Kim's father present?
8 A. No. No. He's -- those were all done in the car with
9 me and Gary and --
10 I don't even think --
11 I think the flowers Kim was there for. The other phone
12 calls I don't think -- she might have been in the car for
13 some, but I remember those being me and Gary together, just
14 the two of us.
15 Q. Do you remember any conversation about CW-1 occurring
16 in front of Kim's father at the marina?
17 A. No. No, I don't. I really don't, no.
18 Q. All right. Was the marina office place different than
19 the marina?
20 A. No. No.
21 Q. Who's Rick Salvo?
22 A. Rick is a civil engineer whose office is in Saugus.
23 The name of his firm is engineering alliance. That's who he
24 is.
25 Q. Do you know if there was any discussion about whether
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 23 of 75
23
1 or not Rick Salvo had been paid?
2 A. I don't know. Honestly, the thing I remember the most
3 about Rick Salvo is having paid him to do things and him not
4 producing them on time. That's -- that's really -- I really
5 --
6 As far as him not getting paid?
7 Q. Okay.
8 A. I -- I -- I remember him asking for money on like the
9 Revere project; but, no, not -- not about CW if what's what
10 you're asking.
11 Q. Yeah. So you don't recall any conversation concerning
12 CW-1 that concerned -- also concerned Rick Salvo for a steel
13 guy, for an electric guy or anything like that?
14 A. Yeah. Steel -- electric -- I wouldn't say steel, but
15 the electric guy --
16 The steel guy may have been the guy putting in that
17 lift, so maybe about that.
18 The electric guy I remember Peter complaining about him
19 not being able to pay. And I can't remember if Peter said
20 he told the electric guy to go collect on his own.
21 Something to that effect maybe, but.
22 Q. And we're talking about an electric guy who was a
23 subcontractor on CW-1's building?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. All right. Now, at some point the government said to
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 24 of 75
24
1 you -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- why do you think --
2 what was behind the flower incident, and you gave your
3 opinion; correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And what was your opinion?
6 A. My opinion of it was that Gary was pissed that Peter
7 didn't get paid, and --
8 I'm sorry. Did you say about the flower incident?
9 Q. Yeah.
10 A. Oh, shit. The flower incident was, yeah, about that.
11 The same thing. The same thing.
12 MR. SHEKETOFF: Nothing further.
13 CROSS-EXAMINATION
14 BY MS. BARCLAY:
15 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Baldi.
16 A. Good afternoon.
17 Q. Mr. Baldi, you're a CPA?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And you work for Coopers and Mybrand (sic) in the 80s;
20 is that right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And then you worked for the Flatly Company. You were
23 the CFO for maybe 17 years?
24 A. Yep.
25 Q. And you worked for a few more years after that as the
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 25 of 75
25
1 CFO for a company Picernes?
2 A. Picerne out of Rhode Island.
3 Q. Picernes. And that's a family real estate business?
4 A. Yep, a big apartment company.
5 Q. And when you left there, you sort of retired?
6 A. Yeah, I thought I was going to.
7 Q. But you were sort of going through a mid-life crisis of
8 some sort?
9 A. Yes, uh-huh.
10 Q. You needed to get out of the house?
11 A. Oh, my God. My wife harassed the crap out of me, so.
12 Q. So you're outside your house one day in October 2013,
13 and Mr. DeCicco drives up --
14 A. Yep.
15 Q. -- with Kim DeBenedictis.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. The pretty girl.
18 A. Yep.
19 Q. What kind of car did he have?
20 A. I think it was a blue Bentley.
21 Q. Bentley.
22 And you recognized him as someone that -- someone had
23 at some point mentioned you should, you know, possibly get
24 into business with.
25 A. He was actually talking to the fellow who was doing the
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. Lemanski
304-20 Filed 05/25/18 Page 26 of 75
26
1 landscaping. And, yeah, I looked out, and I recognized him,
2 and said, yeah, okay. Yeah, because although he and I had
3 never met before, we -- he, I think, moved to Winthrop when
4 he was 18. I sort of almost -- I wouldn't say left
5 Winthrop. Although I lived there, I worked everywhere else
6 but there is the best way I can put it. So I didn't spend a
7 lot of time in Winthrop. So I never spent --
8 You know, I never was introduced to him, so. I knew
9 what he looked like, but I didn't know who he was. And I
10 went out and introduced myself.
11 Q. And he said, yeah, stop by my office tomorrow at the
12 marina?
13 A. Yep. Or the next day or whatever, yeah.
14 Q. The next day?
15 A. Yep.
16 Q. And he told you over the course of your sort of first
17 couple of meetings with him that he owned land in Winthrop?
18 A. Yep.
19 Q. Saugus?
20 A. Yep.
21 Q. Revere?
22 A. Yep.
23 Q. He also told you he owned Pulaski Mills up in Peabody?
24 A. He said he owned half of it.
25 Q. Okay. At that point he owned half.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Case 1:17-cr-10092-NMG Document Lemanski
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 27 of 75
27
1 And that was a mill building with a lot of tenants?
2 A. Not a lot at the time.
3 Q. But it had a lot of possibilities for tenants?
4 A. I believe it did, yes.
5 Q. And that's because you had worked for the Flatly
6 Company.
7 A. Right.
8 Q. That's the type of work you did.
9 A. Well, we had a large industrial park about a mile and a
10 quarter away in Beverly that during a period of time I was
11 there we started with about a half million square feet and
12 ended up with 2.2 million square feet of mostly industrial,
13 some office --
14 Q. So this is the type of thing that you --
15 A. Yeah.
16 Q. -- piqued your interest?
17 A. And I thought the location of the building on Pulaski
18 Street was better than Tom's Park, frankly.
19 Q. And it was your understanding he owned that marina in
20 Winthrop?
21 A. Yeah. I -- I -- in fact, I -- the marina I think --
22 I thought his kids may have owned it, frankly.
23 Q. Okay. But for all intents and purposes, it was his?
24 A. Yeah. Yep.
25 Q. Okay. And he told you --
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 28 of 75
28
1 This land in the Bahamas, did he say I owned some land
2 in the Bahamas?
3 A. Not what we were looking at, but some other land --
4 Q. Other land?
5 A. -- on another island is the best way to put it.
6 Q. And he also told you he had two houses in Nahant;
7 right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. He had one on the water. A beautiful house you've been
10 to.
11 A. Yep. I've been to, yep.
12 Q. And another inland where an ex-girlfriend lived with
13 one of his daughters?
14 A. Right. And I've also been to that. Just, you know,
15 momentarily is the best way to put it.
16 Q. And since you met him in October 2013, it was always
17 your understanding he owned both those houses?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And he had property in Florida he told you?
20 A. Oh, yeah. Yep.
21 Q. And he had a bunch of fancy cars?
22 A. Oh, yeah.
23 Q. All right. Lamborghinies, Porsches, Ferraris?
24 A. Yep.
25 Q. He told you he had a boat in Fort Lauderdale that he
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 29 of 75
29
1 paid 6 or 8 million dollars for?
2 A. Yep.
3 Q. And he told you he had boats in Massachusetts. You saw
4 some of them.
5 A. Yep. I've been on one of them. You know, more than
6 one. Maybe two or --
7 You know, one of them in particular which is a
8 catamaran I was on a few times, yeah.
9 Q. And he said he had another boat in Florida other than
10 the one he paid the 6 or 8 million dollars for?
11 A. Yep.
12 Q. And he had a couple of girlfriends; right?
13 A. Yep.
14 Q. There was Kim DeBenedictis?
15 A. Yep.
16 Q. And then you also met Pam Abdesian (phonetic)?
17 A. Yep.
18 Q. And she lived with him in the house on the water in
19 Nahant with a daughter?
20 A. Yep.
21 Q. Any other girlfriends did he tell you about?
22 A. Yeah. And Lisa who lived in the other home with his
23 other daughter.
24 Q. Anyone else?
25 A. No.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 30 of 75
30
1 Q. And you and DeCicco -- Mr. DeCicco, you're the same
2 age?
3 A. A week apart.
4 Q. Right?
5 A. Yep.
6 Q. And he's got a lot of stuff. He's got cars, houses,
7 boats, properties, a couple girlfriends; right?
8 A. Yep.
9 Q. Talks tough?
10 A. Yep.
11 Q. And very different from the guys you dealt with at
12 Flatly?
13 A. Oh, yeah. Yeah.
14 Q. And you had some money to play around with in your
15 retirement?
16 A. Yep.
17 Q. And you wanted to do something with your time?
18 A. Yeah. I had to. Needed to.
19 Q. So you got talking to him about his properties and how
20 you can help, and this going to be something different for
21 you?
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. And one of those properties is Pulaski Mills?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. And he owned half. The other guy owned half.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 31 of 75
31
1 A. Yep.
2 Q. And we'll circle back to this later, but you gave them
3 900,000 --
4 A. Yep.
5 Q. -- for that -- as a loan for that property?
6 A. As a loan to buy out David Rosenberg who owned the
7 other half.
8 Q. And that was --
9 A. Part -- partially to buy out David.
10 Q. And that was May 2014?
11 A. That sounds about right, yep.
12 Q. So the flower incident we're talking about is in August
13 of 2014.
14 A. Okay.
15 Q. Okay? So there's three months in there.
16 A. Yeah.
17 Q. Does that sounds right?
18 A. I honestly never -- the only thing I can associate with
19 my investment in Pulaski Street is probably the month prior
20 and the period thereafter spending a lot more time with
21 Gary.
22 Q. Well, that was my question, actually.
23 So if you put money in in May, --
24 A. Yep.
25 Q. -- then you didn't start spending a lot of time with
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 32 of 75
32
1 him --
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. -- until April --
4 A. And a little prior to that I wanted to get to show the
5 place a little better, so doing my due diligence. So yes.
6 Q. Okay. And a couple times a week you meet at an auto
7 body shop in Revere, is it?
8 A. It's Saugus actually.
9 Q. Saugus. Route 107?
10 A. Yep.
11 Q. Is that Brother's?
12 A. Is that in Revere?
13 Q. Brother's Auto Body?
14 A. No. No. It's, umm --
15 Q. Is it Kenny Lafauci?
16 A. No. It's Armand -- I don't know Armand's last name.
17 It's right at the end of 107 before the bridge goes in to
18 Lynn.
19 Q. Did Mr. DeCicco did introduce to you Kenny Lafauci,
20 though?
21 A. Yeah. And we would occasionally meet at Kenny's,
22 because Gary would buy cars through auction from Kenny.
23 Kenny would repair cars. Kenny's repaired my own car, and
24 we've repaired --
25 You know, if Gary had something that Armand couldn't
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 33 of 75
33
1 handle from a repair stand -- Kenny was a step above Armand
2 in, I think, mechanically as much as anything in trying to
3 figure out how to fix cars.
4 Q. Did he tell you --
5 Did Mr. DeCicco tell you that Kenny, Mr. Lafauci, let
6 Mr. DeCicco use his dealer license to buy and sell cars?
7 A. No. I thought that was --
8 Well, I thought the dealer plate he had came from the
9 Lynnway Dealership.
10 Q. Is that Mr. Aswad?
11 A. Yep.
12 Q. Okay. Because -- I'm sorry.
13 But Mr. DeCicco did have a dealer plate; right?
14 A. Yep.
15 Q. And did he tell you that the dealer plate allowed him
16 to buy and sell cars without them ever showing up under his
17 name, so he could not reveal that he owned those to the IRS?
18 A. He never said it quite that way, no. He -- he, uh --
19 No. I mean, my -- my --
20 No, he never said that.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. He would --
23 Q. So --
24 A. I mean, my impression of things is that he liked to
25 play with cars. He liked to buy cars that --
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 34 of 75
34
1 He'd by one of two types of cars. One was something
2 that was nice he could get at a cheap price, use it for a
3 period of time, and then sell it at the same price or maybe
4 a little less.
5 Or buy a car that was considered to be a junker by an
6 insurance company or something that he had a good feeling
7 about. He'd buy that, spend some money on it, and then try
8 to sell it for more money. And --
9 Q. What about --
10 A. You know, frankly, I always thought he was a partner of
11 Richy's. I never thought he was -- I didn't think -- I
12 didn't think that was a tax scheme --
13 Q. Okay.
14 A. -- personally. I just never thought.
15 Q. So most days you'd leave a car at one of these shops,
16 and Mr. DeCicco would drive you up to Pulaski in one of his
17 cars?
18 A. Or I would drive up. It was sort one or the other. I
19 mean, sometimes he'd drive his daughter's car over, because
20 it needed repair. And I'd drive up some days. You know,
21 he'd get whatever.
22 So I mean, it was a truck he got that was supposedly in
23 a flood. And I saw it on the auction page. You know, it
24 looked good. And I just didn't believe it was going to run.
25 And it comes off the back of the truck and started right up,
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 35 of 75
35
1 so.
2 Q. And sometimes Ms. DeBenedictis, the younger of his two
3 girlfriends, she's with you when you drive up there?
4 A. Oh, yeah. Many times. I would say maybe not quite
5 half the time.
6 Q. And you said that you drove by CW-1's property, --
7 A. Right.
8 Q. -- the dealership, a number of times?
9 A. Yep.
10 Q. Including when it was being built?
11 A. Yep.
12 Q. And he actually brought you in to the dealership --
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. -- once when it was being built?
15 A. Yep.
16 Q. And you said once, maybe even more than that?
17 A. It might have been twice. I really --
18 There's one time I distinctly remember that lift going
19 in. And that's the thing that I remember the most, because
20 to me, when I looked at it, it looks like a lot of money.
21 That's an expensive thing.
22 Q. Yeah. And Mr. DeCicco just walked you right in there?
23 A. Yeah.
24 Q. And CW-1 was not there?
25 A. Correct.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 36 of 75
36
1 Q. Peter Varone was there?
2 A. Peter I think was there. Probably --
3 Yeah, I can't remember if he was there.
4 Q. And he showed you all around the building?
5 A. Yeah.
6 Q. He showed you how the lift worked?
7 A. I don't think it was working yet.
8 Q. Okay. But he showed you what it was going to do?
9 A. Sure. Yep.
10 Q. Did he show you his office on the second floor?
11 A. He showed me upstairs on the second floor.
12 Q. Okay.
13 A. I mean, he never --
14 Q. You said you thought that he --
15 MR. SHEKETOFF: Wait. He didn't finish the
16 answer.
17 THE COURT: Yeah. Finish --
18 A. Yeah. He never called that his office in my presence,
19 so.
20 Q. Okay.
21 A. I just want to be clear on that.
22 Q. You also said, I think, and maybe I didn't hear you
23 correctly, did you also -- is it possible that you also
24 stopped there, and he ran in on other occasions? Like, you
25 waited in the car?
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 37 of 75
37
1 A. It might have been maybe once. Maybe once, yeah, we
2 pulled around back, and he ran in. That's possible.
3 Q. And you said in response to Mr. Sheketoff's questions
4 that Mr. DeCicco talked about CW-1 and how he was running
5 the business?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And he said he was an idiot who didn't know how to run
8 a business?
9 A. Correct. Didn't know how to run --
10 Q. A car --
11 A. -- a used car -- high-end used car dealership.
12 Q. Right. He's selling Ferraris in the middle of the
13 winter.
14 A. In the middle of the winter, yeah.
15 Q. And there's this issue with the curb cut, because Mr.
16 DeCicco knew that that would be valuable for the property?
17 A. Yes. Any person --
18 You know, I would think that --
19 I mean, that's --
20 Boy, you would have paid for that, you know, in the
21 normal course of business not too much, because there wasn't
22 a lot of land there. But to get it, yeah, you probably
23 would have shelled out a few bucks to get that.
24 Q. Right.
25 A. And to be able to get it in a swap essentially for land
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 38 of 75
38
1 that they needed to make a safer turn off of Route 1; to me,
2 it was a no-brainer when I look at it.
3 Q. And Mr. DeCicco was frustrated that CW-1 --
4 A. Yeah. He's --
5 Q. -- blew up that deal?
6 A. You know, who -- who -- what kind of an entity would do
7 that?
8 Q. And he was also -- you said he was complaining often
9 about CW-1 --
10 Or Mr. Varone was complaining about CW-1 owing him
11 money?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And Mr. DeCicco was not talking about CW-1 in
14 relationship to women in his life?
15 A. No. No.
16 Q. Turning to August of 2014.
17 Now, at this point you had put $900,000 in to Pulaski
18 Mills; right?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And you are working to get that under control?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. And you're spending a lot of time with Mr. DeCicco?
23 A. Yep.
24 Q. But he's not asking you to do anything illegal or
25 improper at that point?
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 39 of 75
39
1 A. No.
2 Q. And when you're driving back and forth to Pulaski one
3 day, you're in the car, he pulls over and sends Kim in for
4 the flowers?
5 A. It was on the way back.
6 Q. On the way back. Sorry.
7 And this is same time that he's getting regular calls
8 from Mr. Varone about CW-1 owing him money?
9 A. Yep. Yep.
10 Q. He's talking about him being an idiot --
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. -- for this curb cut?
13 A. Yep.
14 Q. Not knowing how to run a business. Those types of
15 things.
16 Nothing about him harassing Ms. DeBenedictis, a sister,
17 a daughter, nothing?
18 A. No.
19 Q. With respect to the message on the flowers, you said
20 that Mr. DeCicco dictated it to Ms. DeBenedictis?
21 A. Yeah.
22 Q. It's addressed to --
23 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, we can mark this -- I
24 think --
25 It's already Detention Exhibit 1, I believe.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 40 of 75
40
1 THE COURT: Yes. Well, it's part of the Saugus
2 police report.
3 MS. BARCLAY: Right. Right. But if I could
4 approach, Your Honor?
5 THE COURT: Sure.
6 Q. Take a look at the card.
7 So where it's addressed to Dear Gary, was that your
8 idea?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Whose idea was that?
11 A. Gary.
12 Q. And where it says, "We all know whose place that is.
13 We hope this cross will help you get rid of that Muslim
14 prick," whose idea was that?
15 A. Gary.
16 Q. And "from all Route 1 auto dealers," is that you?
17 A. No. That's all Gary (inaudible).
18 Q. And when Mr. DeCicco first said let's send him flowers,
19 did you have any idea he was going to write something like
20 this?
21 A. No. I figured it would be Flowery; but, no, I didn't
22 know exactly what he would write, no.
23 THE COURT: I'm sorry. I didn't hear what you
24 said. You thought it would be?
25 THE WITNESS: Flowery.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 41 of 75
41
1 THE COURT: You thought it would be flowery?
2 THE WITNESS: Yep.
3 Q. But did you think it would be this vicious?
4 MR. SHEKETOFF: Well, Judge, I mean -- objection
5 to the characterization.
6 THE COURT: To the characterization. Yeah, that's
7 sustained.
8 A. It's a little --
9 Q. Mr. Baldi, I think --
10 A. You know --
11 Q. I think the judge sustained. I'm sorry.
12 A. I'm sorry.
13 THE COURT: That's right. Go ahead and ask the
14 next question.
15 MS. BARCLAY: Next question.
16 Q. Mr. Baldi, would you ever have been involved in sending
17 the flowers and this message if you knew that it had
18 anything to do with Mr. DeCicco wanting a piece of CW-1's
19 business?
20 A. Absolutely not, no.
21 Q. If you could take a look at -- actually, strike that.
22 Is there any water in there?
23 A. No. I have a bottle right there. That's mine. Thank
24 you very much. Thank you.
25 Q. As time went on, Mr. Baldi, eventually Mr. DeCicco
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 42 of 75
42
1 stopped talking to you about CW-1; right?
2 A. Yep.
3 Q. And in fact, he never told that you CW-1 was assaulted
4 in January 2015; right?
5 A. No, he did not.
6 Q. You didn't find that out until after Mr. DeCicco was
7 arrested --
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. -- in March of 2017?
10 A. Yep.
11 Q. And he certainly never told you that he hired someone
12 to beat up --
13 A. No.
14 Q. -- CW-1?
15 And if he had told you that, you would have pulled your
16 money out of Pulaski; right?
17 A. If I could have. I mean, I -- you know, I mean, if --
18 Yeah, I mean, I probably would have been in a pretty
19 good pickle at that point, but.
20 Q. Okay. Just on Pulaski, when you first met Mr. DeCicco,
21 he needed to buy out his partner on Pulaski?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Okay. And you put $900,000 in in May of 2014?
24 A. Yep.
25 Q. And that was -- you thought it was a loan to Mr.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 43 of 75
43
1 DeCicco?
2 A. Yep.
3 Q. And you believed at that time that Mr. DeCicco used all
4 of that money to pay Mr. Rosenberg?
5 A. Yep. It was the 900 -- there was an additional --
6 The 900 grand gave me an option to buy like 36 percent
7 of the shares -- or convert it in to the shares of Pulaski
8 Street.
9 There was an additional like 400 --
10 There was a personal note that Gary took from
11 Rosenberg. I think it was 430,000 or 420,000.
12 And the sum of those two are the million three and
13 change was essentially the buy-out price of David's half.
14 Q. And you thought all your money was going to Rosenberg?
15 A. Sure.
16 Q. Because that's what Mr. DeCicco told you?
17 A. Yep.
18 Q. And then this summer while going through the
19 transaction records with agents, you realized that 200,000
20 of that was missing?
21 A. It certainly looks that way.
22 Q. And have you ever heard of a boat called the Thunder
23 Cat?
24 A. Yep.
25 Q. Did Mr. DeCicco tell that you he used your $200,000 to
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 44 of 75
44
1 buy that?
2 A. No.
3 Q. For Pulaski, there were some mortgages on the property.
4 They totaled 1.5 million?
5 A. There was a mortgage for 1.5 and -- yes, there was --
6 The other personal note between David and Gary was not
7 secured by the property, to the best of my recollection.
8 Q. And early 2016 you guys -- you and Mr. DeCicco start
9 talking about refinancing?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And the two of you applied to three different banks for
12 a refinancing?
13 A. Initially there were two.
14 Q. And then there was one final?
15 A. Yep. Yep.
16 Q. Okay. And first the plan is that you're both going to
17 own it?
18 A. We're both going to own fifty-fifty. One of the banks
19 was Leader Bank. We felt that they may not have been
20 comfortable with Gary as a primary borrower.
21 We had talked about him putting his interest in a trust
22 for the benefit of his children, and because he had enough
23 of a gift tax exemption to be able to do that. And we
24 thought that would have been okay with them is the best way
25 to put it.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 45 of 75
45
1 Q. And just to be clear, so the first bank, they turned
2 you down, because Mr. DeCicco had a tax lien, and because
3 his name was in the paper?
4 A. No, I don't believe -- the first bank was Leader Bank,
5 and I think they turned us down, because they couldn't get
6 comfortable with the trust.
7 Q. With the trust.
8 And the trust, just to be clear, was Mr. DeCicco was
9 going to own it, but he was just going to put it in the name
10 of his kids in trust?
11 A. I don't think he would have owned it, but I think he
12 would have probably been the administrator. He would have
13 been running it for the benefit --
14 His kids weren't old enough to --
15 Q. Right.
16 A. -- be the --
17 And I don't know how exactly it was legally structured;
18 but, you know, it was -- but I think it would have actually
19 been owned by his children.
20 Q. And he --
21 So at some point, though, one of the banks --
22 A. The next bank was Bank of New England. Not the old
23 one, but a smaller version of them that -- an entity called
24 Bank of New England. We applied to them. They were hot to
25 trot on it. And about a week later they came back and said
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 46 of 75
46
1 they wouldn't do the loan because of Gary's tax liens and
2 some of the press that was out on the Everett.
3 Q. And you talked to Mr. DeCicco about his tax lien,
4 didn't you?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And he told you it was $1.1 million --
7 A. He told me --
8 Q. -- at one point?
9 A. -- it was about 1.1, but that he had been on a payment
10 plan, and it was down somewhere in the 250 range. Somewhere
11 around there.
12 Q. So based on what he said to you, you believed he had
13 paid $800,000?
14 A. Yeah.
15 Q. To the IRS?
16 A. Yep.
17 Q. And that he was current in paying?
18 A. Yep.
19 Q. And you actually asked him why didn't he just pay it
20 off; right?
21 A. Simultaneously with any refinancing.
22 Q. And he said he didn't want to show the IRS that he had
23 any money?
24 A. That may have been a previous conversation. The
25 conversation when we were trying to refinance, he just
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 47 of 75
47
1 didn't want to do it. I mean --
2 Q. And you --
3 This whole time you thought that Mr. DeCicco was a
4 millionaire?
5 A. Sure.
6 Q. But at the same time he also bragged to you about
7 getting financial aid from a college for one of his kids;
8 right?
9 A. He mentioned it, yep.
10 Q. Did you and Mr. DeCicco have to submit rent rolls to
11 these banks?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And a rent roll is an accounting of all the leases
14 including the amounts of rent that comes due each month?
15 A. Correct.
16 Q. And those rent rolls that were submitted to the bank,
17 those were actually falsified?
18 A. Yeah, the -- the first set of rent -- the first rent
19 roll that we submitted was to -- I think, in fact, there
20 were --
21 The same rent roll was submitted to Leader Bank and to
22 Bank of New England, and those rent rolls had a combination
23 of some just bogus leases and some inflated leases.
24 Q. And in fact, Mr. DeCicco also manufactured some fake
25 leases to submit to these banks?
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 48 of 75
48
1 A. It was --
2 I thought we could get the debt without needing to do
3 that, and he said it would be better this way. That's what
4 he said.
5 And the one lease in particular that I can just tell
6 you, it was one to a moving company, Commonwealth Movers or
7 whatever, which I -- you know, I met that fellow for a total
8 of about 3 seconds, Joe Porter. He's a real big guy. He's
9 not somebody I would have chosen to cross in my life. I
10 would have never entered a $10,000 a month lease on the rent
11 roll assuming that he was going to somehow fall out of
12 heaven and pay for it. That was -- I had nothing to do with
13 it.
14 Q. So they were not tenants?
15 A. He was not a tenant.
16 Q. But there was a lease for $7,500 that was submitted to
17 the bank for $10,000 --
18 A. I thought it was 10 grand a month, yeah.
19 Q. Okay. And then, in fact, didn't Mr. DeCicco stencil
20 the name --
21 A. I think he attempted to copy it to the best of his
22 ability.
23 Q. But didn't he have the name put on the door?
24 A. Oh, yeah. Up on the door upstairs, yeah.
25 Q. At the place they were supposed to be at behind?
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 49 of 75
49
1 A. Yeah.
2 Q. And it actually, did Mr. DeCicco, didn't he tell you
3 that even though he sold that business to Mr. Porter, he
4 actually still owned a part of it?
5 A. Yeah. He told that to many people.
6 Q. So as time goes on, Mr. DeCicco starts to tell you more
7 about himself as you get to know him?
8 A. Yep.
9 Q. And he tells you at some point that he stuck a gun down
10 someone's throat?
11 A. In his child -- in his high school days or college days
12 maybe, yeah.
13 Q. And he said that he had someone beaten up to make sure
14 they didn't show up at a court hearing to testify against
15 him?
16 A. I think it was against his brother.
17 Q. And he told you he knew members of the Lynn Chapter of
18 the Hell's Angels?
19 A. Yep.
20 Q. And he told you those guys were his friends, and if he
21 needed anything, he could call them?
22 A. Yep.
23 Q. When you heard that Mr. DeCicco had been arrested, you
24 got nervous; right?
25 A. Oh, yeah.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 50 of 75
50
1 Q. Because the allegation here is that he wanted an
2 interest in a piece of property he supposedly sold to
3 someone else?
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. And in order to get that interest, he hired someone to
6 beat the guy up?
7 A. Correct. Once I read what he was being charged with,
8 yeah.
9 I mean, you know, I had just bought a building from
10 him. And you know, yeah, your mind begins to race. You
11 don't know exactly, you know, what you've bargained for.
12 Q. And in fact, the last transaction or the last mortgage
13 that you guys do --
14 A. Yep.
15 Q. -- is you buy the building from him.
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. And you get a $5.5 million mortgage from Eastern Bank?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. But in fact, he gave you some of that money back?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And you then began paying him half of what you were
22 getting from Pulaski each month?
23 A. Yep. And I didn't feel like I was obligated to do
24 that. I felt like he had been fair to me during the time
25 where I didn't own half of it, and --
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 51 of 75
51
1 You know, I didn't think that was going to go on
2 forever, but I thought, you know, we were looking at doing
3 several other real estate transactions, particularly one in
4 Revere that was getting close. And there was a deal in
5 Winthrop where we had -- I had forwarded money for a deposit
6 which is I think is still hanging out there, but I won't
7 close on. I'll lose that money. And it's a combined
8 deposit and something -- payment to acquire of about 37 to
9 38 grand.
10 So we were working together to try to do other deals at
11 that time.
12 MS. BARCLAY: Nothing further.
13 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
15 Q. So who owns Pulaski?
16 A. Me.
17 Q. And when did you buy it?
18 A. September of 2016.
19 Q. And how much did you pay for it?
20 A. The purchase price is $7.8 million, and there's a $5.5
21 million note on -- secured by the building that I have
22 personally guaranteed to Eastern Bank.
23 Q. Okay. So you eventually got the loan from Eastern
24 Bank?
25 A. Correct.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 52 of 75
52
1 Q. And who applied for that loan?
2 A. Me. Me along with the broker who we had used to apply
3 to Leader and to Bank of New England.
4 Q. You used the same broker?
5 A. Yep.
6 Q. But this time you were the only one?
7 A. I was the sole borrower.
8 Q. And as of today, you're the sole owner?
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. But you say you paid my client some of the money from
11 the rent for some period of time?
12 A. Yep.
13 Q. And what period of time was that?
14 A. A couple of months.
15 Q. Two months?
16 A. I'd say it was right up until he got arrested,
17 actually.
18 Q. Did he have some secret interest in that building?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Was that -- has that building been appraised?
21 A. It was appraised twice. It was appraised by Leader
22 Bank for something to the effect of ten point -- I don't
23 know. Ten point something million.
24 It was then appraised by Eastern Bank, and Eastern Bank
25 did what I had assumed Leader Bank probably would have done
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 53 of 75
53
1 which was to say some of the rents were over market, and
2 they would have --
3 I've been through a lot of appraisals. And they say,
4 okay, if market rent's seven bucks, you're getting ten,
5 we're not going to give you the benefit of the other three.
6 We're going to discount that out of the rental stream.
7 And they came in at $7.8 million; which is, you know,
8 to me, was a more realistic appraisal.
9 Q. Okay. So what did you buy the building for?
10 A. 7.8 --
11 Q. Or Mr. DeCicco?
12 A. $7.8 million.
13 Q. But what did you buy it for from him?
14 A. $7.8 million.
15 Q. And you gave him his -- when you closed on the loan, --
16 A. Yep.
17 Q. -- you gave him the money, and now you own Pulaski?
18 A. I'm sorry. Could you -- I --
19 Q. When you closed on the loan from Eastern Bank, he got
20 the proceeds on that loan?
21 A. No. He got the --
22 There were five and a half million dollars coming from
23 Eastern Bank. There was a million and a half plus some
24 accrued interest to be paid to David Rosenberg. There was
25 430 grand plus some accrued interest, and some of it was
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 54 of 75
54
1 default interest on one of the two loans, because it was due
2 previously. So that was, say, a couple million dollars
3 together.
4 And I think that other than that, there may be a broker
5 -- some miscellaneous things.
6 So I would say he ended up with -- I think the number
7 was like 3.2. Something like that. Somewhere around there.
8 Q. And that check was written to him or to somebody else?
9 A. No. I believe it was written to him. I'm not really
10 sure -- I believe they were wire transactions, and --
11 I think it actually went -- may have been gone to an
12 intermediary, because he was going to do a tax-free
13 exchange. So I don't believe it did actually go directly to
14 him. I'm not sure, though. I honestly -- I didn't --
15 I wasn't in control of those funds. The bank was and
16 the bank's lawyer was.
17 Q. So in the meantime, this was in -- when in relation to
18 the -- his arrest?
19 A. Oh, boy. This is in September of 2016, and you can
20 tell me -- I don't know exactly when he was arrested.
21 Q. Okay. So he, you believe, made about --
22 Well, what was his profit on the sale of this building
23 to you?
24 A. Again, I can't really speak to his profit specifically.
25 What I can tell you is that the way I believe he and I
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 55 of 75
55
1 talked about it was that he was going to get his million
2 360. I was going to get returned my 900,000 plus interest.
3 And then over and above that there were a few extra bucks
4 that we were basically keeping track of on a sheet of paper.
5 Q. And you had other projects planned together?
6 A. Correct.
7 THE COURT: Anything else?
8 MS. BARCLAY: Nothing further, Your Honor, with
9 this witness.
10 THE COURT: Mr. Baldi, I'm sorry to belabor this,
11 but let me just make I have it.
12 THE WITNESS: Certainly.
13 THE COURT: September 2016 you bought out Mr.
14 DeCicco for 7.8 million.
15 THE WITNESS: Correct.
16 THE COURT: Your understanding is he netted of
17 that about 3.2 million.
18 THE WITNESS: I think the amount of money that
19 went to him -- his intermediary to effect the tax-free
20 exchange, I think, was 3.2. I'm not --
21 THE COURT: Okay.
22 THE WITNESS: And I believe what happened was the
23 money went through the exchange, and then I was repaid my
24 loan with interest on the back side of the exchange. So
25 those checks would have come probably from him.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 56 of 75
56
1 THE COURT: Okay. And that's what would have been
2 among the things that reduced his net of 3.2 million from
3 7.8.
4 THE WITNESS: No. The 3.2 would have been reduced
5 to --
6 THE COURT: Outside the 3.2 that your 900 would
7 have come.
8 THE WITNESS: Yes.
9 THE COURT: Okay.
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 THE COURT: And the 1.5 or so to David Rosenberg
12 would have come out of the 3.2 or the 7?
13 THE WITNESS: No. That was already out of the
14 5.5.
15 THE COURT: Just when -- at least on the one
16 occasion you remember when you went in to CW's dealership --
18 THE COURT: -- and the lift was being installed,
19 --
21 THE COURT: Was the building -- was the business
22 operating at that time?
23 THE WITNESS: Oh, no. No. I would say --
24 THE COURT: It was under correction.
25 THE WITNESS: Correct. I'd say 85 percent done
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 57 of 75
57
1 complete at that point.
2 THE COURT: Okay. I may not have heard you
3 correctly. When you were first discussing Kim DeBenedictis,
4 I thought you mentioned that -- I have the term "worked
5 there."
6 THE WITNESS: At Pulaski Street, yes.
7 THE COURT: Oh, she worked at Pulaski.
8 THE WITNESS: Yes. She did some secretarial work,
9 and she would place ads like on Craig's List to list space.
10 THE COURT: Okay. That's all I have. Thank you.
11 You can step down.
12 THE WITNESS: Am I all set?
13 THE COURT: You're all set.
14 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
15 THE COURT: Go ahead.
16 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, you had in your order
17 you had said that we could also introduce any rebuttal
18 information or anything else.
19 THE COURT: Right. With respect to what Mr. Baldi
20 --
21 MS. BARCLAY: With respect to --
22 THE COURT: -- testified to?
23 MS. BARCLAY: Right. And I --
24 THE COURT: Okay.
25 MS. BARCLAY: -- assumed that was regarding the
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 58 of 75
58
1 motive. And I have the architect's plans, I guess, is I
2 believe that CW-1 told the investigators that -- that at
3 some point "Gary's Office" showed up on the architectural
4 plans --
5 THE COURT: Right. And written on there was
6 "Gary's Office."
7 MS. BARCLAY: Exactly. So I have three sets of
8 plans.
9 THE COURT: And it was not Mr. Delilo (phonetic)
10 that writes that; it was Mr. Lloyd.
11 MS. BARCLAY: It was Mr. Lloyd. Exactly.
12 So I have three sets of plans. One is the pricing
13 set where it doesn't have anyone's office. The second it
14 says "Gary's Office" and CW-1's office, and the third says
15 conference room and CW-1's office. So it corroborates that.
16 I can also make a proffer as to what Mr. Lloyd
17 would testify to, but -- if Your Honor wants that.
18 THE COURT: I really wanted to try and keep this
19 focused to the issue of whether I need to open or not.
20 MS. BARCLAY: That's fine, Your Honor.
21 THE COURT: Mr. Sheketoff?
22 MR. SHEKETOFF: In terms of making an argument
23 now, Your Honor?
24 THE COURT: Yeah. I think just making an
25 argument. I'm not sure that evidence is actually squarely
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 59 of 75
59
1 rebuttal, so I'm not going to take it.
2 ARGUMENT
3 MR. SHEKETOFF: So here's my position. That
4 apparently just from reading the transcript, this incident
5 that is the main focus of our attention today -- and we
6 spent a lot of time on the flower issue --
7 THE COURT: The flower issue.
8 MR. SHEKETOFF: -- and the flower incident, can be
9 seen in more than one context now. And whether it's a issue
10 of what the -- one of these CWs who supposedly gets the
11 order from Mr. DeCicco to have the guy beat up who says it
12 was about a woman, but whether it's what this guy says, it's
13 not about the government's theory in either event.
14 And I've tried a lot of cases and lost my share
15 for sure. But this is a serious weakness in the
16 government's case that they don't have any evidence of their
17 main theory. Not that he hired someone to beat this person
18 up, but that it had something to do with extorting a piece
19 of business.
20 In many ways the evidence that we heard today
21 about his other wheelings and dealings makes it even less
22 likely that he would want to extort a part of a business
23 that was not being run properly by somebody that he thought
24 was basically an idiot.
25 So I'd ask you to give me a chance to go into
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 60 of 75
60
1 everything that was suggested in Mr. Kendall's motion for
2 reopening, because in the end this is not a case about an
3 assault and battery even with a dangerous weapon. It's a
4 federal Hobbs Act case where they claim that there was a
5 specific purpose for this extortion from CW-1 who would have
6 been cooperating with the FBI for a significant period of
7 time whose own story does not include any specific kind of
8 demand. That, you know, some general statement was made.
9 You know, we want -- we were going to be partners of some
10 sort, according to him. It's not corroborated by anybody
11 else.
12 The idea that he would not go to the FBI to get
13 wired up, to have some subsequent conversation about it, is
14 very surprising to me, Your Honor. I mean, it's not like he
15 had no connection to the FBI. He had a longstanding
16 connection to the FBI, and he could have easily engaged my
17 client in some additional conversation about this. Either
18 he got the flowers. Now he was thinking there's an
19 extortion. Or when he got the prank calls or when he got
20 anything else in connection with this case. He could have
21 gone to the FBI then and done something about it.
22 Even after he was allegedly beaten up at my
23 client's suggestion he could have gone to the FBI and wired
24 up and said something along the lines of what do you want?
25 You know, you convince me. But he never did any of that.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 61 of 75
61
1 So it really comes down to whether -- what was the
2 motive for this incident. And I think the government is
3 extremely weak on this issue, and I think the weight of the
4 case should make a difference to the Court.
5 I mean, he's been locked up for a significant
6 period of time already, and it's obviously easier to defend
7 a case when the defendant's on the street.
8 And in addition, who is it that he's going to now
9 threaten in this case to manipulate the case in some way? I
10 don't see who it is.
11 THE COURT: I'm sorry. Who's "he?"
12 MR. SHEKETOFF: Mr. DeCicco. Who's he going to do
13 something to at some point?
14 They have sworn testimony, as I understand it,
15 from his girlfriend, Kim; from the witness we just heard
16 from, Mr. Baldi; from all the other cooperators. Who is it
17 that he would target?
18 And there's obviously forfeiture by wrongdoing.
19 So it seems to me, Your Honor, that you should very
20 seriously consider reopening the hearing.
21 THE COURT: I want to say that I want to make sure
22 that I'm focused on that question, and what I got from Mr.
23 Baldi is we were in the car, this was a prank just like
24 sending the pizzas.
25 I guess the question is does that make a material
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 62 of 75
62
1 difference as to the weight of the evidence. It doesn't
2 make a difference to the nature of it, whether Mr. DeCicco
3 sent CW-2 there to beat him up for one reason or the other.
4 I'm stuck with him hiring somebody, paying him a
5 thousand bucks to go beat up a car dealer for whatever
6 reason.
7 So it doesn't change the nature and circumstances
8 of the offense; it goes to the weight of it.
9 And I appreciate what you're saying, but there are
10 two issues that I have with it. And I had mentioned these
11 to Mr. Kendall the last time, or at least the first one, and
12 that is the very language in the note.
13 I understand that somebody who may not be clued in
14 to what Mr. DeCicco is or is not thinking may not have the
15 same take on that note, but the language of the note fairly
16 squares with the government's theory here, and that was what
17 was persuasive to the Court at the original detention
18 hearing.
19 I agree with you. You had the statement of the
20 CW. But even in that context it's my understanding that the
21 CW didn't go running to the FBI or the police to say
22 DeCicco's trying to get in on my business. He actually
23 thought somebody else may have been behind it for a while
24 until he got the description of Kim DeBenedictis or was
25 shown the photo array or whatever it was, however she became
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 63 of 75
63
1 connected to it.
2 MR. SHEKETOFF: But, Your Honor, if you're CW-1,
3 and you have this connection to the FBI, and you have Mr.
4 DeCicco say something to you, this really happened, that
5 you're going to be my partner, and he never raises it again,
6 because that's what his testimony is, that he never raises
7 it again; instead, he gets this cross in the mail that
8 suggests that Gary DeCicco wants him out of there, and maybe
9 he's going to take his place. And he gets the architect's
10 view where, you know, someone that worked for the architect
11 has written this in. Wouldn't you -- at that point you put
12 two and two together. I mean, that's their story. That's
13 what you just said to me. Now it squares with the
14 government's theory.
15 If you're CW-1, you put two and two together, and
16 you say to yourself this is an attempt, these three things:
17 Him asking; him sending that cross; him, you know, sending
18 the architect with this name on it. You put these three
19 things together, and you say this guy's trying to extort --
20 extort me. You go to the FBI, and they wire you up.
21 And why doesn't he put these three things together
22 if they so squarely fit with the government's theory? This
23 is not some unsophisticated person who's never, you know,
24 gone to the FBI. This is someone that has total access to
25 the FBI. If he really believed that, as opposed to
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 64 of 75
64
1 constructing it afterwards, this is my theory now, it's my
2 theory now, because I can see what the architect did, I can
3 see what's in the note, so these are not jokes anymore,
4 because once I'm beat up, this makes it a federal crime.
5 I mean, in some ways I can concede it's just as
6 serious a crime whether it's a federal crime or it's not a
7 federal crime. I'm not applauding hiring somebody to beat
8 somebody else up.
9 But it's not a federal crime if he did it because
10 he was angry about what he said about his -- which I haven't
11 been able to prove yet, but I could at a reopened hearing --
12 that he said something about his kids, or he said something
13 about Kim, and that he really had a relationship -- CW-1 --
14 with Kim. I don't mean a sexual relationship. But she
15 worked for him for a period of time. He said things to her.
16 Or it was over the fact that the contractor was
17 not paid, even though the contract was a friend of my client
18 and that --
19 It's not a federal crime if that's what happened.
20 If it was to get the contractor paid or it was a retribution
21 for some crude remark about one of the women in his life,
22 it's just not a federal crime.
23 And that's what they've charged here, and that's
24 why he's being detained, because it's a federal crime.
25 And I see the same thing you do which is that note
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 65 of 75
65
1 fits with the government's theory, but the circumstances of
2 the generation of that note don't really make sense, that he
3 would do it with Mr. Baldi and his girlfriend in the car.
4 Mr. Baldi tells you it wasn't the -- the cross was
5 something -- he has a vague memory, but it wasn't the
6 original discussion. And why doesn't this guy put that two
7 and two together himself when it mattered when he could have
8 proved the case one way or the other if it really fit, as
9 opposed to reconstructing it afterwards, which is my view of
10 what he did, so.
11 And the stuff about the two girlfriends, I don't
12 know what that was doing in this hearing. He has a daughter
13 that he's fully responsible for with one woman. He has a
14 second daughter -- these are both teen-agers now, in their
15 late teens -- with a second woman, and he has his
16 girlfriend. Just because he has what we called back baby
17 mamas doesn't mean that he has not acted as a responsible
18 father, or somehow he's not -- shouldn't be eligible for
19 release because he's a danger. Which is, you know, what you
20 found, that he was a danger. Not that he didn't have strong
21 roots in the community. You rejected that.
22 So I think it is relevant to the weighing idea of,
23 you know, what is the strength of government's case, and do
24 they really have proof beyond a reasonable doubt to be able
25 to convince the jury that this motive was what they allege
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 66 of 75
66
1 in the indictment.
2 THE COURT: Well, it's --
3 MR. SHEKETOFF: I know that's not your standard.
4 THE COURT: That's not my standard.
5 MR. SHEKETOFF: I understand.
6 THE COURT: Mine is have you come forward with
7 information that's new. And I'm treating his information as
8 new, and I'll say in that context I did hear testimony that
9 was probably entirely irrelevant. But Mr. Baldi wasn't
10 here. He's here, let's hear it all, and I'll make a
11 decision.
12 My question is is it material -- does it have
13 material bearing on the facts as I originally understood
14 them, and that's really what I was trying to get at.
15 MR. SHEKETOFF: Right. I understand, and that's
16 how I read your order.
18 MR. SHEKETOFF: And I'm just suggesting that it
19 should.
20 RESPONSE
21 MS. BARCLAY: Your Honor, first of all, just in
22 terms of CW-1 -- I mean, I think what Mr. Sheketoff said is
23 he should have known immediately that this was a federal
24 extortion and reported it to the FBI.
25 What he did was as soon as he got the flowers, he
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 67 of 75
67
1 reported it to the Saugus P.D. He wasn't working for the
2 FBI at the time. That's who you report getting a threat
3 from, you report it to -- you call 911, and you report it to
4 the Saugus P.D. It was the Saugus P.D. that called the FBI
5 when they realized that this could be a federal crime,
6 because Mr. -- because CW-1 once he realized who had ordered
7 the flowers said, oh, yeah, he has wanted a piece of my
8 business. He wants a piece of my business. This must be
9 from him. So they called the FBI.
10 And then the FBI goes and talks to Mr. -- to CW-1
11 in December of 2014 before he's beaten, and he tells them
12 that Mr. DeCicco wanted a piece of his business. The fact
13 that they didn't wire him up between the end -- I think it
14 was December 28 and the day he gets beaten on January 11
15 that should be somehow held against the government's case is
16 --
17 You know, I suggest, Your Honor, that that does
18 not mean that the government can not prove the motive in
19 this case or that CW-1 is somehow not credible. And whether
20 --
21 The suggestion that we should send a guy who had
22 his jaw wired shut for 40 days or 60 days or however it was,
23 have him wear a wire and go talk to the guy who hired
24 someone to beat him up again is, I think, a little bit
25 preposterous, given the circumstances.
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 68 of 75
68
1 With respect to Mr. Baldi's testimony
2 specifically, Your Honor, which I think is what you're
3 asking for here today, is how that materially impacts the
4 government's evidence --
5 And again, it's the weight of the evidence, which
6 is one of the four factors to be considered in a detention
7 analysis, and it's one element of the case.
8 And it's the government's position that his
9 testimony doesn't support the defendant's arguments about
10 motive here. The defendant argued in several different
11 briefs that this was over a woman and other personal
12 matters, and nothing Mr. Baldi said here today supports that
13 theory.
14 In fact, his testimony as to the evidence that Mr.
15 DeCicco's motivation for the card and assault on CW-1 was
16 the business. First Mr. DeCicco brought Baldi in to the
17 dealership when it's under construction. CW-1's not there.
18 He shows him around as if he owns the place.
19 Second, Baldi testified that DeCicco's constantly
20 talking about CW-1, how he doesn't know how to run a
21 business, how he screwed up the curb cut, he could have made
22 a lot more money, and then he owes Varone money for
23 construction at the business.
24 He didn't say anything to Baldi about CW-1's
25 treatment of women in his life or any other personal matters
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 69 of 75
69
1 between the two. It was all about the business.
2 And whether you call it -- or Mr. Baldi calls it a
3 prank or not, Baldi actually thought DeCicco sent CW-1 the
4 threatening message because he owed Varone money, and that's
5 still about the business, Your Honor. It's still extortion.
6 And in fact, it could also be a violation of 18
7 USC 894, extortion and collection of a debt.
8 But that aside, his testimony, Your Honor, I think
9 as you pointed out, is just based on his perception of why
10 Mr. DeCicco sent the flowers. What he thought the flowers
11 were about is not relevant or necessarily admissible at
12 trial.
13 And Mr. DeCicco had good reason to hide his real
14 intent in sending the flowers from Mr. Baldi. He's coming
15 off a long career as a CPA, a CFO for Flatly. He's got
16 $900,000 in with DeCicco, and DeCicco's hoping to get more
17 money from this guy. He's hoping to put him to work,
18 because he's good businessman.
19 And you know, sure, Baldi's impressed with
20 DeCicco's personality, his lifestyle. It's so different
21 from his own.
22 But Mr. DeCicco knew that it would raise a huge
23 red flag for Baldi if he told him why he really sent the
24 flowers, to extort an interest in the dealership. And Baldi
25 would have taken his million back if he could have, if
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 70 of 75
70
1 that's what he thought it was all about.
2 And I would say, Your Honor, it's very telling
3 that he didn't tell Mr. Baldi that he had CW-1 beaten up,
4 that's despite the fact that they're together for several
5 days a week at the time. Because it's one thing to talk a
6 big game about having people beaten up, and it's an entirely
7 different thing to admit to an investor that you're
8 interested in continuing doing business with that -- who's
9 giving you an appearance of legitimacy, that this is how you
10 do business.
11 MR. SHEKETOFF: Can I --
12 MS. BARCLAY: And especially since, Your Honor, it
13 appears that Mr. DeCicco intended to do the same thing with
14 Pulaski. He would, quote/unquote, sell it to Baldi but
15 retain an interest, a hidden interest in it, so that he
16 could hide his interest from the IRS and from banks.
17 It's the government's position that Baldi's
18 testimony here today does not support the defendant's
19 argument that the card and assault had something to do with
20 a woman, and they never said anything like that to Baldi,
21 and this wasn't a joke. Baldi thought -- he said it was a
22 prank, but he thought it was over a business debt. And you
23 don't follow up a joke with a vicious beating, Your Honor.
24 And Mr. DeCicco all but admits that he ordered and
25 paid for the beating in January 2015. You follow up a
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 71 of 75
71
1 threat with action, and that's exactly what the card was
2 here. It was a threat. And nothing Mr. Baldi said here
3 today changes what Mr. DeCicco's words in that card meant.
4 MR. SHEKETOFF: Can I have a very brief rebuttal,
5 Your Honor?
6 THE COURT: You can. It's your motion.
7 MR. SHEKETOFF: Thank you. Thank you for your
8 patience.
9 FURTHER ARGUMENT
10 MR. SHEKETOFF: While the building was under
11 construction when Mr. Baldi says my client brought him
12 there, the government is fully aware from CW-1 that my
13 client was obligated to do all the permitting, to do all
14 that stuff to make sure -- that was part of the deal.
15 So to suggest that there's some nefarious purpose
16 for him being around the building during that period of time
17 is completely inappropriate, Your Honor, in my view.
18 THE COURT: Well, it's ambiguous.
19 MS. BARCLAY: It's actually -- Your Honor, I
20 believe in their briefs they said they had nothing to do
21 with the permitting.
22 THE COURT: I thought Mr. DeCicco got the
23 permitting for it.
24 MS. BARCLAY: That's what CW-1 said. But in the
25 memo of law in support of the motion to reopen the detention
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 72 of 75
72
1 hearing, that numerous people said that Mr. DeCicco had
2 nothing to do with the permitting.
3 MR. SHEKETOFF: That's the government's theory
4 now. I don't -- I couldn't --
5 MS. BARCLAY: It's actually in --
6 THE COURT: I think they meant in Mr. DeCicco's
7 filing. Is that what you mean?
8 MS. BARCLAY: Yes. In Mr. DeCicco's filing he has
9 a private investigator who, I believe, says has interviewed
10 people who said that Mr. DeCicco had nothing to do with the
11 permitting.
12 THE COURT: Okay.
13 MS. BARCLAY: And I have to go back through it,
14 but I believe that was the --
15 MR. SHEKETOFF: All right. Well, the witness --
16 MS. BARCLAY: -- to counter CW-1 saying that he
17 did.
18 MR. SHEKETOFF: All right. The witness they're
19 relying on says that he did have to do the permitting, and
20 now they say don't believe their witness on that ground,
21 just believe him on other grounds. So he had a reason to be
22 around that building, number one.
23 Number two, Mr. Baldi told you that he owns that
24 building now, and that my client made $2 million off of it,
25 something along those lines --
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 73 of 75
73
1 THE COURT: Are we talking about Pulaski now?
2 MR. SHEKETOFF: Yeah, Pulaski. That he owns it.
3 And she's saying, well, that he said there was
4 some hidden interest. He said there wasn't some hidden
5 interest.
6 Number three, I think my sister said, well, if you
7 believe Mr. Baldi, well, he committed another crime, not the
8 crime we've charged in this indictment, but maybe an
9 extortion collection of debt. That's not --
10 THE COURT: I agree.
11 MR. SHEKETOFF: I mean, if the jury believed Mr.
12 Baldi, there would be an acquittal, you know, on what he's
13 charged with now. If the jury comes to the conclusion that
14 he had the guy beat up because the contractors that his
15 friend who got ripped off by CW-1 was not -- was ripped off,
16 then he gets acquitted of the charge that he's facing now.
17 THE COURT: Right. I'm considering the strength
18 of the evidence as to the charge in the indictment and not
19 does it make out some other charge.
20 Do the Saugus Police --
21 Tell me if this is in the record. I'm thinking of
22 the Exhibit 1, the police report.
23 Do they at some point interview Kim DeBenedictis,
24 or do they just go with the photo array that's shown to the
25 woman who works at the flower shop in Lynn?
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 74 of 75
74
1 MS. BARCLAY: They don't. They turn it over to
2 the FBI, Your Honor.
3 THE COURT: Okay. So Kim DeBenedictis is not
4 interviewed.
5 MS. BARCLAY: Not by Saugus P.D.
6 THE COURT: Is she interviewed by the FBI when it
7 goes from Saugus P.D. to the FBI?
8 MS. BARCLAY: No. There was no time in there,
9 Your Honor, before he got assaulted.
11 MS. BARCLAY: I think he was interviewed December
12 28. The assault was January 11. So it was over the
13 holidays.
14 THE COURT: All right. So what I want to do then
15 is on --
16 I'll take under advisement the motion then to
17 reopen. I'll get you a decision as quickly as I can on it.
18 MR. SHEKETOFF: Thank you, Judge.
19 THE COURT: All right. We're in recess.
20 MS. BARCLAY: Thank you, Your Honor.
21 THE COURT: Thank you.
22 (Court adjourned at 3:57:54 p.m.)
23
24
25
Judy Bond, CERT

S.A. 304-20
Filed- 05/25/18
Cross Page 75 of 75
75
1 CERTIFICATION
2 I, Judy Bond, a court approved transcriber, certify
3 that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official
4 electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the
5 above-entitled matter.
8 October 17, 2017

Judy Bond
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Judy Bond, CERT

MEDI MIRNASIRI 236797294 Sep 08, 2014
Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
08/26/14, 7:14 PM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F)
08/26/14, 7:14 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA
08/26/14, 8:12 PM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA
08/26/14, 8:15 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
08/26/14, 8:29 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 6
08/26/14, 8:35 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 5
08/26/14, 8:49 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
08/26/14, 8:53 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
08/27/14, 8:41 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 1
08/27/14, 9:45 AM (781) 662-3498 Incoming 3
08/27/14, 9:48 AM (781) 367-1456 Incoming 4
08/27/14, 9:53 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
08/27/14, 10:13 AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 2
08/27/14, 11 :00 AM (508) 626-7000 to FRAMINGHAM/MA 2
08/27/14, 11 :03 AM (781) 596-9700 to LYNN/MA 3
08/27/14, 11:12AM (917) 757-9507 to BKLYN NYC/NY 2
08/27/14, 11:14AM (610) 509-9722 Incoming (A) 10
08/27/14, 11 :24 AM (917) 757-9507 to BKLYN NYC/NY 18
08/27/14, 11 :46 AM (917) 757-9507 Incoming 2
08/27/14, 11 :47 AM (561) 715-8034 to DELRAY BCH/FL (F)
08/27/14, 1 :43 PM (781) 599.5333 to LYNN/MA
08/27/14, 1 :44 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 8
08/27/14, 2:06 PM (781) 599.5334 Incoming 2
08/27/14, 2:36 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL (A) 3
08/27/14, 2:40 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 2
08/27/14, 2:43 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
08/27/14, 3:14 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
08/27/14, 3:19 PM (617) 924-9507 to WATERTOWN/MA
08/27/14, 3:20 PM (617) 923-8006 to WATERTOWN/MA 10
08/27/14, 3:47 PM (908) 725-2200 to SOMERVILLE/NJ 5
08/27/14, 4:36 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
08/27/14, 5:31 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
08/27/14, 5:33 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
08/27/14, 6:10 PM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM/MA 2
08/27/14, 6:12 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
08/27/14, 6:17 PM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA 5
08/27/14, 6:31 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
08/27/14, 6:45 PM (781) 727-6036 Incoming
08/27/14, 8:50 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 4
08/27/14, 8:56 PM (617) 797-0200 Incoming 6
08/28/14, 7:46 AM (617) 285-1585 Incoming 3
08/28/14, 7:50 AM (617) 285-1585 to SAUGUS/MA 2
08/28/14, 7:56 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 23
08/28/14, 10:06 AM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA
08/28/14, 10:34 AM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 2
08/28/14, 11:10AM (781) 983-4633 to V\1NCHESTER/MA 2
08/28/14, 11:12AM (781) 953-7103 to REVERE/MA (F) 2
08/28/14, 11:14AM (781) 888-3338 to RANDOLPH/MA 6
08/28/14, 11 :21 AM (617) 923-8006 Incoming 8
08/28/14, 11 :30 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
08/28/14, 12:19 PM (781) 953-7103 to REVERE/MA (F) 4
08/28/14, 12:37 PM (781) 231-9500 Incoming
08/28/14, 12:55 PM (703) 996-1100 to DULLES/VA 2
08/28/14, 2:56 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 2
08/28/14, 3:24 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
08/28/14, 3:27 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 2
08/28/14, 3:31 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
Page AS of A53

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
The date and time correst2onds to the local time w here the mobile was located.
09/02/14, 8:58 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (A) 11
09/03/14, 9:07 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
09/03/14, 9:16 AM (781) 953-7103 to REVERE/MA (F) 8
09/03/14, 9:58 AM (508) 270-5462 to FRAMINGHAM/MA 3
09/03/14, 10:22 AM (781) 941-1160 to SAUGUS/MA
09/03/14, 10:39 AM (617) 875-4993 to BOSTON/MA 3
09/03/14, 12:24 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/03/14, 12:25 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F) 2
09/03/14, 12:41 PM (781) 592-3832 to LYNN/MA 1
09/03/14, 1 :08 PM (857) 261-1393 to BOSTON/MA 1
09/03/14, 1 :09 PM (857) 261-1393 to BOSTON/MA
09/03/14, 1: 10 PM (508) 761-6778 to SOUTHGATE/MA
09/03/14, 1: 18 PM (857) 261-1393 Incoming
09/03/14, 1 :20 PM (617) 888-6394 to BOSTON/MA 2
09/03/14, 1 :22 PM (413) 388-5575 to CHICOPEE/MA 2
09/03/14, 1 :44 PM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA 2
09/03/14, 1 :49 PM (781) 510-9143 to RANDOLPH/MA
09/03/14, 1 :53 PM (617) 548-0145 to SAUGUS/MA
09/03/14, 2:19 PM (508) 808-3523 Incoming 3
09/03/14, 2:22 PM (781) 592-3832 Incoming
09/03/14, 2:25 PM (617) 548-0145 Incoming 8
09/03/14, 2:40 PM (781) 535-4126 Incoming (F)
09/03/14, 2:55 PM (617) 548-0145 to SAUGUS/MA 2
09/03/14, 3:34 PM (617) 548-0145 to SAUGUS/MA 2
09/03/14, 3:37 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 3
09/03/14, 5:16 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/03/14, 5:52 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
09/03/14, 6:10 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/03/14, 6:28 PM (917) 868-0883 to QUEENS NYC/NY
09/03/14, 6:36 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
09/03/14, 6:39 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
09/03/14, 6:42 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/03/14, 6:43 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA
09/03/14, 7:45 PM (617) 755-8177 Incoming
09/03/14, 7:45 PM (617) 755-8177 to BOSTON/MA
09/03/14, 7:55 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 22
09/03/14, 10:26 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 5
09/04/14, 5:20 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
09/04/14, 11:16AM (781) 245-2415 Incoming 4
09/04/14, 11 :30 AM (617) 970-3245 to EASTBOSTON/MA (F)
09/04/14, 12: 11 PM (617) 538-8888 to WAL THAM/MA
09/04/14, 2:42 PM (781) 599.5333 to LYNN/MA 2
09/04/14, 2:46 PM (781) 599.5334 Incoming 6
09/04/14, 2:57 PM (781) 599.5334 Incoming
09/04/14, 6:38 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/04/14, 7:02 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 6
09/04/14, 7:23 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA
09/05/14, 9:23 AM (781) 953-5412 to REVERE/MA (F)
09/05/14, 11:12AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/05/14, 11:14AM (978) 372-2552 Incoming 2
09/05/14, 12:23 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 2
09/05/14, 12:43 PM (610) 509-9722 Incoming 3
09/05/14, 12:47 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
09/05/14, 1 :29 PM (857) 247-4360 to BOSTON/MA 3
09/05/14, 1 :33 PM (617) 699-6998 to BOSTON/MA 2
09/05/14, 1 :34 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA 4
09/05/14, 1 :48 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA 3
09/05/14, 1 :53 PM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA
09/05/14, 2:12 PM (857) 247-4360 to BOSTON/MA
09/05/14, 2:27 PM (917) 868-0883 Incoming 2
09/05/14, 2:47 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
PageA11 ofA53
(H) Free Calls (I) Intl Disc Call (J) Intl Disc Call to Mobile (K) WPS Call (M) AnyMobile (R) Roaming (T) T -Mobile Number
(V) myFaves Call (WJ V\1-Fi Call (X) T-Mobile @Home Call

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
09/05/14, 2:51 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
09/05/14, 2:55 PM (610) 509-9722 Incoming
09/05/14, 4:06 PM (617) 939-1462 Incoming
09/05/14, 5:13 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/05/14, 6:14 PM (610) 509-9722 to ALLENTOWN/PA (A) 4
09/05/14, 6:17 PM (732) 788-5250 Incoming (A) 13
09/05/14, 6:32 PM (201) 216-9491 Incoming
09/05/14, 6:33 PM (508) 231-7100 Incoming (A) 2
09/05/14, 6:35 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
09/05/14, 6:37 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/05/14, 6:37 PM (508) 231-7100 to FRAMINGHAM/MA
09/05/14, 6:38 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/05/14, 6:38 PM (508) 231-7100 to FRAMINGHAM/MA 2
09/05/14, 6:57 PM (201) 216-9491 to JERSEYCITY/NJ 3
09/05/14, 7:14 PM (917) 868-0883 Incoming
09/05/14, 7:34 PM (617) 699-6998 Incoming 5
09/05/14, 8:01 PM (508) 808-3523 Incoming
09/05/14, 8:18 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 2
09/05/14, 9:04 PM (917) 868-0883 Incoming 2
09/05/14, 9:30 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/05/14, 9:30 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 18
09/06/14, 8:25 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/06/14, 8:33 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/06/14, 8:53 AM (410) 808-3201 Incoming 3
09/06/14, 9:00 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 2
09/06/14, 9:36 AM (610) 509-9722 to ALLENTOWN/PA 3
09/06/14, 11 :05 AM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA
09/06/14, 11 :36 AM (617) 821-1896 to CAMBRIDGE/MA (A) 3
09/06/14, 11 :39 AM (781) 953-5412 to REVERE/MA (A) 2
09/06/14, 11 :40 AM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (A) 2
09/06/14, 11 :43 AM (781) 953-5412 to REVERE/MA (F)
09/06/14, 1 :23 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/06/14, 1 :24 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/06/14, 3:45 PM (781) 599.5334 Incoming 4
09/06/14, 4:56 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/06/14, 5:26 PM (781) 599.5334 Incoming 2
09/06/14, 5:36 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 2
09/06/14, 5:38 PM (781) 599.5334 to LYNN/MA 2
09/06/14, 5:42 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F) 4
09/06/14, 7:16 PM (610) 509-9722 Incoming 6
09/07/14, 10:38 AM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F) 2
09/07/14, 11 :07 AM (443) 324-9099 Incoming 2
09/07/14, 11 :53 AM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA 4
09/07/14, 12:05 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
09/07/14, 12:13 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F)
09/07/14, 12:26 PM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM/MA 2
09/07/14, 3:01 PM (781) 344-3120 to STOUGHTON/MA 2
09/07/14, 4:40 PM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM/MA
09/07/14, 5:26 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/07/14, 7:36 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
09/07/14, 8:08 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
09/08/14, 7:29 AM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F) 11
09/08/14, 8:50 AM (781) 521-2802 to SAUGUS/MA
09/08/14, 9:27 AM (781) 941-1199 Incoming 2
09/08/14, 9:43 AM (617) 201-6573 to CAMBRIDGE/MA
09/08/14, 9:55 AM (781) 953-7103 to REVERE/MA (F) 3
09/08/14, 10:03 AM (781) 521-2802 to SAUGUS/MA 7
09/08/14, 10:58 AM (781) 953-7103 to REVERE/MA (F) 2
09/08/14, 11 :09 AM (978) 766-5276 to DANVERS/MA 2
09/08/14, 11 :21 AM (617) 201-6573 to CAMBRIDGE/MA 2
09/08/14, 11 :26 AM (508) 962-8345 to FRAMINGHAM/MA 2
Page A12 of A53


MEDI MIRNASIRI 236797294 Oct 08, 2014
Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
09/11/14, 2:29 PM 8885617077 1-888# 3
09/11 /14 , 2:43 PM (610) 509-9722 Incoming (A) 5
09/11 /14, 2:49 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/11/14, 2:50 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA
09/11/14, 3:15 PM (800) 932-3822 Incoming
09/11/14, 3:19 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/11/14, 3:52 PM (508) 270-5496 Incoming
09/11/14, 5:18 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
09/11/14, 5:31 PM (617) 970-3245 to EASTBOSTON/MA (F) 6
09/11/14, 6:59 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
09/11/14, 7:39 PM (617) 970-3245 to EASTBOSTON/MA (F)
09/11/14, 9:28 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/11/14, 10:32 PM (781) 760-2319 Incoming (A) 2
09/11/14, 10:33 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A) 5
09/11 /14, 10:40 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
09/11/14, 11 :10 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
09/12/14, 8:32 AM (978) 766-5276 to DANVERS/MA
09/12/14, 8:50 AM (781) 760-1559 to V\1NCHESTER/MA 4
09/12/14, 9:02 AM (617) 970-3245 to EASTBOSTON/MA (F)
09/12/14, 9:46 AM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F)
09/12/14, 9:46 AM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F)
09/12/14, 9:47 AM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F)
09/12/14, 10:01 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/12/14, 10:09 AM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA
09/12/14, 10:25 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/12/14, 10:30 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 5
09/12/14, 10:43 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
09/12/14, 10:47 AM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA
09/12/14, 11 :01 AM (617) 939-1462 Incoming
09/12/14, 11:33AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
09/12/14, 1 :00 PM (617) 775-4411 to NEWTON/MA
09/12/14, 1 :03 PM (617) 393-2229 to WATERTOWN/MA 4
09/12/14, 1 :52 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F) 3
09/12/14, 1 :56 PM (781) 760-1559 to V\1NCHESTER/MA
09/12/14, 2:01 PM (781) 760-1559 Incoming 3
09/12/14, 2:12 PM (781) 424-8714 to NORWELL/MA 5
09/12/14, 4:05 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
09/12/14, 6:47 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 22
09/12/14, 7:11 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 6
09/13/14, 9:10 AM (781) 558-8518 Incoming 7
09/13/14, 10:54 AM (781) 953-7103 to REVERE/MA (F)
09/13/14, 11 :54 AM (617) 314-1448 to BOSTON/MA 2
09/13/14, 1 :02 PM (239) 285-1666 to NAPLES/FL 9
09/13/14, 1 :36 PM (617) 390-3550 Incoming 2
09/13/14, 1 :40 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 8
09/13/14, 2:26 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
09/13/14, 2:30 PM (443) 324-9099 Incoming 3
09/13/14, 2:35 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
09/13/14, 3:01 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 1
09/13/14, 3:02 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
09/13/14, 3:07 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
09/13/14, 3:11 PM (443) 324-9099 to BALTIMORE/MD 5
09/13/14, 6:21 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
09/13/14, 6:24 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/13/14, 6:47 PM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F)
09/13/14, 7:04 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 2
09/13/14, 7:09 PM (781) 760-2323 Incoming 3
09/13/14, 7:15 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 6
09/13/14, 7:35 PM (781) 581-9994 to LYNN/MA
Page A2 of A44

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
09/17/14, 4:18 PM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F) 4
09/17/14, 4:23 PM (617) 982-8080 Incoming (F) 5
09/17/14, 4:27 PM (781) 844-9253 to ARLINGTON/MA 13
09/17/14, 4:41 PM (617) 749-6712 to ROXBURY/MA (F) 6
09/17/14, 5:15 PM (781) 983-4633 Incoming
09/17/14, 7:22 PM 8003489008 1-800#
09/17/14, 7:39 PM 8003489008 1-800# 3
09/17/14, 7:47 PM (617) 593-9111 to BOSTON/MA 7
09/18/14, 7:58 AM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA 7
09/18/14, 8:52 AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 4
09/18/14, 9:01 AM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
09/18/14, 9:21 AM (781) 983-4633 Incoming
09/18/14, 10:16 AM (781) 953-6870 to REVERE/MA 2
09/18/14, 10:19 AM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA
09/18/14, 10:23 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/18/14, 10:43 AM (781) 696-5647 to WOBURN/MA
09/18/14, 10:58 AM (508) 761-6778 to SOUTHGATE/MA 2
09/18/14, 11 :08 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
09/18/14, 11 :20 AM (239) 285-1666 to NAPLES/FL
09/18/14, 12:19 PM (239) 285-1666 to NAPLES/FL
09/18/14, 12:23 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/18/14, 1:10 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/18/14, 1 :22 PM (781) 696-5647 to WOBURN/MA
09/18/14, 1 :24 PM (617) 970-3245 to EASTBOSTON/MA (F)
09/18/14, 1 :25 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (A) 2
09/18/14, 1 :27 PM (781) 953-5412 Incoming (A) 5
09/18/14, 1 :40 PM (781) 696-5647 to WOBURN/MA 9
09/18/14, 2:00 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming (A) 12
09/18/14, 2:12 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/18/14, 2:16 PM (617) 593-9111 Incoming 2
09/18/14, 4:24 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/18/14, 4:25 PM (781) 710-3666 to LYNN/MA 5
09/18/14, 4:56 PM (781) 710-3666 to LYNN/MA 2
09/18/14, 5:25 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
09/18/14, 5:35 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
09/18/14, 6:38 PM (617) 749-6712 Incoming (F) 5
09/18/14, 6:42 PM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA 2
09/18/14, 7:03 PM (781) 727-6036 Incoming 2
09/18/14, 7:33 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
09/19/14, 7:07 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 10
09/19/14, 8:53 AM (800) 932-3822 Incoming
09/19/14, 8:59 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
09/19/14, 9:09 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
09/19/14, 9:13 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL (A) 2
09/19/14, 9:16 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/19/14, 9:33 AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA
09/19/14, 10:38 AM (561) 767-0490 to BOYTONBCH/FL
09/19/14, 11 :06 AM (561) 767-0490 Incoming 3
09/19/14, 11 :54 AM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA
09/19/14, 1:05 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/19/14, 1:10 PM (617) 820-1248 to BOSTON/MA (F) 2
09/19/14, 1:13 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 6
09/19/14, 2:51 PM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA 2
09/19/14, 5:21 PM (617) 820-1248 to BOSTON/MA (F)
09/19/14, 5:36 PM (781) 953-7151 to REVERE/MA 3
09/19/14, 6:53 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F) 1
09/19/14, 7:03 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 30
09/19/14, 9:06 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
09/19/14, 9:07 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/19/14, 9:10 PM (617) 949-6936 Incoming 9
09/20/14, 8:35 AM 995322550777 Incoming (A) 8
09/20/14, 8:43 AM (401) 474-4027 to PROVIDENCE/RI
09/20/14, 8:44 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/20/14, 8:44 AM (401) 474-4027 to PROVIDENCE/RI 3
09/20/14, 9:04 AM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA 2
09/20/14, 9:23 AM (401) 474-4027 Incoming 2
09/20/14, 9:29 AM (781) 367-1456 to WOBURN/MA 11
Page A4 of A44
(V) myFaves Call (WJ VVi-Fi Call (X) T-Mobile @Home Call

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
09/25/14, 10:28 AM (610) 509-9722 to ALLENTOWN/PA (A) 3
09/25/14, 10:30 AM (781) 662-3498 to MELROSE/MA 7
09/25/14, 11 :02 AM (781) 727-6036 Incoming 5
09/25/14, 11 :23 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 5
09/25/14, 11 :28 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/25/14, 11 :32 AM (781) 558-5210 to SAUGUS/MA
09/25/14, 11 :40 AM (781) 599-0096 to LYNN/MA 2
09/25/14, 12:03 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 2
09/25/14, 12:11 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming (A) 5
09/25/14, 12:15 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 1
09/25/14, 12:24 PM (714) 336-6613 Incoming 2
09/25/14, 12:31 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/25/14, 12:37 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
09/25/14, 12:48 PM (781) 596-9700 Incoming
09/25/14, 1: 15 PM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA
09/25/14, 2:19 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
09/25/14, 2:26 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
09/25/14, 2:33 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
09/25/14, 2:42 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 7
09/25/14, 3:18 PM (508) 685-3483 Incoming (F)
09/25/14, 3:24 PM (508) 685-3483 to BARNSTABLE/MA (F) 4
09/25/14, 3:30 PM (617) 593-9111 to BOSTON/MA 3
09/25/14, 3:34 PM (714) 336-6613 to ANAHEIM/CA 2
09/25/14, 5:13 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
09/25/14, 6:26 PM (781) 558-8518 Incoming (A) 3
09/25/14, 6:28 PM (306) 229-8800 Incoming (A) 3
09/25/14, 6:54 PM (781) 558-8518 Incoming
09/25/14, 7:24 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA
09/25/14, 9:00 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (A) 15
09/25/14, 9:16 PM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA
09/25/14, 9:16 PM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA
09/26/14, 8:59 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/26/14, 9:00 AM (781) 231-4111 to SAUGUS/MA 3
09/26/14, 9:07 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 7
09/26/14, 9:33 AM (617) 212-1880 Incoming 2
09/26/14, 9:38 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
09/26/14, 10:01 AM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 2
09/26/14, 10:09 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
09/26/14, 10:15 AM (617) 939-1462 Incoming 5
09/26/14, 10:22 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
09/26/14, 10:34 AM (617) 970-3245 to EASTBOSTON/MA (F) 2
09/26/14, 10:55 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
09/26/14, 11:14AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/26/14, 11 :20 AM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F) 2
09/26/14, 11 :33 AM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA
09/26/14, 11 :33 AM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA
09/26/14, 11 :43 AM (978) 500-9000 to IPSV\1CH/MA
09/26/14, 11 :53 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/26/14, 12:02 PM (978) 500-9000 to IPSV\1CH/MA
09/26/14, 12:03 PM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA
09/26/14, 12:04 PM (617) 212-1880 Incoming 2
09/26/14, 12:19 PM (781) 581-0929 Incoming 3
09/26/14, 12:50 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F) 4
09/26/14, 1 :02 PM (781) 888-3338 to RANDOLPH/MA 2
09/26/14, 1 :06 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A) 3
09/26/14, 1 :26 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F)
09/26/14, 1 :32 PM (617) 970-3245 to EASTBOSTON/MA (F) 3
09/26/14, 1 :35 PM (954) 453-8488 Incoming
09/26/14, 1 :59 PM (978) 500-9000 to IPSV\1CH/MA (A) 3
09/26/14, 2:06 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
09/26/14, 2: 11 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 5
09/26/14, 3:33 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F)
09/26/14, 4:00 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F)
Page A7 of A44

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
09/26/14, 4:08 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA
09/26/14, 5:19 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming 7
09/26/14, 6:21 PM (781) 596-9700 Incoming
09/26/14, 6:27 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/26/14, 6:29 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL (A) 16
09/26/14, 6:44 PM (732) 788-5250 Incoming (A) 5
09/27/14, 6:20 AM (800) 932-3822 Incoming
09/27/14, 6:30 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/27/14, 6:48 AM 8009323822 1-800# 4
09/27/14, 8:31 AM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 10
09/27/14, 9:10 AM (781) 231-4595 to SAUGUS/MA 2
09/27/14, 10:00 AM (781) 231-4595 to SAUGUS/MA 2
09/27/14, 10:21 AM (781) 599-0096 to LYNN/MA 2
09/27/14, 10:41 AM (781) 231-4595 to SAUGUS/MA
09/27/14, 10:49 AM (617) 543-2500 Incoming (F)
09/27/14, 10:52 AM (781) 231-4595 to SAUGUS/MA 3
09/27/14, 12:03 PM (781) 696-5647 to WOBURN/MA
09/27/14, 12:06 PM (508) 685-3483 to BARNSTABLE/MA (F) 2
09/27/14, 12:11 PM (857) 236-0871 to BOSTON/MA
09/27/14, 12:11 PM (857) 236-0871 Incoming 2
09/27/14, 1 :06 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/27/14, 1 :07 PM (617) 763-8887 to BOSTON/MA 7
09/27/14, 1:14 PM (617) 901-9114 to BOSTON/MA (F)
09/27/14, 1:15 PM (617) 901-9114 Incoming (F) 3
09/28/14, 11:12AM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 6
09/28/14, 11 :24 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
09/28/14, 11 :47 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 9
09/28/14, 1: 11 PM (617) 982-8080 Incoming (F)
09/28/14, 3:12 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
09/28/14, 4:01 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/28/14, 4:01 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/28/14, 4:02 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/28/14, 4:02 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F) 2
09/28/14, 4:04 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 2
09/28/14, 5:12 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/29/14, 7:23 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 2
09/29/14, 9:04 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
09/29/14, 9:46 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 5
09/29/14, 10:29 AM (781) 953-5412 to REVERE/MA (F) 2
09/29/14, 11 :01 AM (800) 932-3822 Incoming
09/29/14, 11:14AM (781) 367-1456 to WOBURN/MA 8
09/29/14, 11 :22 AM (508) 843-5538 to BEVERLY/MA (A) 3
09/29/14, 11 :25 AM (508) 843-5538 Incoming 2
09/29/14, 11 :52 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
09/29/14, 1 :24 PM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA
09/29/14, 1 :30 PM (508) 572-0001 to BILLERICA/MA
09/29/14, 1 :31 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/29/14, 1 :31 PM (508) 572-0001 Incoming (A) 2
09/29/14, 1 :33 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/29/14, 1 :34 PM (917) 868-0883 to QUEENS NYC/NY 5
09/29/14, 2:28 PM (781) 953-5412 to REVERE/MA (F) 2
09/29/14, 3:58 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
09/29/14, 4:10 PM (857) 247-4360 Incoming (F) 1
09/29/14, 5:28 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F)
09/29/14, 5:40 PM (857) 247-4360 to BOSTON/MA (F)
09/29/14, 5:50 PM (857) 247-4360 Incoming (F) 8
09/29/14, 6:26 PM (610) 509-9721 to ALLENTOWN/PA 7
09/29/14, 9:10 PM (800) 932-3822 Incoming
09/30/14, 9:54 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/30/14, 9:55 AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA
09/30/14, 12:49 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
Page AS of A44

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
09/30/14, 12:50 PM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA 2
09/30/14, 2: 11 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/30/14, 2:17 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/30/14, 2:33 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A) 5
09/30/14, 2:39 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
09/30/14, 3:28 PM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA (A)
09/30/14, 3:28 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming (A) 2
09/30/14, 3:31 PM (703) 996-11 00 Incoming
09/30/14, 3:59 PM (781) 953-7151 to REVERE/MA
09/30/14, 4:24 PM (781) 953-7151 to REVERE/MA 6
09/30/14, 4:47 PM (617) 939-1462 Incoming
09/30/14, 7:37 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
09/30/14, 9:09 PM (781) 727-6036 Incoming 4
10/01/14, 8:12 AM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 14
10/01/14, 8:52 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/01 /14, 9:42 AM (781) 953-5412 Incoming (F)
10/01/14, 10:03 AM (978) 500-9000 Incoming
10/01/14, 10:15 AM 8664264480 1-866# 3
10/01/14, 10:32 AM (610) 509-9721 Incoming 5
10/01/14, 11:01 AM (781) 231-4595 to SAUGUS/MA 3
10/01/14, 12:23 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/01/14, 12:56 PM (714) 336-6613 to ANAHEIM/CA 2
10/01/14, 2:59 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 5
10/01/14, 3:47 PM (443) 324-9099 Incoming 2
10/01/14, 4:11 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F) 2
10/01/14, 5:07 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
10/01/14, 5:09 PM (703) 651-3447 to DULLES/VA 4
10/01/14, 5:12 PM (714) 336-6613 to ANAHEIM/CA (A) 6
10/01/14, 5:17 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A) 5
10/01/14, 5:25 PM (561) 767-0490 to BOYTONBCH/FL
10/01/14, 5:26 PM (561) 945-5381 to DELRAY BCH/FL 2
10/01/14, 5:28 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/01/14, 5:28 PM (561) 945-5381 Incoming
10/01/14, 5:30 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 8
10/01 /14, 5:46 PM (617) 699-7798 Incoming 7
10/01/14, 6:16 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 1
10/01/14, 7:09 PM (561) 945-5381 to DELRAY BCH/FL
10/01 /14, 7:49 PM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM/MA
10/01/14, 8:09 PM (239) 285-1666 to NAPLES/FL
10/01/14, 9:50 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/01 /14, 10:27 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 15
10/01/14, 11:09 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 14
10/02/14, 8:46 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 3
10/02/14, 8:51 AM (781) 385-9417 Incoming 2
10/02/14, 10:15 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/02/14, 10:32 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/02/14, 11 :04 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL (A) 4
10/02/14, 11:12AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/02/14, 12:15 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/02/14, 12:15 PM (216) 800-8496 to CLEVELAND/OH
10/02/14, 12:24 PM (781) 599.5334 Incoming 5
10/02/14, 12:30 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 2
10/02/14, 1:11 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/02/14, 2:31 PM (617) 820-1248 Incoming (F) 2
10/02/14, 3:11 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 1
10/02/14, 4:49 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
10/02/14, 4:54 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/02/14, 4:57 PM (781) 367-1456 Incoming 5
10/02/14, 5:27 PM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM/MA 2
10/02/14, 5:29 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
10/02/14, 6:20 PM (781) 727-6036 Incoming (A) 2
10/02/14, 6:21 PM (617) 699-7798 to BOSTON/MA 2
10/02/14, 6:45 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 3
10/02/14, 7:31 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
Page AS of A44

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
10/02/14, 8:45 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA
10/03/14, 7:56 AM (617) 699-7798 Incoming
10/03/14, 7:58 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
10/03/14, 8:09 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 5
10/03/14, 8:15 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 6
10/03/14, 9:06 AM (781) 385-9417 Incoming
10/03/14, 9:08 AM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (A) 3
10/03/14, 9:10 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
10/03/14, 9:15 AM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (A) 3
10/03/14, 9:17 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A) 4
10/03/14, 9:36 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/03/14, 9:52 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/03/14, 10:16 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/03/14, 10:39 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/03/14, 11 :11 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/03/14, 11 :42 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/03/14, 11 :48 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/03/14, 12:15 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/03/14, 12:27 PM (617) 201-6996 to CAMBRIDGE/MA 2
10/03/14, 1 :35 PM (617) 699-7798 to BOSTON/MA 2
10/03/14, 1 :37 PM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM/MA 2
10/03/14, 2:13 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/03/14, 2:17 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 5
10/03/14, 3:19 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/03/14, 3:42 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/03/14, 3:55 PM (781) 231-4595 to SAUGUS/MA
10/03/14, 4:19 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A)
10/03/14, 4:20 PM (781) 760-2323 Incoming (A) 3
10/03/14, 4:50 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
10/03/14, 4:59 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/03/14, 6:18 PM (832) 94 7 -9940 Incoming 3
10/04/14, 8:12 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 10
10/04/14, 9:30 AM (617) 782-8224 to BRIGHTON/MA
10/04/14, 2:23 PM (978) 372-2553 Incoming
10/04/14, 5:22 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 7
10/04/14, 5:29 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 6
10/04/14, 7:08 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 17
10/04/14, 10:56 PM (800) 932-3822 Incoming
10/05/14, 12:08 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/05/14, 1 :32 AM (781) 581-1212 to LYNN/MA
10/05/14, 1 :42 AM (781) 581-1212 to LYNN/MA
10/05/14, 10:24 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/05/14, 11 :23 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 10
10/05/14, 11 :47 AM (508) 280-6502 Incoming 2
10/05/14, 12:11 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA 4
10/05/14, 1 :05 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 3
10/05/14, 1 :25 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 5
10/05/14, 1 :30 PM (917) 975-4126 to BKLYN NYC/NY
10/05/14, 5:17 PM (781) 853-8414 to REVERE/MA
10/05/14, 5:19 PM (781) 853-8414 Incoming
10/05/14, 5:46 PM (781) 581-9994 to LYNN/MA
10/05/14, 5:48 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 3
10/05/14, 5:58 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (A) 6
10/05/14, 5:59 PM (305) 318-7590 Incoming (A)
10/05/14, 6:18 PM (305) 318-7590 Incoming 3
10/05/14, 9:00 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/05/14, 9:02 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
10/05/14, 10:10 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/06/14, 8:14 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
10/06/14, 8:40 AM (781) 424-8714 to NORWELL/MA
10/06/14, 8:45 AM (781) 424-8714 Incoming 2
10/06/14, 8:55 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/06/14, 8:56 AM (585) 381-64 7 4 to EROCHESTER/NY 4
Page A10 of A44


Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
10/06/14, 9:54 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/06/14, 9:58 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/06/14, 10:20 AM (781) 888-3338 to RANDOLPH/MA 5
10/06/14, 11 :47 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
10/06/14, 11 :50 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/06/14, 2:36 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/06/14, 2:42 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/06/14, 3:24 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 8
10/06/14, 4:46 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 1
10/06/14, 4:54 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/06/14, 5:43 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/06/14, 6:38 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/06/14, 7:36 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 23
10/06/14, 8:15 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
10/06/14, 8:20 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
10/06/14, 8:23 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/06/14, 8:36 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
10/06/14, 8:42 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/06/14, 8:51 PM (617) 994-6491 Incoming
10/06/14, 9:13 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/07/14, 10:14 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/07/14, 10:17 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/07/14, 12:48 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/07/14, 2:01 PM (781) 853-8414 to REVERE/MA 4
10/07/14, 5:35 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 2
10/07/14, 6:26 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 2
10/07/14, 7:36 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (A) 11
10/07/14, 7:46 PM (857) 277-5563 Incoming (A)
10/08/14, 7:39 AM (781) 424-8714 to NORWELL/MA 3
10/08/14, 9:05 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/08/14, 9:51 AM (617) 939-1462 Incoming
10/08/14, 9:55 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/08/14, 9:59 AM (781) 888-3338 to RANDOLPH/MA 4
10/08/14, 10:29 AM (401) 465-1980 to PROVIDENCE/RI
10/08/14, 11:16AM (781) 844-9253 to ARLINGTON/MA
10/08/14, 12:57 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/08/14, 12:58 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA
10/08/14, 1 :53 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/08/14, 2:01 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/08/14, 2:22 PM (781) 844-9253 to ARLINGTON/MA
10/08/14, 2:23 PM (781) 844-9253 Incoming 6
10/08/14, 2:29 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 2
10/08/14, 2:53 PM (781) 231-4143 Incoming (A) 2
10/08/14, 2:54 PM (617) 939-1462 Incoming (A) 2
10/08/14, 3:13 PM (781) 367-1456 to WOBURN/MA 16
10/08/14, 4:24 PM (781) 820-1452 to SAUGUS/MA 2
10/08/14, 4:35 PM (781) 820-1452 Incoming
10/08/14, 4:46 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming (A) 7
10/08/14, 4:53 PM (781) 820-1452 to SAUGUS/MA
10/08/14, 5:34 PM (781) 599.5333 to LYNN/MA 6
10/08/14, 6:16 PM (508) 922-5367 Incoming 3
10/08/14, 6:25 PM (781) 367-1456 to WOBURN/MA 3
10/08/14, 7:21 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 1
10/08/14, 7:53 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 16
Total: 2,164 $0.00
Text
The date and time correst2onds to Pacific Time (PST/PDT).
Date and time Number Destination Direction Type Amou nt
09/09/14, 5:47 AM (617) 901-6173 Boston, MA Outgoing Text
09/09/14, 6:57 AM (561) 767-0490 Boytonbch, FL Outgoing Text
09/09/14, 6:58 AM (561) 767-0490 Boytonbch, FL Incoming Text
09/09/14, 6:58 AM (561) 767-0490 Boytonbch, FL Outgoing Text
09/09/14, 7:02 AM (561) 767-0490 Boytonbch, FL Incoming Text
PageA11 ofA44

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Text
Date and time Number Destination Direction Type Amount
09/29/14, 6:53 PM (781) 853-8414 Revere, MA Incoming Text
09/29/14, 6:54 PM (781) 853-8414 Revere, MA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 7:10 AM (610) 509-9721 Allentown, PA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 7:19 AM (610) 509-9721 Allentown, PA Incoming Text
09/30/14, 7:22 AM (610) 509-9721 Allentown, PA Incoming Text
09/30/14, 8:40 AM (305) 318-7590 North Dade, FL Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 9:20 AM (305) 318-7590 North Dade, FL Incoming Text
09/30/14, 11:19AM (617) 939-1462 Boston, MA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 11 :25 AM (610) 509-9721 Allentown, PA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 11 :26 AM (610) 509-9721 Allentown, PA Incoming Text
09/30/14, 11 :26 AM (305) 318-7590 North Dade, FL Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 11 :27 AM (617) 939-1462 Boston, MA Incoming Text
09/30/14, 11 :28 AM (617) 939-1462 Boston , MA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 12:21 PM (239) 285-1666 Naples, FL Incoming Text
09/30/14, 12:24 PM (239) 285-1666 Naples, FL Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 1 :09 PM (610) 509-9721 Allentown, PA Incoming Text
09/30/14, 1 :24 PM (610) 509-9721 Allentown, PA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 2: 11 PM (781) 760-2680 Winchester, MA Incoming Text
09/30/14, 2:23 PM (781) 760-2680 Winchester, MA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 2:52 PM (610) 509-9721 Allentown, PA Incoming Text
09/30/14, 2:54 PM (610) 509-9721 Allentown, PA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 3:40 PM (603) 997-2171 Hampton, NH Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 3:47 PM (857) 247-4360 Boston , MA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 4:57 PM (603) 997-2171 Hampton, NH Incoming Text
09/30/14, 5:04 PM (786) 326-2803 Miami, FL Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 6:06 PM (781) 727-6036 Needham, MA Outgoing Text
09/30/14, 6:07 PM (786) 326-2803 Miami, FL Outgoing Text
10/01/14, 6:23 AM (786) 326-2803 Miami, FL Outgoing Text
10/01/14, 6:41 AM (781) 953-5412 Revere, MA Outgoing Text
10/01/14, 7:24 AM (781) 853-8414 Revere, MA Incoming Text
10/01/14, 9:04 AM (617) 768-7000 Cambridge, MA Incoming Text
10/01/14, 9:06 AM (617) 768-7000 Cambridge, MA Outgoing Text
10/01/14, 9:08 AM (617) 768-7000 Cambridge, MA Incoming Text
10/01/14, 9:09 AM (617) 768-7000 Cambridge, MA Outgoing Text
10/01/14, 10:15 AM 17863262803 Incoming Picture
10/01/14, 10:17 AM (917) 975-4126 Bklyn Nye, NY Outgoing Text
10/01/14, 11:16AM (786) 326-2803 Miami, FL Incoming Text
10/01/14, 4:11 PM 12392851666 Outgoing Picture
10/01/14, 4:25 PM (857) 247-4360 Boston, MA Outgoing Text
10/01/14, 4:54 PM (857) 247-4360 Boston , MA Incoming Text
10/01/14, 4:57 PM (857) 247-4360 Boston, MA Incoming Text
10/01/14, 5:10 PM (239) 285-1666 Naples, FL Outgoing Text
10/01 /14, 5:49 PM (312) 560-4800 Chicago, IL Incoming Text
Page A32 of A44


MEDI MIRNASIRI 236797294 Nov 08, 2014
Usage details
(781) 244-4474
Talk
The date and time corres(2onds to the local time where the mobile was located.
10/09/14, 8:20 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 3
10/09/14, 8:32 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
10/09/14, 8:36 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 6
10/09/14, 9:03 AM (781) 727-6036 Incoming 6
10/09/14, 9:12 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/09/14, 10:15 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/09/14, 10:20 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
10/09/14, 10:25 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 1
10/09/14, 10:27 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/09/14, 10:30 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
10/09/14, 10:42 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL (A)
10/09/14, 10:42 AM (908) 725-2200 Incoming (A) 2
10/09/14, 10:44 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/09/14, 10:50 AM (908) 725-2200 Incoming
10/09/14, 10:51 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 5
10/09/14, 10:58 AM (508) 922-5367 to HOPKINTON/MA 2
10/09/14, 11 :03 AM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F)
10/09/14, 11:14AM (908) 725-2200 Incoming 2
10/09/14, 11 :23 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A) 2
10/09/14, 11 :26 AM (508) 922-5367 to HOPKINTON/MA 2
10/09/14, 11 :30 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 5
10/09/14, 11 :38 AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 3
10/09/14, 11 :42 AM (781) 558-2070 to SAUGUS/MA 2
10/09/14, 1:19 PM (781) 844-9253 to ARLINGTON/MA
10/09/14, 1:19 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 2
10/09/14, 1 :27 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/09/14, 2:30 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 8
10/09/14, 3:42 PM (703) 996-1100 to DULLES/VA 2
10/09/14, 3:47 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 6
10/09/14, 4:05 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/09/14, 4:32 PM (703) 996-1100 Incoming 3
10/09/14, 5:33 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 7
10/09/14, 5:51 PM (617) 699-7798 to BOSTON/MA 4
10/09/14, 6:09 PM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM/MA 3
10/09/14, 8:21 PM (781) 535-4126 to BRAINTREE/MA (F) 2
10/09/14, 8:23 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
10/09/14, 8:28 PM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM/MA 2
10/09/14, 8:46 PM (610) 509-9721 to ALLENTOWN/PA 7
10/09/14, 9:27 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming 2
10/10/14, 8:16 AM (718) 844-3380 Incoming (F) 2
10/10/14, 8:47 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/10/14, 8:50 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/10/14, 9:19 AM (718) 844-3380 Incoming (F)
10/10/14, 9:24 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/10/14, 9:53 AM (617) 939-1462 Incoming
10/10/14, 10:52 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 3
10/10/14, 10:55 AM (773) 230-6900 to CHICAGO/IL 2
10/10/14, 10:59 AM (781) 385-9417 to HINGHAM/MA
10/10/14, 11:21 AM (561) 891-8554 Incoming 6
10/10/14, 1:15 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
10/10/14, 1:16 PM (508) 280-1312 to HYANNIS/MA
10/10/14, 1:25 PM (617) 538-6058 to WAL THAM/MA 3
10/10/14, 4:12 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/10/14, 4:12 PM (773) 230-6900 to CHICAGO/IL 2
10/10/14, 4:45 PM (773) 230-6900 Incoming 3
10/10/14, 4:56 PM (773) 230-6900 to CHICAGO/IL
10/10/14, 5:46 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 4
10/10/14, 6:02 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/10/14, 6:39 PM (617) 797-0200 Incoming 16
10/11/14, 9:17 AM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
10/11/14, 9:39 AM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F) 2
Page A1 of A43

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
10/14/14, 12:29 PM (781) 599-0096 to LYNN/MA
10/14/14, 12:34 PM (617) 731-1700 to BROOKLINE/MA
10/14/14, 12:37 PM (617) 666-4100 to SOMERVILLE/MA
10/14/14, 12:37 PM (617) 666-8333 to SOMERVILLE/MA 3
10/14/14, 12:41 PM (781) 444.4747 to NEEDHAM/MA 3
10/14/14, 12:45 PM (978) 815-5579 to LOWELUMA 2
10/14/14, 12:49 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/14/14, 12:51 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/14/14, 12:55 PM (508) 270-5491 to FRAMINGHAM/MA (A) 2
10/14/14, 12:56 PM (617) 257-0190 Incoming (A) 3
10/14/14, 1:02 PM (617) 257-3595 to SAUGUS/MA
10/14/14, 1:04 PM (781) 718-6868 to LYNN/MA 2
10/14/14, 1:09 PM (508) 843-1919 to BEVERLY/MA 2
10/14/14, 1:13 PM (781) 662-3498 to MELROSE/MA 2
10/14/14, 1:14 PM (781) 710-3666 to LYNN/MA 7
10/14/14, 1:25 PM (781) 521-2802 to SAUGUS/MA 2
10/14/14, 1:27 PM (617) 699-6998 to BOSTON/MA 2
10/14/14, 1:29 PM (617) 593-9111 to BOSTON/MA 2
10/14/14, 1:31 PM (617) 593-9111 to BOSTON/MA
10/14/14, 1:32 PM (617) 593-9111 to BOSTON/MA
10/14/14, 1:36 PM (781) 599-0096 to LYNN/MA 3
10/14/14, 2:26 PM (614) 571-7 450 to COLUMBUS/OH 2
10/14/14, 2:28 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 3
10/14/14, 2:41 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 3
10/14/14, 3:25 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/14/14, 3:43 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
10/14/14, 4:26 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 7
10/14/14, 4:55 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
10/14/14, 4:59 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
10/14/14, 5:07 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/14/14, 5:18 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/14/14, 5:46 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/14/14, 6:21 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/14/14, 7:07 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 9
10/14/14, 7:16 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/14/14, 7:50 PM (508) 612-557 4 to WORCESTER/MA 2
10/14/14, 7:55 PM (617) 835-2100 to BOSTON/MA 5
10/14/14, 8:01 PM (617) 512-3767 to BOSTON/MA 5
10/14/14, 8:42 PM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA
10/14/14, 8:43 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/14/14, 8:44 PM (917) 975-4126 to BKLYN NYC/NY
10/14/14, 8:44 PM (201) 216-9491 to JERSEYCITY/NJ
10/15/14, 8:03 AM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA
10/15/14, 8:08 AM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA
10/15/14, 8:28 AM (781) 231-4129 to SAUGUS/MA 3
10/15/14, 8:49 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/15/14, 8:53 AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 7
10/15/14, 9:45 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 5
10/15/14, 10:38 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/15/14, 10:43 AM (404) 669-5762 Incoming
10/15/14, 11:55AM (781) 599.5334 to LYNN/MA
10/15/14, 11:57 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/15/14, 12:11 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 1
10/15/14, 12:26 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 1
10/15/14, 12:38 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/15/14, 12:50 PM (339) 987-8040 Incoming
10/15/14, 1:00 PM (404) 669-5762 Incoming 2
10/15/14, 1:04 PM (561) 945-5381 to DELRAY BCH/FL 2
10/15/14, 1:20 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/15/14, 1:23 PM (404) 669-5762 to ATLANTA/GA
10/15/14, 2:14 PM (781) 558-8518 Incoming 2
Page A3 of A43

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
10/21/14, 5:37 PM (978) 500-9000 Incoming 3
10/21/14, 7:12 PM (919) 380-6031 Incoming 2
10/21/14, 7:30 PM (781) 953-7151 to REVERE/MA 2
10/21/14, 7:32 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/21/14, 7:41 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 4
10/21 /14, 8:40 PM (781) 596-2525 Incoming 3
10/21 /14 , 8:44 PM (781) 853-8414 to REVERE/MA
10/21/14, 8:55 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/21/14, 9:13 PM (781) 953-7151 Incoming 2
10/22/14, 12:27 AM (718) 844-3380 Incoming (F) 2
10/22/14, 8:31 AM (781) 231-4500 Incoming 2
10/22/14, 8:51 AM (781) 558-8518 to SAUGUS/MA
10/22/14, 8:53 AM (781) 231-4111 Incoming 8
10/22/14, 9:01 AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 3
10/22/14, 9:28 AM (781) 581-1212 to LYNN/MA
10/22/14, 9:31 AM (617) 970-1011 to EASTBOSTON/MA 2
10/22/14, 9:33 AM (617) 970-1911 to EASTBOSTON/MA 2
10/22/14, 9:38 AM 8009905060 1-800#
10/22/14, 9:39 AM 8009905060 1-800#
10/22/14, 9:40 AM 8774496932 1-877# 2
10/22/14, 9:43 AM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F) 2
10/22/14, 11 :23 AM (617) 970-1911 Incoming 3
10/22/14, 11 :27 AM (617) 538-9070 to WAL THAM/MA
10/22/14, 11 :50 AM 8774496932 1-877# (A) 16
10/22/14, 12:06 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/22/14, 12:10 PM (781) 953-7151 to REVERE/MA (A) 2
10/22/14, 12:12 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A) 8
10/22/14, 12:34 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/22/14, 12:49 PM (781) 581-1212 Incoming 2
10/22/14, 1:13 PM (207) 475.4399 Incoming
10/22/14, 1 :35 PM (207) 475.4399 to KITTERY/ME 6
10/22/14, 2:12 PM (781) 858-1306 Incoming 2
10/22/14, 4:03 PM (908) 725-2200 Incoming
10/22/14, 5:36 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA
10/22/14, 5:38 PM (617) 699-7798 to BOSTON/MA 2
10/22/14, 5:43 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming (A) 20
10/22/14, 7:13 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/22/14, 8:26 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 11
10/23/14, 8:10 AM (617) 982-8080 Incoming (F) 3
10/23/14, 8:13 AM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F)
10/23/14, 8:14 AM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F)
10/23/14, 8:26 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 4
10/23/14, 8:28 AM (781) 760-2680 Incoming (A)
10/23/14, 8:41 AM (781) 775-7427 to WAL THAM/MA 2
10/23/14, 8:45 AM (781) 775-7427 Incoming 3
10/23/14, 9:06 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/23/14, 9:07 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
10/23/14, 9:12 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/23/14, 9:14 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/23/14, 9:39 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/23/14, 9:43 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/23/14, 9:46 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/23/14, 10:12 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
10/23/14, 11 :00 AM (978) 500-9000 to IPSV\1CH/MA
10/23/14, 11 :40 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
10/23/14, 12:29 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/23/14, 1:12 PM (305) 308-3313 to NORTH DADE/FL 2
10/23/14, 1:19 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
10/23/14, 1 :28 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
10/23/14, 1 :48 PM (617) 538-8888 to WAL THAM/MA
10/23/14, 2:05 PM (617) 710-3602 Incoming 3
10/23/14, 5:14 PM (781) 521-7499 Incoming 2
Page A7 of A43

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
10/30/14, 11 :37 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/30/14, 12:44 PM (781) 820-1452 to SAUGUS/MA
10/30/14, 12:45 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/30/14, 1:12 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/30/14, 1 :40 PM (978) 423-4730 to LOWELL/MA 2
10/30/14, 3:07 PM (617) 939-1462 Incoming 2
10/30/14, 4:39 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F) 19
10/30/14, 5:00 PM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA (A) 16
10/30/14, 5:41 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
10/30/14, 6:19 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/30/14, 6:34 PM (617) 301-3387 Incoming 12
10/30/14, 6:48 PM (978) 500-9000 to IPSV\1CH/MA 10
10/30/14, 7:01 PM (561) 767-0490 to BOYTONBCH/FL 3
10/30/14, 7:04 PM (978) 500-9000 to IPSV\1CH/MA 2
10/30/14, 8:56 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 6
10/31/14, 8:05 AM (732) 895-1266 Incoming 3
10/31/14, 8:24 AM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA
10/31/14, 8:26 AM (617) 314-1448 to BOSTON/MA 2
10/31/14, 9:05 AM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F)
10/31/14, 9:31 AM (857) 321-1002 Incoming 7
10/31/14, 11:30AM (617) 257-0190 to SAUGUS/MA (A) 4
10/31/14, 11:34AM (617) 710-8822 to CAMBRIDGE/MA 2
10/31/14, 11:41 AM (781) 599.5334 to LYNN/MA 6
10/31/14, 11:47 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 12
10/31/14, 12:01 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
10/31/14, 12:25 PM (617) 749-6712 Incoming (F)
10/31/14, 12:33 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL (A) 4
10/31/14, 1:41 PM (781) 718-5036 to LYNN/MA 4
10/31/14, 2:28 PM (617) 759-8100 Incoming 4
10/31/14, 3:05 PM (617) 527-2717 to NEWTON/MA (A) 4
10/31/14, 3:09 PM (617) 959-3770 to BOSTON/MA (F) 4
10/31/14, 3:30 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL (A) 10
10/31/14, 4:31 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
10/31/14, 4:32 PM (617) 888-6394 Incoming
10/31/14, 4:56 PM (781) 710-3666 to LYNN/MA
10/31/14, 5:35 PM (617) 943-3382 to BOSTON/MA
10/31/14, 5:36 PM (617) 943-3382 Incoming
10/31/14, 5:43 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F) 3
10/31/14, 5:45 PM (617) 943-3382 to BOSTON/MA
10/31/14, 7:44 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
10/31/14, 8:14 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 4
11/01/14, 8:14 AM (781) 718-5036 to LYNN/MA 2
11/01/14, 9:08 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 6
11/01/14, 10:48 AM (617) 982-8080 to BOSTON/MA (F) 2
11/01/14, 10:50AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11/01/14, 10:50AM (617) 982-8080 Incoming (A)
11/01/14, 11:02AM (617) 970-3245 to EASTBOSTON/MA (F) 2
11/01/14, 11:04AM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA
11/01/14, 11:05AM (781) 234-4415 to DEDHAM/MA (A) 2
11/01/14, 11:07 AM (508) 397-8163 Incoming 2
11/01/14, 11:13AM (508) 397-8163 to NATICK/MA 4
11/01/14, 11:17 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
Page A10 of A43


Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
11 /04/14, 12:44 PM (978) 500-9000 Incoming 4
11/04/14, 2:30 PM (800) 932-3822 Incoming
11/04/14, 2:31 PM (800) 932-3822 Incoming
11/04/14, 2:32 PM (781) 820-1452 to SAUGUS/MA
11/04/14, 2:33 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11 /04/14, 2:48 PM (781) 820-1452 Incoming 2
11/04/14, 3:38 PM (781) 771-8333 to LYNN/MA (F) 2
11/04/14, 3:53 PM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA
11/04/14, 4:08 PM (781) 710-3666 to LYNN/MA 2
11/04/14, 4:28 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11/04/14, 4:47 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA (A) 3
11/04/14, 4:50 PM (781) 771-8333 to LYNN/MA (F) 2
11/04/14, 5:09 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
11/04/14, 5:24 PM (781) 710-3666 to LYNN/MA 4
11 /04/14, 7:48 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
11/04/14, 7:58 PM (781) 771-8333 to LYNN/MA (F) 7
11 /05/14, 8:49 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL (A) 5
11/05/14, 8:54 AM (508) 843-5538 Incoming (A) 7
11/05/14, 10:51 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
11/05/14, 12:17 PM (305) 321-0349 to MIAMI/FL 2
11/05/14, 12:58 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
11/05/14, 1:05 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
11 /05/14, 1 :44 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
11/05/14, 2:01 PM (781) 581-0929 to LYNN/MA
11/05/14, 2:03 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
11/05/14, 2:13 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
11/05/14, 2:21 PM (312) 560-4800 to CHICAGO/IL 15
11/05/14, 4:14 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
11/05/14, 4:15 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
11/05/14, 4:33 PM (617) 389-3506 to EVERETT/MA 2
11/05/14, 4:39 PM (781) 231-4595 to SAUGUS/MA 2
11 /05/14, 4:41 PM (617) 389-3506 to EVERETT/MA (A) 3
11 /05/14, 4:43 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A) 5
11/05/14, 5:02 PM (508) 922-5367 to HOPKINTON/MA 2
11/05/14, 6:08 PM (781) 727-6036 Incoming 4
11/05/14, 6:18 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 5
11/05/14, 6:28 PM (781) 771-4456 Incoming (F) 6
11/05/14, 6:33 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
11/05/14, 6:34 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
11 /05/14, 7:42 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 5
11/05/14, 8:26 PM (781) 581-0929 Incoming 3
11/05/14, 9:55 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 7
11/06/14, 8:54 AM (978) 500-9000 to IPSV\1CH/MA 2
11/06/14, 9:07 AM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F) 2
11/06/14, 9:12 AM (508) 270-5491 Incoming 2
11 /06/14, 9:48 AM (781) 341-0116 to STOUGHTON/MA
11/06/14, 9:57 AM (347) 356-4351 to BKLYN NYC/NY 6
11/06/14, 10:12AM (617) 389-3506 to EVERETT/MA 4
11 /06/14, 10:25 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 1
11/06/14, 10:47 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
11/06/14, 11:06AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
11/06/14, 11 :11 AM (617) 699-6998 Incoming 2
11/06/14, 11:35AM (781) 953-7103 to REVERE/MA (F)
11/06/14, 12:29 PM (610) 509-9722 to ALLENTOWN/PA
11/06/14, 12:30 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11/06/14, 2:03 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11/06/14, 2:24 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
11/06/14, 2:58 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
11/06/14, 3:12 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 5
Page A12 of A43


Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
11/06/14, 3:30 PM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA 2
11/06/14, 3:36 PM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA 3
11/06/14, 5:16 PM (781) 341-0116 to STOUGHTON/MA
11/06/14, 5:32 PM (781) 596-9700 Incoming
11/06/14, 5:53 PM (978) 500-9000 Incoming 2
11/06/14, 5:55 PM (610) 509-9722 Incoming 6
11/06/14, 6:09 PM (617) 699-6998 Incoming 19
11/06/14, 6:59 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
11/06/14, 7:09 PM (781) 760-2323 Incoming 1
11/06/14, 7:27 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
11/06/14, 7:30 PM (781) 284-1556 to REVERE/MA (A)
11/06/14, 7:30 PM (781) 284-1556 Incoming (A) 19
11/06/14, 7:59 PM (781) 581-0929 Incoming
11/07/14, 8:26 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 16
11/07/14, 10:25AM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA
11/07/14, 10:31 AM (305) 318-7590 to NORTH DADE/FL
11/07/14, 10:35AM (305) 318-7590 to NORTH DADE/FL
11/07/14, 11:29AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11/07/14, 11:30AM (857) 400-6747 to BOSTON/MA 5
11/07/14, 11:38AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 5
11/07/14, 1:56 PM (781) 599-0096 Incoming 2
11/07/14, 2:58 PM (781) 341-0116 Incoming 11
11/07/14, 5:36 PM (508) 229-8312 Incoming 3
11/07/14, 5:39 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA 5
11/07/14, 5:55 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 2
11/07/14, 6:24 PM (781) 558-5210 to SAUGUS/MA
11/08/14, 8:20 AM (978) 500-9000 to IPSV\1CH/MA 3
11/08/14, 4:07 PM (978) 500-9000 Incoming
11/08/14, 4:30 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F)
11 /08/14, 4:44 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F)
11 /08/14, 5:48 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA 4
11/08/14, 9:07 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 15
Total: 2,555 $0.00
Text
10/09/14, 6:29 AM 17863262803 Outgoing Picture
10/09/14, 7:11 AM (786) 326-2803 Miami, FL Incoming Text
10/09/14, 10:10 AM (617) 939-1462 Boston, MA Incoming Text
10/09/14, 10:11 AM (617) 939-1462 Boston, MA Incoming Text
10/09/14, 12:05 PM (786) 326-2803 Miami, FL Incoming Text
10/09/14, 5:04 PM (781) 535-4126 Braintree, MA Incoming Text
10/10/14, 6:47 AM (617) 797-0200 Saugus, MA Incoming Text
10/10/14, 6:47 AM (617) 797-0200 Saugus, MA Outgoing Text
10/10/14, 7:58 AM (773) 230-6900 Chicago, IL Outgoing Text
Page A13 of A43


Continued... (781) 244-4474
Text
11 /03/14, 5:46 PM (857) 247-4360 Boston , MA Outgoing Text
11/04/14, 4:53 AM (732) 788-5250 Middletown , NJ Outgoing Text
11/04/14, 4:56 AM (305) 318-7590 North Dade, FL Incoming Text
11/04/14, 5:38 AM (732) 788-5250 Middletown , NJ Incoming Text
11/04/14, 6:10 AM (781) 771-4456 Lynn, MA Incoming Text
11/04/14, 6:10 AM (781) 771-4456 Lynn , MA Outgoing Text
11 /04/14, 10:21 AM (781) 760-2680 Winchester, MA Outgoing Text
11/04/14, 10:27 AM (781) 760-2680 Winchester, MA Incoming Text
11/04/14, 12:01 PM (781) 771-8333 Lynn , MA Incoming Text
11/04/14, 12:24 PM (781) 771-8333 Lynn, MA Outgoing Text
11/04/14, 12:33 PM 17817718333 Incoming Picture
11/04/14, 12:36 PM (781) 771-8333 Lynn , MA Outgoing Text
11/04/14, 12:37 PM (781) 771-8333 Lynn, MA Incoming Text
11 /04/14, 12:40 PM (781) 771-8333 Lynn, MA Outgoing Text
11/04/14, 1:29 PM (617) 939-1462 Boston , MA Outgoing Text
11 /04/14, 1 :45 PM (781) 771-8333 Lynn, MA Incoming Text
11 /04/14, 1 :46 PM (781) 771-8333 Lynn , MA Outgoing Text
11 /04/14, 1 :48 PM (781) 771-8333 Lynn, MA Incoming Text
11 /04/14, 1 :49 PM (781) 771-8333 Lynn , MA Outgoing Text
11/04/14, 4:34 PM (617) 749-6712 Roxbury, MA Incoming Text
11/04/14, 4:35 PM (617) 749-6712 Roxbury, MA Outgoing Text
11 /04/14, 4:41 PM (617) 749-6712 Roxbury, MA Incoming Text
11 /04/14, 4:42 PM (617) 749-6712 Roxbury, MA Outgoing Text
11/04/14, 5:17 PM (732) 687-8477 Middletown, NJ Incoming Text
11/04/14, 5:17 PM (732) 687-8477 Middletown , NJ Incoming Text
11/04/14, 5:20 PM (732) 687-8477 Middletown , NJ Outgoing Text
11 /04/14, 6:44 PM (781) 853-8414 Revere, MA Incoming Text
11 /04/14, 6:44 PM (781) 853-8414 Revere, MA Outgoing Text
11 /04/14, 6:49 PM (781) 853-8414 Revere, MA Outgoing Text
Page A33 of A43


MEDI MIRNASIRI 236797294 Dec 08, 2014
Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
11/18/14, 7:40 PM (781) 853-8414 Incoming
11 /18/14, 7:46 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL
11/19/14, 8:09 AM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA 2
11/19/14, 9:50 AM (617) 592-4018 Incoming 2
11/19/14, 9:54 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
11/19/14, 10:02AM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
11/19/14, 10:07 AM (781) 888-3338 to RANDOLPH/MA 3
11/19/14, 1:50 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 9
11/19/14, 2:09 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
11 /19/14, 2:43 PM (630) 550-07 41 Incoming 2
11/19/14, 2:50 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL
11/19/14, 2:52 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
11/19/14, 3:07 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
11/19/14, 3:09 PM (781) 710-3666 to LYNN/MA (A) 4
11/19/14, 3:12 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
11/19/14, 3:12 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
11/19/14, 3:35 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
11/19/14, 4:31 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
11 /19/14, 4:40 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
11/19/14, 5:54 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL 2
11/19/14, 6:47 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
11/19/14, 7:17 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
11/19/14, 7:18 PM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM/MA
11/19/14, 7:21 PM (781) 771-8333 to LYNN/MA (F) 5
11/19/14, 8:37 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11/19/14, 8:39 PM (970) 405-2033 to GREELEY/CO (F) 3
11 /19/14, 8:42 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
11/19/14, 9:07 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
11/20/14, 8:01 AM (781) 853-8414 Incoming 2
11 /20/14, 8:43 AM (703) 536-8085 Incoming
11/20/14, 10:10AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 3
11 /20/14, 10:25 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
11 /20/14, 10:42 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 5
11/20/14, 10:55AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
11/20/14, 11:24AM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL
11/20/14, 11:47 AM (630) 550-07 41 Incoming 3
11/20/14, 12:47 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL
11/20/14, 12:47 PM (630) 550-07 41 Incoming 2
11 /20/14, 1 :48 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11 /20/14, 2:43 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
11/20/14, 4:32 PM (781) 588-4289 to KINGSTON/MA
11/20/14, 4:56 PM (970) 405-2033 to GREELEY/CO (F)
11 /20/14, 5:41 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 8
11/20/14, 6:08 PM (781) 771-8333 to LYNN/MA (F) 3
11/20/14, 6:16 PM (781) 727-6036 Incoming 13
11 /20/14, 6:46 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 3
11/20/14, 7:24 PM (954) 532-1933 Incoming 5
11/21/14, 8:00 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11/21/14, 8:40 AM (781) 231-4500 to SAUGUS/MA 4
11/21/14, 9:55 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
11/21/14, 10:06AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 7
11/21/14, 11:27 AM (617) 212-1880 Incoming
11/21/14, 12:05 PM (781) 888-3338 to RANDOLPH/MA
11/21/14, 2:03 PM (617) 939-1462 Incoming
11/21/14, 3:24 PM (781) 588-4289 to KINGSTON/MA
11/21/14, 3:36 PM (617) 982-8080 Incoming (F)
11/21/14, 4:10 PM (978) 500-9000 Incoming 2
11/21/14, 4:27 PM (857) 251-7278 to BOSTON/MA
11/21/14, 4:41 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL
11/21/14, 5:32 PM (781) 760-2680 to WNCHESTER/MA 2
11/21/14, 5:33 PM (978) 219-3686 Incoming 3
11/21/14, 6:10 PM (401) 490-1419 Incoming 4
Page A4 of A38

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
11/21/14, 6:24 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL
11/21/14, 8:26 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL 2
11/21/14, 9:20 PM (240) 988-4144 to SILVER SPG/MD
11/21/14, 9:27 PM (508) 612-557 4 Incoming 5
11/22/14, 9:02 AM (978) 500-9000 Incoming
11/22/14, 12:41 PM (347) 873-1278 Incoming (F) 2
11/22/14, 12:47 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 3
11 /22/14, 4:43 PM (617) 926-0880 to WATERTOWN/MA 2
11 /22/14, 4:44 PM (508) 572-2030 to BILLERICA/MA 3
11/22/14, 5:28 PM (617) 699-6998 to BOSTON/MA
11/22/14, 5:36 PM (617) 224-6553 to BOSTON/MA (F) 2
11/22/14, 5:39 PM (617) 699-6998 Incoming 2
11/22/14, 6:06 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 5
11/22/14, 9:02 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 2
11/23/14, 2:51 PM (617) 201-6996 to CAMBRIDGE/MA
11/23/14, 3:25 PM (617) 784-2835 to BOSTON/MA (A) 4
11/23/14, 3:29 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
11 /23/14, 3:41 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
11/24/14, 10:07 AM (561) 790-1200 Incoming 13
11/24/14, 11:07 AM (781) 727-6036 Incoming 9
11/24/14, 11:22AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
11/24/14, 11:58AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11/24/14, 11:59AM (610) 509-9722 to ALLENTOWN/PA 4
11 /24/14, 12:25 PM (610) 509-9722 to ALLENTOWN/PA 5
11/24/14, 12:34 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
11/24/14, 12:37 PM (781) 710-3666 to LYNN/MA
11/24/14, 1:26 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
11/24/14, 1:27 PM (781) 710-3666 to LYNN/MA 2
11/24/14, 1:29 PM (781) 596-9700 to LYNN/MA
11 /24/14, 1 :44 PM (781) 760-2680 to V\1NCHESTER/MA 2
11 /24/14, 1 :46 PM (617) 875-4993 to BOSTON/MA 2
11 /24/14, 1 :48 PM (781) 588-4289 to KINGSTON/MA
11/24/14, 1:50 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
11/24/14, 2:24 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL (A) 2
11/24/14, 2:24 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming (A)
11 /24/14, 2:40 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 2
11/24/14, 2:51 PM (781) 596-9700 Incoming
11/24/14, 2:56 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
11/24/14, 3:11 PM (617) 939-1462 Incoming
11 /24/14, 3:45 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL 3
11/24/14, 3:55 PM (781) 596-9700 Incoming
11/24/14, 4:00 PM (781) 599-0096 Incoming
11/24/14, 4:54 PM (617) 389-3506 to EVERETT/MA
11/24/14, 5:12 PM (617) 201-6996 Incoming 3
11/25/14, 8:38 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 6
11/25/14, 8:55 AM (617) 939-1462 Incoming
11/25/14, 10:38AM (781) 588-4289 Incoming 3
11/25/14, 10:41 AM (781) 953-6870 to REVERE/MA
11 /25/14, 10:42 AM (339) 440-7183 to LYNN/MA (F)
11 /25/14, 10:43 AM (781) 953-6870 to REVERE/MA
11/25/14, 10:44AM (781) 953-6870 to REVERE/MA
11 /25/14, 10:45 AM (781) 588-4289 to KINGSTON/MA
11/25/14, 10:50AM (781) 953-6870 to REVERE/MA
11/25/14, 10:51 AM (781) 953-6870 to REVERE/MA 2
11/25/14, 10:53AM (781) 953-6870 to REVERE/MA
11/25/14, 10:54AM (781) 588-4289 to KINGSTON/MA 2
11/25/14, 11 :15 AM (781) 588-4289 to KINGSTON/MA 2
11/25/14, 11 :16 AM (781) 588-4289 to KINGSTON/MA
11/25/14, 11 :19 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
11/25/14, 11:24AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
11/25/14, 11:38AM (610) 509-9722 to ALLENTOWN/PA 3
11/25/14, 11:52AM (617) 7 46-5520 to BRIGHTON/MA 2
Page A5 of A38

Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
12/03/14, 3:29 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 6
12/03/14, 3:46 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 6
12/03/14, 6:25 PM (781) 588-4289 Incoming (A)
12/03/14, 6:26 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming (A) 2
12/03/14, 6:27 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 3
12/03/14, 6:32 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 3
12/03/14, 6:35 PM (781) 558-5481 Incoming 4
12/03/14, 6:38 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 2
12/04/14, 8:37 AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 2
12/04/14, 9:00 AM (561) 767-0490 to BOYTONBCH/FL
12/04/14, 9:13 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 5
12/04/14, 9:17 AM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 2
12/04/14, 11 :08 AM (617) 201-6996 Incoming
12/04/14, 11 :35 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
12/04/14, 11 :42 AM (509) 535-7824 to SPOKANE/WA 5
12/04/14, 12:09 PM (561) 214-2227 Incoming
12/04/14, 12:35 PM (617) 513-8992 to BOSTON/MA 3
12/04/14, 1 :20 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA 4
12/04/14, 1 :26 PM (617) 782-8222 to BRIGHTON/MA
12/04/14, 1 :53 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
12/04/14, 1 :56 PM (508) 761-6778 to SOUTHGATE/MA 4
12/04/14, 2:03 PM 8773783383 1-877# 2
12/04/14, 2:05 PM (617) 331-9630 to BOSTON/MA (F)
12/04/14, 2:50 PM (954) 857-3973 to DEERFLDBCH/FL
12/04/14, 2:53 PM 8007668797 1-800# 2
12/04/14, 2:55 PM 8773783383 1-877# 2
12/04/14, 2:57 PM (954) 857-3973 to DEERFLDBCH/FL 2
12/04/14, 2:59 PM (954) 835-4720 Incoming (A)
12/04/14, 2:59 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming (A)
12/04/14, 3:02 PM (954) 835-4720 Incoming
12/04/14, 4:03 PM (630) 550-07 41 Incoming 2
12/04/14, 4:49 PM (781) 771-8333 to LYNN/MA (F) 4
12/04/14, 5:04 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
12/04/14, 5:45 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 5
12/04/14, 6:19 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 3
12/04/14, 6:23 PM (617) 749-6712 Incoming (F) 2
12/04/14, 6:42 PM (508) 612-557 4 Incoming 21
12/05/14, 8:41 AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
12/05/14, 8:42 AM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA
12/05/14, 9:49 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
12/05/14, 11 :08 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
12/05/14, 11 :08 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
12/05/14, 12:35 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
12/05/14, 12:41 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
12/05/14, 12:47 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL 2
12/05/14, 3:00 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 4
12/05/14, 3:09 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
12/05/14, 3:12 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
12/05/14, 3:17 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
12/05/14, 3:22 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
12/05/14, 3:34 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
12/05/14, 3:35 PM (617) 835-2100 to BOSTON/MA 2
12/05/14, 3:36 PM (617) 835-2100 Incoming 2
12/05/14, 3:38 PM (617) 224-6553 to BOSTON/MA (F)
12/05/14, 3:40 PM (617) 224-6553 to BOSTON/MA (F)
12/05/14, 4:06 PM (617) 224-6553 to BOSTON/MA (F) 5
12/05/14, 4:10 PM (617) 835-2100 to BOSTON/MA 3
12/05/14, 4:55 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 11
12/05/14, 6:23 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 3
12/05/14, 7:01 PM (617) 269-8562 Incoming 2
Page AS of A38

Statement for Account number Bill close date
M EDI MIRNASIRI 236797294 Jan 08, 2015
Usage details
(781) 244-4474
Talk
The date and time corres(2onds to the local time where the mobile was located.
12/09/14, 9:20AM (978) 500-9000 to IPS\MCH/MA
12/09/14, 9:21AM (978) 500-9000 Incoming 8
12/09/14, 9:32AM (970) 405-2033 Incoming (F) 3
12/09/14, 9:33AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 2
12/09/14, 9:51 AM (970) 405-2033 to GREELEY/CO (F) 2
12/09/14, 10:32AM (970) 405-2033 Incoming (F) 3
12/09/14, 10:36 AM (781) 436-0294 Incoming
12/09/14, 10:49AM (781) 888-3338 to RANDOLPH/MA
12/09/14, 11:47AM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
12/09/14, 11:49AM (781) 888-3338 to RANDOLPH/MA 4
12/09/14, 12:03 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 1
12/09/14, 12:47 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
12/09/14, 1:36 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
12/09/14, 2:26 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 2
12/09/14, 4:09 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 14
12/09/14, 5:05 PM (630) 550-0741 to BARTLETT/IL 2
12/09/14, 5:07 PM (970) 405-2033 to GREELEY/CO (F)
12/09/14, 5:26 PM (630) 550-0741 Incoming 1
12/09/14, 5:37 PM (970) 405-2033 Incoming (F) 2
12/09/14, 5:43 PM (781) 771-8333 to LYNN/MA (F) 5
12/09/14, 6:00 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming 12
12/09/14, 6:13 PM (781) 888-3338 to RANDOLPH/MA 10
12/09/14, 6:25 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 6
12/09/14, 6:59 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 15
12/09/14, 7:15 PM (617) 939-1462 to BOSTON/MA 2
12/09/14, 7:17 PM (781) 844-9253 to ARLINGTON/MA 3
12/09/14, 7:28 PM (781) 953-5412 to REVERE/MA (F) 29
12/09/14, 8:56 PM (781) 588-4289 Incoming 2
12/09/14, 9:04 PM (781) 760-2319 to \MNCHESTER/MA 2
12/09/14, 9:21 PM (781) 760-2319 Incoming 8
12/09/14, 9:30 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 10
12/10/14, 8:58 AM (781) 596-9700 to LYNN/MA 2
12/10/14, 9:04 AM (781) 727-6036 to NEEDHAM /MA 5
12/10/14, 9:29 AM (781) 588-4289 Incoming 2
12/10/14, 9:54 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 4
12/10/14, 10:24AM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 3
12/10/14, 11:36AM (781) 424-8714 to NORWELL/MA 2
12/10/14, 11:48AM (617) 939-1462 Incoming 5
12/10/14, 12:14 PM (781) 596-9700 Incoming 2
12/10/14, 1:55 PM (970) 405-2033 to GREELEY/CO (F)
12/10/14, 1:57 PM (970) 405-2033 to GREELEY/CO (F)
12/10/14, 2:37 PM (970) 405-2033 to GREELEY/CO (F) 4
12/10/14, 4:16 PM (508) 740-4508 to FRAMINGHAM /MA 2
12/10/14, 5:33 PM (617) 257-0190 to SAUGUS/MA 1
12/10/14, 5:34 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G) 2
12/10/14, 5:40 PM 123 VM R etrieval (G) 1
12/10/14, 5:47 PM (617) 257-0190 to SAUGUS/MA 4
12/10/14, 6:06 PM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F) 8
12/10/14, 7:06 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 7
12/10/14, 7:34 PM 123 VM R etrieval (G) 2
12/10/14, 7:55 PM (781) 254-1212 Incoming 5
12/11/14, 8:27 AM (781) 581-0088 to LYNN/MA 2
12/11/14, 9:10 AM (617) 212-1880 to BOSTON/MA 2
12/11/14, 9:16 AM (508) 740-4508 Incoming 1
12/11/14, 10:12AM (781) 389-5985 to \MNCHESTER/MA 2
12/11/14, 10:25AM (781) 389-5985 to \MNCHESTER/MA
12/11/14, 10:27 AM (781) 389-5985 to \MNCHESTER/MA 1
12/11/14, 10:29AM (781) 844-4797 Incoming 2
12/11/14, 10:34AM (781) 844-4797 to ARLINGTON/MA 2
12/11/14, 10:39AM (781) 844-4797 Incoming 1
12/11/14, 11:13AM (617) 970-3245 Incoming (F) 3
12/11/14, 1:46 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming
Page A 1 of A37
Type: (A) Call Wait ing (B) Call Forward (C) Co nference Call (E) Dat a/Fax (F) Mobile2Mobile (G) Voicemail
(H) Free Calls (I) Int l Disc Call (J) Int l Disc Call to Mobile (K) WPS Call (M ) AnyMobile (R) Roaming (T) T-Mobile Number
(V) myFaves Call (WJ Vin-Fi Call (X) T-Mobile @Home Call
USAO- DECICCO-00025510
MEDI MIRNASIRI 236797294 Jan 08, 2015
Continued... (781) 244-4474
Talk
01/06/15, 11:20AM (781) 927-4883 to WEYMOUTH/MA
01/06/15, 1:05 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 7
01/06/15, 2:06 PM (781) 241-7707 to REVERE/MA 2
01/06/15, 3:30 PM (916) 334-5438 to SCRM NORTH/CA 3
01/06/15, 3:50 PM (857) 247-4360 to BOSTON/MA (F) 38
01/06/15, 4:31 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 4
01/07/15, 7:40 AM (617) 201-6573 to CAMBRIDGE/MA
01/07/15, 7:45 AM (617) 201-6573 Incoming
01/07/15, 7:46 AM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F)
01/07/15, 11:33AM (617) 257-1905 to SAUGUS/MA
01/07/15, 3:16 PM (630) 550-07 41 to BARTLETT/IL
01/07/15, 3:24 PM (630) 550-07 41 Incoming
01/07/15, 4:19 PM (781) 820-1452 to SAUGUS/MA 2
01/07/15, 4:51 PM (732) 895-1266 to Ml DDLETOVVN/NJ
01/07/15, 4:56 PM (781) 241-7707 Incoming
01/07/15, 5:03 PM (732) 591-0842 Incoming 11
01/07/15, 6:17 PM (617) 224-6553 to BOSTON/MA (F) 8
01/07/15, 7:07 PM (978) 289-3667 Incoming
01/07/15, 7:17 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
01/07/15, 7:20 PM (781) 953-5412 to REVERE/MA (A) 10
01/07/15, 7:29 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming (A)
01/07/15, 7:30 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 5
01/07/15, 8:04 PM (781) 771-4456 to LYNN/MA (F) 3
01/07/15, 8:50 PM (617) 605-4500 to MALDEN/MA 2
01/07/15, 9:13 PM (617) 605-4500 Incoming 30
01 /08/15, 9:40 AM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 8
01 /08/15, 9:49 AM (563) 549-6181 Incoming (A)
01/08/15, 9:50 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
01/08/15, 9:56 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
01/08/15, 10:11 AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL
01/08/15, 10:12 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
01 /08/15, 10:46 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
01/08/15, 11:08AM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL 2
01/08/15, 11:12AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
01/08/15, 11:17 AM (786) 326-2803 Incoming
01/08/15, 1:56 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 2
01/08/15, 2:36 PM (508) 843-1919 Incoming 8
01 /08/15, 2:44 PM 123 VM Retrieval (G)
01 /08/15, 2:45 PM (617) 593-9111 to BOSTON/MA
01/08/15, 3:19 PM (617) 593-9111 to BOSTON/MA 14
01/08/15, 4:07 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 5
01/08/15, 4:14 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming 4
01/08/15, 4:39 PM (786) 326-2803 to MIAMI/FL (A) 7
01 /08/15, 4:45 PM (781) 760-2680 Incoming (A) 2
01/08/15, 5:02 PM (786) 326-2803 Incoming 3
01 /08/15, 5:46 PM (617) 699-6998 Incoming 11
01/08/15, 7:07 PM (978) 500-9000 to IPSV\1CH/MA 2
01/08/15, 7:12 PM (781) 581-9994 to LYNN/MA
01/08/15, 7:16 PM (978) 500-9000 Incoming 6
Total: 2,150 $0.00
Text
12/09/14, 6:21 PM (781) 760-2680 Winchester, MA Incoming Text
12/09/14, 6:21 PM (781) 760-2680 Winchester, MA Incoming Text
12/10/14, 5:04 AM (781) 389-5985 Winchester, MA Outgoing Text
12/10/14, 5:07 AM (781) 389-5985 Winchester, MA Outgoing Text
Page AS of A37

Information Provided To:
Agency: Attorney/Other
Requestor: Ibrahim Salah
Agent Address: United States Attorney's Office
Billing City, State, Zip: Boston, MA 02210‐0000 Request Submission Response
Provided On: May 16, 2018
This is in response to the Subpoena, 1:17CR10092, dated May 04, 2018, which was served upon T‐Mobile US, Inc. You have requested information for the
subscriber associated with MSISDN: 7812444474. All times below are reflected in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).
No Records were found for MSISDN 7812444474 for the period of June 01, 2014 ‐ March 01, 2015. Call Detail Records are maintained for a period of 24 months, after which
they are overwritten and cannot be retrieved.
Information Provided By:
T‐Mobile US, Inc. 4 Sylvan Way, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Page: 1 of 1
Law Enforcement Relations Tel: 866‐537‐0911; Fax: 973‐292‐8697
Billing City, State, Zip: Boston, MA 02210‐0000 Request Submission Response
This is in response to the Subpoena, 1:17CR10092, dated May 04, 2018, which was served upon T‐Mobile US, Inc. You have requested information for the
subscriber associated with MSISDN: 7812444474. All times below are reflected in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).
No Records were found for MSISDN 7812444474 for the period of June 01, 2014 ‐ March 01, 2015. Call Detail Records are maintained for a period of 24 months, after which
they are overwritten and cannot be retrieved.
Information Provided By:
T‐Mobile US, Inc. 4 Sylvan Way, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Page: 1 of 1
Law Enforcement Relations Tel: 866‐537‐0911; Fax: 973‐292‐8697
Billing City, State, Zip: Boston, MA 02210‐0000
This is in response to the Subpoena, 1:17CR10092, dated May 04, 2018, which was serve
requested Information for the subscriber associated with MSISDN: 7812444474.
Subscriber Details:
Subscriber Name MEDI MIRNASIRI
Subscriber Address 7 NECTAR PL, NAHANT, MA 0
Subscriber Status Active
Subscriber Name Effective Date 10/02/2003
Account Details:
Brand TMUS
Activation Date 10/02/2003
Termination Date
Account Name MEDI MIRNASIRI
Account No 236797294
Account Effective Date 10/02/2003
Account Expiration Date
Device Details:
IMSI 310260987627520
MSISDN Expiration Date
MSISDN Disconnect Reason
MSISDN No 7812444474
MSISDN Status Active
MSISDN Market BOM
MSISDN Name MEDI MIRNASIRI
SIM 8901260985776275206
IMEI 358255006346470
Begin Service Date 10/02/2003
Billing Details:
Bill Name MEDI MIRNASIRI
Bill Birth Date 02/22/1960
Bill SSN 373826341
Bill Cycle 6
Bill Address 7 NECTAR PL, NAHANT, MA 0
Company Name MIRNASIRI
Rate Plan ONE60TI
Rate Plan Desc T‐Mobile ONE Unlimited 55
Contact 1 7815994226
Contact 2 7815994226
Coupon
Last Refilled
Ported Details:
Ported Carrier
Request Submission Response
ed upon T‐Mobile US, Inc. You have
1908 USA
1908 USA
Ashley Deaso
From: Caroline Simons

Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 9:15 AM
To: Ashley Deaso; Jessica L. Perry; lauren@cipoletta.com
Subject: Fwd: SA Chizmadia Texts
Attachments: Copy of CHIZMADIA_BB_SMS_Logs_4474_Formatted (006) Text Messages with Medi
2014.xlsx; ATT00001.htm; Copy of CHIZMADIA_Android_SMS_Logs_4474_Formatted
(005) 2015 - Present.xlsx; ATT00002.htm
FYI and FTF
Caroline Simons :: Fish & Richardson P.C. :: 617 956 5907
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Barclay, Kristina (USAMA)" <Kristina.Barclay@usdoj.gov>

Date: May 24, 2018 at 9:07:30 AM EDT
To: Caroline Simons <simons@fr.com>, "'frongillo@fr.com'" <frongillo@fr.com>,
"jcipoletta@post.harvard.edu" <jcipoletta@post.harvard.edu>
Cc: "Richardson, Robert (USAMA)" <Robert.Richardson@usdoj.gov>
Subject: SA Chizmadia Texts
Counsel:
We will send Bates-stamped copies later today, but I wanted to ensure that you received these as
soon as possible. As you will see, there were two spreadsheets because SA Chizmadia switched
from a Blackberry Device to an Android device, and the Blackberry spreadsheet was
inadvertently omitted from the government's 21-day production.
I will forward to you shortly the email production of records from T-Mobile, there is nothing to
inspect at our office as it was sent to us by email.
Kristina
Kristina E. Barclay
Assistant United States Attorney
District of Massachusetts
(617) 748-3371
1
FW: Expedited Request - Tracking ID 1858920

From: Barclay, Kristina (USAMA)
To: 'frongillo@fr.com', Caroline K. Simons, jcipoletta@post.harvard.edu
Cc: Richardson, Robert (USAMA), Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA)
Sent: 5/24/2018 9:18:48 AM
See correspondence with TMobile below.
From: Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA)
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:25 AM
To: LER2 <LER2@TMobile.com>
Cc: Barclay, Kristina (USAMA) <KBarclay@usa.doj.gov>; Elio, Matthew D. (BS) (FBI) <mdelio@fbi.gov>;
Lemanski, Sandra (USAMA) <SLemanski@usa.doj.gov>
Subject: RE: Expedited Request Tracking ID 1858920
Thank you very much. Just checking in on this.
From: LER2 <LER2@T-Mobile.com>
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 9:29 AM
To: Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) <ISalah@usa.doj.gov>
I will have the specialist review.
Thanks,
Yesenia
From: Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) [mailto:Ibrahim.Salah@usdoj.gov]
To: LER2 <LER2@T-Mobile.com>
Cc: Barclay, Kristina (USAMA) <Kristina.Barclay@usdoj.gov>; Elio, Matthew D. (BS) (FBI) <mdelio@fbi.gov>;
Loycano, Stephanie A. (BS) (FBI) <saloycano@fbi.gov>
Thanks but we appear to be missing the records for the time period December 9, 2014January 8, 2015.
From: LER2 <LER2@T-Mobile.com>
Good Morning Salah,
Your request was completed and sent via email to ibrahim.salah@usdoj.gov on 5/17/18. Your Tracking ID
1858920.
Thanks,
Yesenia Gonzalez
Contractor
Main: 9732928911 Email: Yesenia.Gonzalez85@T-Mobile.com
This message contains information that is confidential or privileged. The information is intended for the use of the individual or entity
named above. Said information, when provided to a law enforcement agency to assist in its official duties may also be protected from
disclosure by 5 U.S.C. 522, et seq (“the FOIA Act”) and 5 U.S.C. 552a, et seq. (“the Privacy Act”). If you are not the intended recipient,
be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this
electronic transmission in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and any attachments.
From: Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) [mailto:Ibrahim.Salah@usdoj.gov]
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2018 12:45 PM
To: LER2 <LER2@T-Mobile.com>
Subject: FW: Expedited Request
Importance: High
Just checking in on the status of the response to the attached.
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 1:55 PM
To: 'Cathleen.RodriguezIsmael@TMobile.com' <Cathleen.RodriguezIsmael@T-Mobile.com>
Cc: Barclay, Kristina (USAMA) (KBarclay@usa.doj.gov) <KBarclay@usa.doj.gov>; Elio, Matthew D. (BS) (FBI)
<mdelio@fbi.gov>
Subject: FW: Expedited Request
Importance: High
I hope this email finds you well. As requested, our office has submitted the additional paperwork you
requested. Please let us know what we can do to further expedite this since I had sent the expedited
subpoena on 05/04/18 and was quoted 3 to 5 days from then. I do acknowledge that the expedited form was
not submitted at the time but would have most definitely performed that process if I was told by one of
TMobile subpoena representatives that said was missing during my conversation with her on May 9, 2018.
From: Beckwith, Lauren (USAMA)
Subject: RE: Expedited Request
Please email and let me know when you receive the records.
To: Beckwith, Lauren (USAMA) <LBeckwith@usa.doj.gov>
Subject: RE: Expedited Request
Thank you very much!
From: Beckwith, Lauren (USAMA)
To: LEREXPEDITES@T-MOBILE.COM
Cc: Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) <ISalah@usa.doj.gov>
Subject: Expedited Request
Good Afternoon,
Please see the expedited request for a TMobile phone.
Thank you,
Lauren
Lauren Beckwith
Support Services Supervisor/Contracting Officer
United States Attorney’s Office
Phone: 617-748-3324
FW: Tasks for Case Number: 1:17CR10092, T-Mobile US, Inc. Trackin…
To: Caroline K. Simons, 'frongillo@fr.com', jcipoletta@post.harvard.edu
Cc: Richardson, Robert (USAMA), Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA)
Sent: 5/24/2018 9:19:57 AM
CDR_Mediations_7812444474_4893976.xls
RECEIPT 1858920.pdf 1858920 Certification.pdf
SUB_Tibco_7812444474_4893977.xls
eb919448-87a9-4055-9ef5-903bbfad3153.pdf
Attachments:
b7686421-b1d0-41d6-a2cd-52658a5b9e77.pdf
Interpreting Call Detail Records - 170711.pdf
Interpreting Subscriber Information.pdf
UTC Information Sheet 03302018.pdf
Additional correspondence from TMobile.
Original Message
From: LERinbound@TMobile.com <LERinbound@TMobile.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 10:03 AM
Subject: Tasks for Case Number: 1:17CR10092, TMobile US, Inc. Tracking ID: 1858920
I APOLOGIZE FOR THE ERROR ON RECORDS SENT PRIOR. I HAVE ATTACHED THE TIME FRAME MISSING TO THE END
OF THE RECORDS.
THANK YOU
Ashley Deaso
From: Caroline Simons

Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 5:19 PM
To: Ashley Deaso
Subject: FW: Supplemental Discovery
Attachments: USAO_DECICCO_00025553.pdf; USAO_DECICCO_00025554.pdf; USAO_DECICCO_
00025555.pdf; USAO_DECICCO_00025556.pdf; USAO_DECICCO_00025557.pdf;
USAO_DECICCO_00025548.xlsx; USAO_DECICCO_00025549.pdf; USAO_DECICCO_
00025552.pdf


From: Barclay, Kristina (USAMA) [mailto:Kristina.Barclay@usdoj.gov]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 11:39 AM
To: Caroline Simons <simons@fr.com>; Thomas Frongillo <frongillo@fr.com>; jcipoletta@post.harvard.edu
Cc: Richardson, Robert (USAMA) <Robert.Richardson@usdoj.gov>; Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) <Ibrahim.Salah@usdoj.gov>
Subject: Supplemental Discovery

Counsel:

Attached please find supplemental discovery, bearing Bates Numbers
USAO_DECICCO_00025548 through USAO_DECICCO_00025561.

Kristina

1
From: Barclay, Kristina (USAMA) <Kristina.Barclay@usdoj.gov>

Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 2:44 PM
To: Caroline Simons; Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA); Richardson, Robert (USAMA)
Cc: Thomas Frongillo; jcipoletta@post.harvard.edu
Subject: RE: Defense Exhibits
Caroline:
As I stated in the discovery hearing, we have completed the review of CW‐1’s phone, with the
exception of some video/audio files that postdate the offense at issue in this case and
therefore would be entirely irrelevant. Nevertheless, we intend to review but are having
technical difficulties reviewing. When the review is complete I will let you know.
I have completed the review per my representations to Judge Hennessy and there is nothing
to produce pursuant to his order.
Kristina
From: Caroline Simons <simons@fr.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2018 10:46 PM
To: Barclay, Kristina (USAMA) <KBarclay@usa.doj.gov>; Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) <ISalah@usa.doj.gov>; Richardson,
Robert (USAMA) <RRichardson@usa.doj.gov>
Cc: Thomas Frongillo <frongillo@fr.com>; jcipoletta@post.harvard.edu
Kristina,
As we have laid out in much of our pretrial briefing to date, we disagree with the government’s position that the
testimony of the proposed defense witnesses is irrelevant. We confirm that at this time we are declining your request
to prepare and provide to the government a preview of the expected testimony of the defense witnesses, and we will
defer to the Court’s guidance on this issue.
We confirm that our investigator did not prepare or otherwise take any statements of defense witnesses as defined by
Rule 26.2/Jencks, which is what the government is entitled to. We confirm again that we have produced all statements
within our possession, custody, and control (with the exception of GJ transcripts and 302s), and we will supplement our
production if need be. We respectfully refuse to disclose or produce any materials or communications to the
government that constitute attorney work product, including our internal emails, notes, memoranda, etc. pertaining to
these witnesses.
While we are on the topic of discovery, please confirm if the government has completed its review of (1) CW‐1’s phone;
as well as (2) any 302s regarding attempts to identify the source of the alleged threatening calls; and (3) the FBI agents’
notes, per the government’s representations and Magistrate Judge Hennessy’s ruling during the May 10, 2018 hearing.
1
We also plan on providing updated witness/exhibit lists tomorrow morning, along with the anticipated production
discussed earlier this evening.

Regards,
Caroline


To: Caroline Simons <simons@fr.com>; Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) <Ibrahim.Salah@usdoj.gov>; Richardson, Robert
(USAMA) <Robert.Richardson@usdoj.gov>

Caroline:

It’s impossible to file objections if we do not know what the witnesses are going to testify
about. While we have interviewed some of these individuals, their testimony as far as we can
tell would be entirely irrelevant to this case. Please confirm that you are refusing to provide
this information so that we may inform the Court.

Please also confirm that your investigator took no notes and wrote no reports, emails, texts,
etc. regarding any interviews of individuals on your witness list. If such materials exist, please
produce them tomorrow morning.

We anticipate providing updated witness and exhibit lists tomorrow morning.

Kristina


Counsel:

We will provide additional exhibits that we have in our possession, custody, and control tomorrow morning.

With respect to your request for a “general description of the relevant testimony” for the proposed defense witnesses
you have identified, we are not presently aware of any authority requiring us to provide you with disclosures of their
anticipated testimony. We note that the government has not offered to provide a synopsis of the expected testimony of
its witnesses. Please let us know what authority you are relying on, however, and we will review your request. As you
know, we have voluntarily provided you with the witness statements we have in our possession, custody, and control
2
(with the exception of grand jury testimony and reports of FBI interviews that we received from your office). We also
understand that the government has interviewed a number of the defense witnesses already and is in possession of
their statements; indeed, the government is in possession of at least one grand jury transcript of a defense witness we
do not have access to.

Thank you.

Regards,
Caroline


Cc: Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) <Ibrahim.Salah@usdoj.gov>; Richardson, Robert (USAMA) <Robert.Richardson@usdoj.gov>
Subject: Defense Exhibits

Counsel:

We are missing from the defense production proposed exhibits 98‐103, 105 and 106. Please
provide those first thing tomorrow morning.

In addition, please provide tomorrow morning a general description of the relevant testimony
the following proposed defense witnesses would offer:

3. Detective Stacey Forni
5. Lieutenant Robert Wells
6. Richard Aswad
7. Steven Bagnera
8. Marty Barnes
9. Maria Bazzi
10. Alen Bejtovic
11. Andrew Bisignani
12. Sharon Boggs
13. Liran Cohen
14. Mark Cullinan
15. Lawrence Cunningham
16. Nicholas D’Angelo
17. John D’Olimpio
18. Kimberly DeBenedictis
19. Vincent DeBenedictis
20. Linda DeCicco
21. Daniel DiLullo
22. Albert DiVenuti
23. Scott Grieves
24. Farzad Hagayegi
25. Robert Inello
3
26. Sui Chang Li
27. Charles Lightbody
28. John Lloyd
29. Alfred Lopilato
30. Sean McMahon
31. Richard Magnan
32. George Mastoras
33. Saad Moustafa
34. Corina Milian
35. Joseph Oteri
36. Julia Papagno
37. Richard Salvo
38. Richard Scourtas
39. Sherry Soleymani
40. Noelle Spinosa
41. John Taglieri
42. Ralph Texeira
43. Fred Varone
44. Peter Varone, Jr.

Kristina

Kristina E. Barclay
(617) 748‐3371

***************************************************************************************************
*************************
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information. Any unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
message.
***************************************************************************************************
*************************
***************************************************************************************************
*************************
message.
***************************************************************************************************
*************************
4
Ashley Deaso
From: Thomas Frongillo

Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 6:36 PM
To: Ashley Deaso; lauren@cipoletta.com
Cc: jcipoletta@comcast.net
Subject: FW: Discovery
Attachments: USAO_DECICCO_00024929.pdf; USAO_DECICCO_00024989.pdf
Thomas Frongillo :: Principal

Fish & Richardson P.C.
+1-617-521-7050 direct :: frongillo@fr.com
fr.com
To: Thomas Frongillo <frongillo@fr.com>; Caroline Simons <simons@fr.com>; jcipoletta@post.harvard.edu
Subject: Discovery

Counsel:

Attached are documents that we realized during trial preparations were inadvertently omitted
from discovery. The texts are between David Witham and SA Elio.

Kristina

Kristina E. Barclay
(617) 748‐3371

1
Andrew E. Le/ling
United States Attorney
District ofMassachusetts
Main Reception: (617) 748-3100 John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse
I Courthouse Way
Suite 9200
March 20, 2018
By Hand
Thomas C. Frongillo
Fish & Richardson
1 Marina Park Drive
Boston, MA 02210

Dear Counsel:
The government responds to your sixteen-page, forty-request discovery letter dated

March 6, 2018, as follows:
By setting forth specific objections herein, the government does not waive its right to
raise further objections to the discovery requests.
By producing information in response to any request, the government does not admit that
it is required to make such production under Local Rule 116.l(c)(l) or Local Rule 116.2(b)(l),
and the government does not waive any objections it may have to the relevance or admissibility
of such information in a trial of this matter.
The government objects to the requests to the extent they call for information in the
possession, custody or control of the Saugus Police Department or any law enforcement agency
other than the United States Attorney's Office for the"District of Massachusetts, the Federal·
Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Revenue Service - Criminal Investigation and the
Massachusetts State Police. The term "government" as used herein is limited to the United
States Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts, the Federal Bureau oflnvestigation,
the Internal Revenue Service - Criminal Investigation, and the Massachusetts State Police.
The government objects to the requests to the extent they mischaracterize and misstate
the facts of this case. While the government notes several inaccuracies below, its failure to
identify each and every one of the misstatements and mischaracterizations is not an admission
that any of the statements contained in the defendant's voluminous discovery requests is
accurate.
The government objects to the requests to the extent they call for information the
government is not required to provide, or that it is not required to provide until 21 days before
trial or pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3500. The government declines to produce such information in
response to the requests, except as specifically set forth below.
The government objects to these requests to the extent they call for "books, papers,
possession, custody, or control," and various iterations of these categories of information. Aside
from the fact that the government cannot produce a building or place to the defendant, these
categories of information are overbroad and call for the production of information which is
protected by various privileges and protections, as well as other information to which the
defendant is not entitled at this time.
With regard to specific requests, subject to the objections and limitations above, the
government responds as follows:
1. Enclosed are responsive documents in the government's possession, custody and

control that are not publically available to the defendant.
USAO- DECICCO- 00003130 to USAO- DECICCO 00003148.

control which have not already been provided to the defendant.
USAO- DECICCO- 00003149 to USAO- DECICCO 00003162.
3. The government has no responsive documents in its possession, custody or control

which have not already been produced to the defendant and which the government is
required to produce under Local Rule 116.1 (c)(1) or Local Rule 116.2(b)(1 ).


required to produce under Local Rule 116.l(c)(l) or Local Rule 116.2(b)(l).


2

USAO DECICCO 00003163.
10. The government has no responsive documents in its possession, custody or control.
USAO- DECICCO 0003164 to USAO- DECICCO- 0003221. To the extent that
Request 11 calls for documents related to "law enforcement's efforts to identify" an
individual, "law enforcement's efforts to investigate and identify" an individual, or
the "FBI's efforts to investigate" an incident, the government declines to provide any
responsive information on the grounds that such information is protected by the
investigative privilege and the government is not required to produce such
information.
12. There is no request number 12.
required to produce under Local Rule 116.1 (c)(1) or Local Rule 116.2(b)(1 ). With
respect to Request 14(2), the government notes that Paragraph 19 of the Elio
Affidavit does not state that CW-3 instructed CW-2 to tell CW-1 that "this would
teach CW-1 'how to talk to a lady"'. The government further notes, with respect to
Request 14(4), that CW-1 called 911 after the assault on January 11, 2015. FBI Task
Force Officer James Donovan, a member of the Saugus Police Department, notified
FBI Special Agent Jesse Chizmadia of the assault on or about January 11 or 12, 2015 .
FBI evidence technicians responded to the location on or about January 13, 2015, as
set forth in reports previous!y produced. Due to his injuries, CW-1 was unable to be
interviewed about the assault by SA Chizmadia until February 11, 2015.
USAO DECICCO 0003222.
required to produce under Local Rule 116.1 (c)(1) or Local Rule 1 l 6.2(b )(1 ).
17. Enclosed and produced pursuant to the protective order are responsive documents in
the government's possession, custody and control which have not already been
3
provided to the defendant. USAO_DECICCO_00003223. The government also has

made available for the defendant's inspection voluminous records relating to bank
accounts over which the defendant exercised control, which may contain documents
responsive to Request 17.
USAO DECICCO- 00003224 to USAO- DECICCO 00003225.
USAO- DECICCO- 0003226.
23. With respect to the first paragraph of Request 23, the government has no responsive
documents in its possession, custody or control which have not already been
produced to the defendant and which the government is required to produce under
Local Rule 116.1 (c )(1) or Local Rule 116.2(b)(1 ). With respect to the second
paragraph of Request 23, to the extent it is a request and not a comment on the
government's investigation, the government declines to produce any information
which it has not already provided to the defendant, on the grounds that it is subject to
law enforcement privileges and work product protection.
24. The government notes that this information is not actually "discoverable under Fed.
R. Crim. P. 16(1)(1)(E)(i) ... Fed R. Crim. P. 16(a)(l)(B)(i) and Local Rule
116.l(c)(l)(A)." Regardless, enclosed are responsive materials in the government's
possession, custody and control which have not already been provided to the
defendant. USAO DECICCO 0003227 to USAO DECICCO 0003228.
required to produce under Local Rule 116.1 (c)(1) or Local Rule l 16.2(b)(1 ).
26. The government made its Fed.R.CrimP. 16(a)(l)(E)(i) disclosures on May 26, 2017.
It will make further disclosures regarding its anticipated exhibits on May 14, 2018,
pursuant to Docket No. 152.
4
which have not already been produced to the defendant.
USAO_DECICCO_ 00003229 to USAO_DECICCO_0003243. The government
notes that the following statement is not accurate: "During the timeframe of the
alleged attempted extortion, federal agents and the Massachusetts State Police
approached Mr. DeCicco and requested him to cooperate on at least two instances,
including during the summer of 2013 and after Mr. DeCicco's arrest on March 17,
2017." The government is not aware that any law enforcement agent asked for
DeCicco's cooperation in 2013 or 2017. In fact, the defendant's prior attorney,
Michael Kendall, approached the government well after DeCicco's March 2017 arrest
and offered DeCicco 's cooperation in an effort to get DeCicco released from prison
pending trial. Please contact undersigned counsel or Mr. Kendall for more
information regarding those conversations, which took place between counsel and
never in the presence of the defendant.
30. The government is unaware of any inconsistent statements made to the FBI as to why
CW-1 believed he was assaulted on January 11, 2015.
32. The government is not aware that any agent or attorney threatened to prosecute a
witness in this matter if he or she did not change their account of events, or warned a
witness to be careful what he or she said to defense attorneys or investigators or they
will be prosecuted. The remainder of Request 32 calls for the production of
information the government is not required to disclose under Local Rule 116.l(c)(l)
or Local Rule 116.2(b)(l).
33. Request 33 calls for the production of information the government is not required to
disclose under Local Rule 116.l(c)(l) or Local Rule 116.2(b)(l).
37. The government will make the disclosures required by Local Rule l 16.2(b)(2)
regarding testifying witnesses 21 days before trial.
USAO_DECICCO_0001262. The government declines to provide information in
response to subsections (1), (2), (3) and (5) because the government is not required to
5
provide such information under Local Rule 116.l(c)(l) or Local Rule 116.2(b)(l). In
addition, some or all of the information requested in these subsections is Classified.
In response to subsection (4), the government incorporates by reference its May 26,
2017 automatic disclosures. In response to subsections (6) and (7), the government is
not required to provide such information under Local Rule 116.1 (c)(1) or Local Rule
116.2(b)(l), but nevertheless states that it has no responsive information in its
possession, custody or control. The government declines to provide information in
response to subsections (8) through (16) because the government is not required to
provide such information under Local Rule 116.l(c)(l) or Local Rule 116.2(b)(l).
The government has no documents responsive to subsections (17) and (18) in its
possession, custody or control.
39. The government has no responsive information in its possession, custody or control.
Also enclosed are records obtained from Wyatt Detention Facility,

USAO_DECICCO_ 00003101 to USAO_DECICCO_00003129. In addition, enclosed is a
replacement disk for USAO_DECICCO_00000150 to USAO_DECICCO_00001228.
Please call the undersigned Assistant U.S. Attorney at 617-748-3371 if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
ANDREW E. LELLING
By: ls/Kristina E. Barclay

Kristina E. Barclay
Encl:
Discs containing:
USAO- DECICCO- 00003101 to
USAO DECICCO 00003243
Replacement Disc for:

USAO- DECICCO- 00000150 to
USAO DECICCO 00001228
Password for discs:
Moakley123!
6
Andrew E. Lelling
Main Reception: (617) 748-3100 John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse
1 Courthouse Way
Suite 9200
May 24, 2018
By E-Mail
Thomas C. Frongillo
Fish & Richardson
1 Marina Park Drive
Boston, MA 02210

Dear Counsel:
This morning we searched the extraction report for Mr. Mirnasiri’s phone for the phone
numbers associated with SA Chizmadia and Det. Lt. Frenzo. As a supplement to the
government’s 21-day production, I have enclosed additional text messages between SA
Chizmadia and Mr. Mirnasiri that were included in the extraction report from Mr. Mirnasiri’s
cellular telephone, which inexplicably do not show up on the FBI report of text messages. See
USAO_DECICCO_00025565 through USAO_DECICCO_00025686. As you can see from the
SMS Index page of document number USAO_DECICCO_00024502, the request for SA
Chizmadia’s texts was for the time period August 2014 to “no end date.” We have reached out
to the FBI technicians who process these requests to ensure that we have produced all texts
between SA Chizmadia and Mr. Mirnasiri in the government’s possession, custody and control.
Mr. Mirnasiri’s phone extraction report contained no text messages with Det. Lt. Frenzo.
Also enclosed, as a supplement to the government’s 21-day production, are text messages
between SA Elio and Mr. Mirnasiri from January 2018 until present, and three recent email. See
USAO_DECICCO_00025687 through USAO_DECICCO_00025702. We are in the process of
double-checking to make sure that all text messages between SA Elio and Mr. Mirnasiri
contained in the extraction report for Mr. Mirnasiri’s phone were provided either today or on
May 8, 2018.
Mr. Mirnasiri is the victim in this case. Though not required to do so, he voluntarily
produced his phone to the government for review. The earliest phone call entry on the phone log
and the earliest SSM and MMS messages recovered from Mr. Mirnasisi’s phone are from July
19, 2016. As you know, we previously had reviewed the entirety of the extraction report for
relevant or exculpatory information, including information beyond the August 2014 to January
2015 time period. Believing all of SA Chizmadia’s text messages had been provided by the FBI
technicians and produced to the Defendant, we did not previously produce them.
We do not believe we are required to turn over the entire extraction report for 2014 and
2015, which may include personal and business information for Mr. Mirnasiri, to the extent it has
nothing to do with the case or is not exculpatory in some way.
Please call the undersigned Assistant U.S. Attorneys at 617-748-3371 if you have any
questions.
Very truly yours,
ANDREW E. LELLING
By: /s/Kristina E. Barclay

Kristina E. Barclay
Robert E. Richardson
Assistant U.S. Attorneys
Encl:
USAO_DECICCO_00025565 through USAO_DECICCO_00025702
2
Ashley Deaso
From: Barclay, Kristina (USAMA) <Kristina.Barclay@usdoj.gov>

To: Caroline Simons; Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA); Richardson, Robert (USAMA)
Cc: Thomas Frongillo; jcipoletta@post.harvard.edu
Counsel –

We have completed the review of all content on the phone that we were able to access.

Kristina

Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 2:44 PM
To: 'Caroline Simons' <simons@fr.com>; Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) <ISalah@usa.doj.gov>; Richardson, Robert (USAMA)
<RRichardson@usa.doj.gov>

Caroline:

As I stated in the discovery hearing, we have completed the review of CW‐1’s phone, with the
exception of some video/audio files that postdate the offense at issue in this case and
therefore would be entirely irrelevant. Nevertheless, we intend to review but are having
technical difficulties reviewing. When the review is complete I will let you know.

I have completed the review per my representations to Judge Hennessy and there is nothing
to produce pursuant to his order.

Kristina


Kristina,

1
As we have laid out in much of our pretrial briefing to date, we disagree with the government’s position that the
testimony of the proposed defense witnesses is irrelevant. We confirm that at this time we are declining your request
to prepare and provide to the government a preview of the expected testimony of the defense witnesses, and we will
defer to the Court’s guidance on this issue.

We confirm that our investigator did not prepare or otherwise take any statements of defense witnesses as defined by
Rule 26.2/Jencks, which is what the government is entitled to. We confirm again that we have produced all statements
within our possession, custody, and control (with the exception of GJ transcripts and 302s), and we will supplement our
production if need be. We respectfully refuse to disclose or produce any materials or communications to the
government that constitute attorney work product, including our internal emails, notes, memoranda, etc. pertaining to
these witnesses.

While we are on the topic of discovery, please confirm if the government has completed its review of (1) CW‐1’s phone;
as well as (2) any 302s regarding attempts to identify the source of the alleged threatening calls; and (3) the FBI agents’
notes, per the government’s representations and Magistrate Judge Hennessy’s ruling during the May 10, 2018 hearing.

We also plan on providing updated witness/exhibit lists tomorrow morning, along with the anticipated production
discussed earlier this evening.

Regards,
Caroline


To: Caroline Simons <simons@fr.com>; Salah, Ibrahim (USAMA) <Ibrahim.Salah@usdoj.gov>; Richardson, Robert
(USAMA) <Robert.Richardson@usdoj.gov>

Caroline:

It’s impossible to file objections if we do not know what the witnesses are going to testify
about. While we have interviewed some of these individuals, their testimony as far as we can
tell would be entirely irrelevant to this case. Please confirm that you are refusing to provide
this information so that we may inform the Court.

Please also confirm that your investigator took no notes and wrote no reports, emails, texts,
etc. regarding any interviews of individuals on your witness list. If such materials exist, please
produce them tomorrow morning.

We anticipate providing updated witness and exhibit lists tomorrow morning.

Kristina

2

Counsel:

We will provide additional exhibits that we have in our possession, custody, and control tomorrow morning.

With respect to your request for a “general description of the relevant testimony” for the proposed defense witnesses
you have identified, we are not presently aware of any authority requiring us to provide you with disclosures of their
anticipated testimony. We note that the government has not offered to provide a synopsis of the expected testimony of
its witnesses. Please let us know what authority you are relying on, however, and we will review your request. As you
know, we have voluntarily provided you with the witness statements we have in our possession, custody, and control
(with the exception of grand jury testimony and reports of FBI interviews that we received from your office). We also
understand that the government has interviewed a number of the defense witnesses already and is in possession of
their statements; indeed, the government is in possession of at least one grand jury transcript of a defense witness we
do not have access to.

Thank you.

Regards,
Caroline


Subject: Defense Exhibits

Counsel:

We are missing from the defense production proposed exhibits 98‐103, 105 and 106. Please
provide those first thing tomorrow morning.

In addition, please provide tomorrow morning a general description of the relevant testimony
the following proposed defense witnesses would offer:

3. Detective Stacey Forni
5. Lieutenant Robert Wells
6. Richard Aswad
7. Steven Bagnera
8. Marty Barnes
9. Maria Bazzi
10. Alen Bejtovic
3
11. Andrew Bisignani
12. Sharon Boggs
13. Liran Cohen
14. Mark Cullinan
15. Lawrence Cunningham
16. Nicholas D’Angelo
17. John D’Olimpio
18. Kimberly DeBenedictis
19. Vincent DeBenedictis
20. Linda DeCicco
21. Daniel DiLullo
22. Albert DiVenuti
23. Scott Grieves
24. Farzad Hagayegi
25. Robert Inello
26. Sui Chang Li
27. Charles Lightbody
28. John Lloyd
29. Alfred Lopilato
30. Sean McMahon
31. Richard Magnan
32. George Mastoras
33. Saad Moustafa
34. Corina Milian
35. Joseph Oteri
36. Julia Papagno
37. Richard Salvo
38. Richard Scourtas
39. Sherry Soleymani
40. Noelle Spinosa
41. John Taglieri
42. Ralph Texeira
43. Fred Varone
44. Peter Varone, Jr.

Kristina

Kristina E. Barclay
(617) 748‐3371

***************************************************************************************************
*************************
4
message.
***************************************************************************************************
*************************
***************************************************************************************************
*************************
message.
***************************************************************************************************
*************************

2018 05 24 DeCicco Motion To Dismiss Detail

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

2018 05 24 DeCicco Motion To Dismiss Detail

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Case 1:17-cr-10092-NMG Document 304 Filed 05/25/18 Page 1 of 42

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MEMORANDUM OF DEFENDANT GARY DECICCO IN SUPPORT OF

for their own separate objectives.

investigation in an unsuccessful attempt to set up Mr. DeCicco. No standard reports were

can never be restored.

the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose

based on governmental misconduct.

I. Overview of the Government’s Theory of the Case

attempted extortion. FBI Special Agent Jesse Chizmadia—the handler of Mirnasiri as a

III. Miransiri’s Status as an FBI Confidential Human Source

Dkt. No. 3-1 ¶ 5.

IV. The Investigation of the Flower Incident on August 4-6, 2014

A. Mirnasiri’s Reports to the Saugus Police Department

1. Events on August 4, 2014

2. The Alleged Blocked Call

whether, in fact, any such call was even made.

3. Mr. DeCicco’s Prior Alleged Harassment of Mirnasiri

to the flower, cross, and note. See Dkt. No. 35-13 ¶ 24

4. Events on August 6, 2014

5. The Second Alleged Blocked Call

near to the florist where the flowers were purchased. Id.

C. The Purported Failure to Request Mirnasiri’s Telephone Records

Mirnasiri had just fabricated a story about them.

Court in support of his incarceration was false.

2014, Agent Chizmadia finally called Mirnasiri back.

2014, Mirnasiri and Agent Chizmadia communicated 8 times.

VI. Agent Chizmadia’s Supervision of Mirnasiri’s Contact with the Defendant on

period, and had at least one in-person meeting.

Agent Chizmadia called Mirnasiri, and they spoke for 5 minutes.

Scourtas agreed to make the call to Mirnasiri.

15 at 30:13-20, see also Section IX, infra.

VII. The FBI’s Continued Investigation After Assault

of the scene, collecting specimens of physical evidence. See Ex. 16.

A. The Continued, Purported, and Now Selective Failure to Request Mirnasiri’s

flower delivery incident, but not the assault.

B. The February 11, 2015 Interview of Mirnasiri by FBI Agent Chizmadia

February 11, 2015 read in its entirety:

February 11, 2015 – Mirnasiri reported being assaulted by an Unidentified White

Second 302 Report is discussed in more detail in Section VII.A, infra.

C. The FD-1057 Laboratory Forms Reflecting Inconsistent and Exculpatory

Mirnasiri attributed the assault to an outstanding debt he owed to Mr. DeCicco:

initiated on July 6, 2011.

or what he meant when he said “it stopped shortly after.” Ex. 1.

A. The Government’s Preparation of Misleading FBI FD-302 Reports to

Mirnasiri and Agent Chizmadia prior to December 28, 2014.

Procedures (MAOP), Part 2, Section 10-13.3 (emphasis supplied).

entered into the investigative file.9

B. The Government’s Preparation of Affidavits In Support of the Criminal

telephone records, “wherever possible,” to corroborate the information provided by cooperating

assault. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 3-1 ¶¶ 17, 20, 23.

A. The Government’s Representation that the FBI First Talked to Mirnasiri on

THE COURT: Right. I’m considering the strength of the evidence as

Ex. 15 at 55:24-56:5 (Nov. 3, 2017); and:

assault, that they had no contact:

C. The Government’s Representation that the FBI Approached Mirnasiri, and

Defendant’s assertion that CW-1 “manipulates law enforcement” is argument, not

the final detention hearing, arguing:

way round. See Section V, supra.

X. The Government’s Failure to Produce or Suppression of Material and Exculpatory

Prejudicial, Suspicious, and Eve-of-Trial Production

USAO_DECICCO_00025283 with USAO_DECCICCO_00025321). When confronted about

A. The Failure to Produce Mr. DeCicco’s Recorded Statements

government has not produced them.

B. The Selective Failure to Produce Mirnasiri’s Communications with the

within its possession.