Eddy Alexandre’s initial court appearance and what’s next
EminiFX owner Eddy Alexandre was arrested in New York on May 12th.
Later that same day Alexandre made his initial court appearance.
Here’s what happened, and what’s next.
At Alexandre’s initial appearance, bail was set as per the following conditions:
- bail was set at $3 million, secured by two homes, a BMW and Mercedes-Benz;
- Alexandre is prohibited from travelling outside the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York;
- Alexandre must surrender his travel documents (passports etc.), and is prohibited from acquiring new documents;
- Alexandre is subject to pretrial supervision, to be determined by pretrial services;
- Alexandre is subject to home incarceration, including 24/7 location monitoring and enforcement by a 23/7 security guard;
- Alexandre will pay the cost of his location monitoring and security guard;
- Alexandre cannot use EminiFX investor fUpdate 16th June 2022 – A consented proposed preliminary injunction was filed on June 14th.unds to pay for monitoring and the guard;
- Alexandre is banned from “working in (the) investing/financial industry”;
- Alexandre cannot open any new bank accounts without approval from pretrial services;
- Alexandre must disclose his cryptocurrency accounts to pretrial services; and
- Alexandre cannot make any cryptocurrency transactions without prior approval.
In light of the restraining order granted against Alexandre in parallel CFTC civil proceedings, assets tied to EminiFX have been placed under control of a Temporary Receiver.
This renders some of the conditions above, such as those pertaining to EminiFX assets, moot.
Looking forward, a preliminary hearing has been scheduled for 13th June.
This is not to be confused with the preliminary injunction hearing scheduled for May 24th, as part of the CFTC’s civil case.
While Alexandre’s criminal case and the CFTC’s civil case overlap the same alleged fraudulent conduct, they are separate proceedings.
Typically we civil proceedings stayed at some point, pending the outcome of related criminal proceedings.
That hasn’t happened yet. Given the appointment of a Receiver, I’m unsure if it will happen either. Typically the faster a Receiver acts the more is recovered.
We’ll have to wait and see how both cases continue to play out.
Update 23rd May 2022 – It looks like preliminary injunction hearings are set to be delayed.
On May 20th the DOJ filed a joint letter motion, requesting the scheduled May 24th preliminary injunction hearing be delayed.
The parties jointly move the Court to extend the effect of the SRO through June 7, 2022, and to adjourn the hearing on the Commission’s motion for a preliminary injunction to that same date.
Adjournment will provide Defendant Alexandre with additional time to meet with his counsel prior to any preliminary injunction hearing and will provide all parties the opportunity to attempt to negotiate a consent preliminary injunction in lieu of a contested hearing.
An order on the motion remains pending but I expect it will be granted later today.
Update 27th May 2022 – The joint letter motion was granted.
The EminiFX preliminary injunction hearing has been rescheduled for June 7th.
Update 4th June 2022 – At the request of Eddy Alexandre’s attorney, the preliminary hearing has been pushed back to June 17th.
Defendant Eddy Alexandre was detained between May 12 and May 31, 2022, with limited access to counsel.
The requested adjournment will allow time for Mr. Alexandre to consult with counsel regarding the allegations in this action and the CFTC’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
If an agreement is reached on the preliminary injunction, it is to be filed by June 15th.
Update 16th June 2022 – A consented proposed preliminary injunction was filed on June 14th.
Is there any doubt the two homes and luxury cars were purchased with stolen funds? Why then are they available to the defendant to secure the bond? If Eddy were to manage to skip bail, he’d only be saying good-bye to money that was going to be seized anyway. I mean, WTF?
@Oz: is “23/7 security guard” a typo, or is that a real thing?
As I understand it the assets are owned by third-parties. Whether they were purchased with EminiFX funds or not is unclear.
Yeah 23/7 is definitely what it says in the filing. I don’t know if it’s a typo or if 23/7 is a thing with guards.
A Google search suggests it’s not a thing so I’m going with typo. I’ll add [sic] to remove any confusion on the reader’s behalf.
Is there any link between Emini FX and Novatec since they were performing in the same Haitian Community and especially the SDÀs followers avid of money?
Beyond sharing religious affinity fraud, possibly between the same community is sounds like, I’m not aware of any hard connection between EminiFX and NovaTech.
Cynthia Petion leans heavily into her reverend schtick for a reason.
Article updated with news of prelim injunction hearing delay.