Armenta’s OneCoin class-action lawyers gone in just 3 weeks

15 Comments on “Armenta’s OneCoin class-action lawyers gone in just 3 weeks”

#1

Semjon

Mar 10th, 2021 at 4:37 pm  Semjon(Q)

Gilbert Armenta is soon going to testify in a trial unralated to OneCoin, but OneCoin might be brought when the defense tries to demolish his credibility as a witness (in a standard legal tactic.)

This was reported yeasterday by Matthew Russel Lee of InneR City Press:

Defense lawyer: You knew Armenta’s money was illegal, correct?

Hargreaves: Yes.

Defense: And you knew about OneCoin, correct?

Hargreaves: Yes.

Defense: And a connection between Gary Murphy and Armenta, right?

Hargreaves: Yes.

Defense lawyer: And you knew OneCoin was a Ponzi, right?

AUSA: Objection [!]

Judge Rakoff: It’s his opinion.

Hargreaves: Yes. OneCoin was a crypto currency fraud.

Defense lawyer: You were getting involved with Armenta to get involved in laundering illegal gambling money, right?

Hargreaves: I wanted to do well for my company.

Defense lawyer: Armenta had a bank in Georgia, right?

Hargreaves: Yes, I think so.

(twitter.com/innercitypress/status/1369336532117622788)

I checked the docket of that case from Courtlister (courtlistener.com/docket/16976912/united-states-v-weigand/), and I’m convinced that “CW-1” e.g in this filing is Armenta.

courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.533919/gov.uscourts.nysd.533919.70.1.pdf

Now with Armenta tied to this case and the Hobbs Act extortion act being mentioned in relation to CW-1, it pretty much cofirms his identity.

Among other sources of information in this investigation, some of which are discussed below, is a cooperating witness (“CW-1”) with whom Akhavan contracted to receive services to implement the Transaction Laundering Scheme.

According to CW-1—and as corroborated by other evidence—among other roles CW-1 played in the charged conspiracy, CW-1 assisted Weigand, Akhavan, and other co-conspirators in the creation and development of the Phony Merchants and phony merchant websites and the preparation of associated fraudulent merchant applications, agreements, and related documents to submit to banks and financial institutions.

Based in part on his involvement in the bank frank scheme charged in the Indictment, CW-1 has pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit bank fraud, conspiring to commit money laundering, and Hobbs Act extortion offenses pursuant to a cooperation agreement with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.

In connection with CW-1’ s assistance, CW-1 has provided information and records to law enforcement, and hopes to receive leniency at sentencing.

Information provided by CW-1 has been corroborated, in part, by recordings, electronic communications, and other records.

(courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.533919/gov.uscourts.nysd.533919.27.0.pdf)

In Limine filings indicate that the Government intends to put CW-1 in spotlight:

At trial, the Government expects to introduce evidence through CW-1 that explains the circumstances surrounding the development of his criminal relationship with the defendants.

As explained below, this testimony will reflect that the Scheme originated with CW-1, an uncharged co-conspirator (“CC-1”) and Akhavan working towards a payment processing solution involving the processing of transactions from Akhavan’s online adult (i.e. online pornography) business and transactions from Akhavan’s client, the Company.

(courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.533919/gov.uscourts.nysd.533919.169.0.pdf)

This is what Armenta was doing when being released on bail and co-operating with the Feds in OneCoin case. Lol, what a guy. 😀

And this case is what has kept AUSAs Nicholas Folly and Christopher Dimase busy lately.



#2

Semjon

Mar 10th, 2021 at 5:25 pm  Semjon(Q)

Now that I think about it more carefully, CW-1 might not be Armenta after all but someone working close to him who could have participated in the same extortion that Armenta was charged.

Armenta has already botched his co-operation, so I don’t know they would use in the trial.

Instead, someone from the Zala Group like Diane Lynn Cook or William Morro could perhaps be equally good or even better candidates.

William Morro especially, since he was the one who partnered with Armenta acquiring and running the banks in Georgia and Zambia for Ruja and other criminals.:

https://behindmlm.com/companies/onecoin/onecoin-fraud-sars-featured-in-fincen-files-leak/#comment-429136

It’d be incredible if Morro walks away from this without any charges.



#3

Oz

Mar 10th, 2021 at 7:47 pm  Oz(Q)

This is too complicated for me 😀



#4

Semjon

Mar 11th, 2021 at 2:11 am  Semjon(Q)

OK, mystery solved. I was wrong — no Morro or Armenta on trial this time. CW-1’s charges were so similiar to that of Armenta’s that I thought it’s gotta be him.

My second post was closer to the truth. It indeed turned out to be someone involved in the Armenta’s extortion scheme.

Surprisingly, it was this Oliver Hargreaves who was doing the extortion on behalf of Armenta:

Tuesday’s OneCoin revelation surfaced during cross-examination of Hargreaves by a member of Weigand’s defense team, Michael Artan, who quizzed him on how he came to be a cooperating witness having pled guilty to charges of attempted extortion, money laundering and fraud.

Around the time of his arrest in September 2018, Hargreaves said, he had been trying to forcibly collect a $30 million debt on behalf of Ignatova’s onetime boyfriend, Florida financier Gilbert Armenta.

Armenta believed the extortion target stole from him, Hargreaves said.

“You were hoping to get 30% of a $30 million payout, correct?” Artan asked.

“That is correct,” Hargreaves said.

(law360.com/articles/1363008)

In September 2017, Armenta was charged only with counts related to extortion:

courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.480724/gov.uscourts.nysd.480724.4.0.pdf

(I think it was likely a tactical move by the SDNY prosecotrs to not put OneCoin related charges in the first indictment.)

It’s incredible that Armenta apparently continued the extortion activities — through Hargreaves — even after he pleaded guilty and was co-operating with the Feds.

No wonder his plea deal got terminated.



#5

Oz

Mar 11th, 2021 at 8:53 am  Oz(Q)

So what you’re saying is… I don’t need to invest time familiarizing myself with this case too? 😀

edit: Wait, the $30 mill debt was OneCoin related correct?



#6

Semjon

Mar 11th, 2021 at 4:30 pm  Semjon(Q)

Oz:
So what you’re saying is… I don’t need to invest time familiarizing myself with this case too?

edit: Wait, the $30 mill debt was OneCoin related correct?

The OneCoin aspect in this pot case in very tangential, so not worth your time.

It’s not even certain that the $30 million is OneCoin related. It very vell could be, but I don’t think it can be inferred from court docs avalaible. Armenta apparently had other “customers” alongisde Ruja.

BTW, Konstantin released on home incarceration: courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.516497/gov.uscourts.nysd.516497.362.0.pdf



#7

Semjon

Apr 26th, 2021 at 1:54 am  Semjon(Q)

Looks like Gilbert Armenta and Sebastian Greenwood are in danger of getting default judgements in OneCoin Class Action against them — and OneCoin Ltd & Ruja Ignatova are in the pipeline too:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no later than May 5, 2021, Plaintiff must apply for certificates of default against Defendants Armenta and Greenwood.

Within fourteen days of receiving such certificates, Plaintiff must apply for a default judgment against Defendant Armenta and Defendant Greenwood, consistent with the procedures described in Attachment A to the undersigned’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no later than May 5, 2021, Plaintiffs must submit an update on the status of service of the Second Amended Complaint on Defendants OneCoin Ltd. and Ruja Ignatova

(courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.515064/gov.uscourts.nysd.515064.184.0.pdf)



#8

Oz

Apr 26th, 2021 at 5:31 pm  Oz(Q)

Plaintiffs don’t have a good history with these kind of required updates. Let’s see what they do.



#9

Semjon

May 6th, 2021 at 5:01 pm  Semjon(Q)

There now seems to be Default Judgement filing on OneCoin Class Action docket.

courtlistener.com/docket/15064613/grablis-v-onecoin-ltd/?page=2

Not available on Courtlistener as I write so don’t know the details.



#10

Oz

May 6th, 2021 at 5:05 pm  Oz(Q)

Thanks. Back in the office in a bit, will check soon.



#11

Oz

May 6th, 2021 at 9:11 pm  Oz(Q)

@Semjon

The May 5th motion stems from this April 21st order:

ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no later than May 5, 2021, Plaintiff must apply for certificates of default against Defendants Armenta and Greenwood.

Within fourteen days of receiving such certificates, Plaintiff must apply for a default judgment against Defendant Armenta and Defendant Greenwood.

And this April 26th order:

Upon review of the Second Amended Complaint, the Court agrees that service of the SAC on Defendants OneCoin Ltd. and Ruja Ignatova is not necessary under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(a)(2).

Accordingly, no later than May 10, 2021, Plaintiffs must apply for certificates of default against Defendants OneCoin Ltd. and Ruja Ignatova.

Within fourteen days of receiving such certificates, Plaintiffs must apply for a default judgment against Defendant OneCoin and Defendant Ignatova.

The motion is 5 pages long and supported by a 4 page affidavit and 150 pages of exhibits.

I don’t see anything about “certificates” on the docket so I’m not sure the court will accept the motion.

I’ve never heard of certificates so I’m wondering if the court meant entry of defaults, which usually precede motions for default judgment.



#12

Oz

May 6th, 2021 at 9:14 pm  Oz(Q)

Nevermind, just had a look at the motion and its incorrectly filed on the docket.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Clerk enter Certificates of Default against Defendants OneCoin, Ignatova, Armenta, and Greenwood pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) and Local Rule 55.1.

This is a motion for entry of default, not a motion for default judgment as filed and titled.



#13

Semjon

May 6th, 2021 at 10:42 pm  Semjon(Q)

Thanks! The way that I read it, this looks like bad news particularly for the criminals in Sofia who thought they could stonewall this trouble out of existence.

So, Judge Caproni agrees that the Class Action Plaintiffs don’t have to successfully service Ruja or OneCoin Ltd in person in order to seek default judgements — the “alternative means” etc. that they had tried so far is enough.

Not sure what the default judgements would mean in practise though. They could start to go after ill-gotten OneCoin gains world-wide? (So good bye OneCoin Sofia office, Davina Yacht and Björn Strehl’s mansion in Germany?)



#14

WhistleBlowerFin

May 18th, 2021 at 6:37 am  WhistleBlowerFin(Q)

OneCoin, ‘CryptoQueen,’ Financier In Default In $4B Fraud Suit

law360.com/newyork/articles/1385433/onecoin-cryptoqueen-financier-in-default-in-4b-fraud-suit



#15

Dr. Jon Levy

May 18th, 2021 at 8:38 am  Dr. Jon Levy(Q)

Very difficult to enforce a US default judgment overseas.

travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/travel-legal-considerations/internl-judicial-asst/Enforcement-of-Judges.html