Mark Scott’s sentencing delayed 9th Nov, retrial motion insight
Mark Scott has failed to have his sentencing suspended indefinitely.
Following a letter filed earlier this week and subsequent opposition by the DOJ, the court rescheduled Scott’s sentencing to November 9th.
Whether there will be subsequent delays to Scott’s sentencing remains to be seen.
The November 9th adjournment marks the tenth rescheduling of Scott’s sentencing since February 2020.
In related news a letter filed by the DOJ has provided insight into Scott’s Supplemental Rule 33 Motion.
The motion pertains to Scott (right) requesting a retrial, however details of the motion have not been made public.
On August 26th the DOJ filed a letter requesting a two-week extension to respond to Scott’s Rule 33 motion.
The DOJ believed the extension was justified because Scott waited for six weeks after receiving the information that is the subject of his motion before filing his motion.
“The information” is elaborated on but redacted in the public copy of the letter.
A footnote in the DOJ’s letter suggests there might be an issue with a cooperating witnesses.
Scott’s counsel informed the Government today that: “In light of the Government’s recent disclosure that its cooperating witness committed perjury and the lack of prior disclosure to the defense …”
To the best of my knowledge this perjury issue has not previously been made public.
Cooperating witnesses pertaining to Scott’s trial point to Konstantin Ignatov.
Ignatov (right), who served as OneCoin’s CEO, testified for the DOJ at Scott’s trial.
Gilbert Armenta is also cooperating with the DOJ but I don’t recall him being presented as a witness.
While he’s all for indefinitely delaying his sentencing, Scott opposed the DOJ’s request for a two-week response extension.
On August 26th the court granted the DOJ’s request, setting a new September 10th deadline.
Given Scott’s motion was filed under seal there’s a good chance the DOJ’s response will also be filed under seal.
This means we won’t learn the specifics of Scott’s motion until an order is issued at a later date.
Update 25th September 2021 – Mark Scott’s retrial letter motion has been made public.
In the motion Scott’s attorney confirms Ignatov lied about throwing away a laptop.
If Konstantin committed perjury under oath, it’s no wonder Scott’s lawyer Arlo Devlin-Brown wants a new trial.
But it would complicate many things. Konstantin would probably lose both his 5K1-benefits and his cooperating witness status.. Suddenly he could really face full 90 years in prison.
DOJ has probably more than enough evidence to put Scott away eventually, but he would stay out of prison definitely still for a long time.
And what would happen to Frank Schneider’s case if Konstantin loses his cooperating witness status? Maybe DOJ has enough material against him too, but I’m sure Konstantin would have lots of juicy details about Frank Schneider..
If it’s Konstantin who committed perjury as it’s very likely (he was the cooperating witness in Scott’s trial), he must be pooping his pants.. Lying under oath when facing 90 years in prison is not a small thing to do.
You can read the complete Letter Motion with the footnote about perjury here:
More info here:
Mark S Scott has aleady filed both re-trial (Rule 33) and acquittal (Rule 29) motions in early 2020 (storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.482287/gov.uscourts.nysd.482287.218.0.pdf).
These have been “fully briefed” since May 2020, meaning both parties have had chance to to reply and sur-reply. So I think this is the background as to why the Scott’s latest motion is called “supplemental” re-trial motion.
I don’t know/understand why Judge Ramos hasn’t made any ruling during this 1+ year period.
It seems Konstantin has now f*cked up big time. In Scott’s desperate situation, it’s at least worth a try to use this to supplement his 2020 case, which rests more on creative reading of case law coupled with distortions and omission of key evidence against him.
Probably not very likely related, but I’ve noticed there is a strange passage in court transcript that if your read it carefully, might indicate that Konstantin deliberatively mislead the court — or, which I think is perhaps more likely, was just mistaken/confused.(Or there is an error in the transcript.)
However, given the context, I have theory of what the passage is “really about”, of which Konstantin was probably only ignorant/confused of, but on the other hand it might also explain why Konstantin would have mislead the court.
I’ve mentioned the issue here before, but can’t remember if I’ve given any specifics. I hope I haven’t and at least for now I’m not going to go into any details out of precaution that Scott’s defense won’t get any new ammo. 😉
If my theory is correct, it relates to an “elephant in the room” aspect that I think both parties had an interest of keeping the context out of the trial. Scott due to optics/prejudice reasons and Government due to harm to ongoing investigations.
Now, if K’s perjury is about that, Scott might take the risk of being painted as a more sinister crook if it buys him time with a new trial…
I figure Scott’s original Rule 33 motion was just going through the motions (no pun intended).
Perhaps the delay in ruling is due to the sentencing hearing delays.
The Supplemental Motion might be a spanner in the works. It’s unlikely Scott will walk free but we’re likely looking at more delays.
Konstantin Ignatov was confirmed today to be one who committed the alleged perjury in Mark Scott’s trial:
Unfortunately at the moment I don’t believe the perjury will be legally established. Can’t say why because it’s confidential.
Of course things can always change and nothing it 100% sure.
Point 1: I’m curious to know why you said “unfortunately.” If perjury cannot be legally established, that will speed up the wheels of justice, will it not? Or would you like to see Konstantin do hard time for lying under oath? (Serious question; just want to hear your thoughts, not arguing.)
From the courtlistener link:
From that, I take it that the government has stipulated that Konstantin committed perjury, which sounds like they think perjury can be legally established.
Since the context of the stipulation was an opposing motion, it sounds like the government’s stance is that Konstantin’s lies had no effect on the outcome of the trial.
I guess we’ll see.
Thanks Fin, I’d just checked the dockets yesterday and that letter wasn’t up yet.
At the very least I’d expect Konstantin’s witprot deal to be off.
Seeing as Konstantin didn’t have a direct role in Scott’s money laundering, I’d be surprised if the perjury had any drastic impact on his case (other than more delays).
So the takewaway seems to be that Konstantin did himself over with continuing to lie, just like he did from the moment he landed in the US.
Per his bail papers he lied to US Immigration, the Feds at LAX afterwards, and Pre-trial Services. He lived in some kind of a fantasy world where he either did or didn’t speak to Ruja (I bet he did) and could visit orphanages in the poorest parts of the world whilst stealing from the locals who couldn’t afford it and then sleep at night.
Lying liars lie.
No doubt the people who can spot the lies have no desire to be accessories after the fact (by not reporting at least) and also wonder what he might pin on them. Ignatov has everything to gain by shifting the blame and nothing to lose.
Surely the OneLife newletter is covering this in depth? Oh wait
I’m not sure I agree with that. Iggy was no-doubt told the deal was going to be off if he lied. He had plenty to lose: possible decades of freedom.
Now, on THAT we agree. For some people, lies come so easily and naturally they can’t help themselves. They lie when truth would serve them better.
@Amos_N_Andy, we already know from experience that Scott’s sentence has zero effect on Onecoin and its MLM marketing. It will be just another ‘noise’ for them which they consider irrelevant.
But Konstantin is totally different. If Konstantin gets a long sentence it will surely have a significant consequences to their MLM network and that way also to Sofia.
They can’t ignore Konstantin’s long prison sentence and the news will spread like wildfire, and in best case it will lead to total collapse of the scam.
But if Konstantin’s sentence is something like ‘time served’ and he walks out after like 6 months from now, that’s a huge victory for the scam.
Konstantin could have taken an active role stopping OneCoin from his house arrest, but what does he do online instead.. He complains that he doesn’t like the photo of him which a German newspaper used in their news article. And he cleaned his personal Facebook page. That’s it.
No public apologies, no personal confession on his social media that he worked for a fraud scheme, nothing.
So yeah, I’d rather see Scott walk free and Konstantin sitting decades in prison, than seeing Scott sentenced and Konstantin out after an insignificant sentence.
What comes to stopping OneCoin, only Konstantin’s sentence matters. Greenwood matters too, but not so much. All others are irrelevant noise for the scam and their MLM promoters.
If Iggy got got out with even a minimal sentence, there would be church bells ringing where this is promoted. He has had every moment since 19h00 March 2019 to stop this but he chooses not to.
Fuck that guy.
BREAKING: motions about Konstantin Ignatov’s perjury unsealed:
LOL they forgot to redact the name of a certain RavenR employee, Doc #410 page 5 (bold added):
Wonder why they bothered. Duncan Arthur disclosed he was travelling with Konstantin in October 2019.
Case 1:17-cr-00630-ER Document 189, transcript of Konstantin Ignatov’s testimony in Mark Scott’s trial (bold added):
Probably “out of an abundance of caution” 😉