An undercover FBI agent promoted his bomb making abilities to targets of the Michigan kidnapping investigation by sharing videos of him blowing things up.
When that didn't convince them, he offered to sell them explosives on credit, per a new filing in the case.
When that didn't convince them, he offered to sell them explosives on credit, per a new filing in the case.
His activities have come up because prosecutors want him and another undercover agent to be able to testify under pseudonyms ("Red" and "Mark") at trial.
Defendants say that the govt hasn't shown cause as to why that unusual measure should be allowed.
Defendants say that the govt hasn't shown cause as to why that unusual measure should be allowed.
The DoJ argued last week they couldn't use their real names because they are still working undercover in other cases and disclosure of the names would compromise those probes or endanger the agents.
Defendants reply that they "almost certainly" are not using their true names in those other cases (which would, of course, defeat the intent of being undercover) and that since photography is not allowed in federal court, their connection to other cases would not be impacted
To support their request, prosecutors cited a RICO case in Maryland involving MS-13 (USA v Zelaya) that relied in part on testimony from two Salvadorans using pseudonyms.
casetext.com/case/us-v-zela…
casetext.com/case/us-v-zela…
But the defense noted that in Zelaya, the court first held closed hearings to determine whether the use of fake names was justified to protect the witnesses & their families. In this case, no hearings have been conducted and the govt has provided no evidence to support its ask.
"Permitting the agents to testify under false names erodes the presumption of innocence. Such a measure clearly communicates to the jury that the defendants are so dangerous that even experienced FBI agents have a judicially recognized & justified reason to fear them."
TO BE CLEAR: using undercover FBI agents who use fake names, concoct untrue backstories, and offer to facilitate potential criminal acts by suspects is perfect legal, or as the defense notes, "ordinary practice."
The question here is only about testifying under fake names.
The question here is only about testifying under fake names.
The use of fake names would also shield prosecutors from having to share background info on the agents and prevent defendants from being able to research their backgrounds. That, in turn, could make it impossible for them to effectively cross-exam them in court, they argue.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
