Federico “Fred” Machado has 50 days to decide whether to plead guilty or maintain his innocence in the United States until the final consequences. And if you don’t reach an agreement with the public prosecutor beforehand February 6thmust now face an oral and public trial for alleged drug trafficking, money laundering and fraud March 2nd. This was decided by the federal judge for the Eastern District of Texas. Amos Mazzant.
The deadlines and expiry dates were determined after a presentation by the defense, among other things consent of the public prosecutora first indication of the back and forth between the parties that takes place outside of the file. He wasn’t the only one. The Argentine stated in his letter that this was the case “in discussions” with the prosecutor’s office to determine whether the case exists “can be solved” without it being necessary “present or discuss a large number of previous applications without there being a hearing”.
The statement made in the defense statement opens a Choice of options to avoid a jury trial. Among other things, the possible negotiation of a settlement agreement, the partial or complete dismissal of the 5 criminal charges Machado faces, or even a possible alternative agreement that could include, for example, signing a “probation agreement” or a conditional solution.
After analyzing the defense brief and obtaining approval from the prosecution, Judge Mazzant confirmed a new schedule. He stated that the “Ends of Justice” The crimes prosecuted with these new time limits exceed the interest of the public and the defendant himself in a speedy trial. And he emphasized that the updated dates are essential for the defense “Prepare effectively for the process”given the complexity of the test.
If no agreement is reached beforehand 4 p.m. on February 6ththe Argentine will lose the advantage of a points reduction in his penalty “Assumption of responsibility”explained the judge, and a very different roadmap would begin, which would include the selection of the jury and the definition of the evidence that can be presented during the hearing, such as money transfers to the former national MP. José Luis Espert.
Machado’s presentation and Judge Mazzant’s decision came just five weeks after the Argentine was extradited to the United States and appeared in court in Texas where he pleaded “not guilty”a position that can be changed until February 6th. If so, it could provide sensitive information about the election campaigns it finances and its interactions with other leaders of the same or other political spaces.
However, according to the evidence already presented by prosecutors in Texas, Machado at least transferred $200,000 to Espert in 2020, by Bank of Americawhich recorded the funds on internal forms that it submitted along with the registration of the criminal file Airplane from Machado, which the economist and leader in Argentina used: N28FM.
The evidentiary key to this conclusion lies in the instructions “further credit to” the transfera mechanism used by the prosecution to identify the ultimate recipient of the laundered funds, giving high probative value to the documentary evidence obtained from the trial by Machado’s lawyers – Christopher Clore Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLPand Jamie Hoxie Solano – asked for more time for analysis.
After the public revelation of this money transfer, the Argentine judiciary opened an investigation into alleged money laundering. And at the request of the Federal Prosecutor’s Office Federico Dominguezthe judge Lino Mirabelli ordered freeze all assets that Espert, his wife, his son and others have relatives and employees in the country.
In the file processed in Texas, identified as “United States v. Mercer-Erwin et al.”describes how Machado and other defendants – including his partner Debra Lynn Mercer-Erwin, sentenced to 16 years in prison– They used a network of front companies, trust contracts and escrow accounts to channel money of dubious origin, exploiting the lack of transparency in the sale and purchase of jets and helicopters.
Time Machado must decide whether he will become an employee of the American justice system or whether he will face several years in prison as a result of the verdict of a popular jury started running.
About The Author
