Appandi's "Saudi donation" story was clearly intended as a "no predicate offence"defence,which the DOJ is still not buying
by Ganesh Sahathevan
Given the recent interest in "predicate offences" with regards the 1MDB matter, this writer has decided to re-post the article below, which appears to have been an earlier attempt to use the "no predicate offence" defence to escape prosecution.
n court papers quietly filed this past week, various entities connected to Red Granite Pictures co-founder Riza Aziz are attacking the U.S. government's attempt to seize real estate properties in the huge $1 billion action targeting alleged corruption of Malaysian public funds.
The Justice Department has touted the 1MDB case as its biggest kleptocracy case to date, but Aziz's lawyer, Matthew Schwartz, a former assistant U.S. attorney who once prosecuted Bernie Madoff, slams the U.S. government for failing to include "essential detail" about the supposed crimes. He's demanding a dismissal.
"[T]he Government's entire theory of the case presupposes that the Malaysia Attorney General's findings are factually and legally invalid," states the court papers. "There is therefore no way for this litigation to proceed without a ruling from this Court on whether the Malaysian Attorney General's sovereign functions were illegitimate.".