The protection attorneys for Monica Cannon-Grant and her husband, Clark Grant, have met their deadline for submitting a movement for a “Bill of Particulars” — which formally calls on the feds to listing out the specifics of whom the couple allegedly defrauded with their administration of the charity Violence in Boston.
“While the indictment identifies the particular grants at issue and the allegedly false certifications/statements at issue with those grants, it does not provide necessary particulars regarding which donors, from amongst the thousands of donors to VIB, were allegedly defrauded,” the attorneys wrote of their movement filed July 11, the deadline set in Boston federal courtroom final month by U.S. District Court Senior Judge Mark L. Wolf.
The attorneys — privately retained Robert Goldstein for Cannon-Grant and federal defender Julie-Ann Olson for Grant — cite the first Circuit case U.S. v. Hallock, of 1991, to make clear the three functions of such a invoice: “to give the accused details concerning the charges against him, enabling him to prepare a defense; to prevent double jeopardy; and to avoid surprise at trial.”
“Without the requested bill of particulars,” the protection attorneys proceed, “the defendants will be left to guess (1) the identities of witnesses critical to the charged VIB scheme, (2) the false statements allegedly at issue, and (3) the means by which they allegedly made material false representations, all of which will deny the defendants a meaningful opportunity to prepare for trial in this matter.”
The submitting states that the protection attorneys met with the federal prosecutors, who had advised them they’d oppose the movement. The protection is requesting oral arguments in courtroom on the movement.
In the 14-page movement, the attorneys argue that the allegations set out within the indictment — which was unsealed on March 15 — are too obscure to determine who the alleged sufferer is within the charged fraud.
For instance, they are saying that prosecutors laid out 4 checks from “Network for Good” into the ViB coffers, however that the Network for Good is a third-party cost processor. The attorneys wrote, “There are no details, however, regarding the identity of any particular donor defrauded by any such expenditures, or specified representations to any particular donors.”
Prosecutors have stated the Cannon-Grant and Grant used the charity, “formed at least as early as 2017 to raise money to reduce violence, raise social awareness, and aid community causes, among other purposes,” “as a vehicle to personally enrich themselves and their designees.”
Prosecutors have stated that they’ll search a superseding indictment within the case over the past in-person listening to, on June 10, however haven’t launched any additional particulars of what which may entail.
The subsequent courtroom listening to within the case is scheduled for Sept. 8 at 2 p.m.
Source: www.bostonherald.com”