Lawyers for Defendant Steven Mazzone are taking the gloves off with Federal prosecutors, demanding more discovery, evidence and information related to a key witness in the case against the dapper South Philly Mobster.
The Mazzone defense team, John C. Meringolo, Esq. and Louis Busico, Esq., respectfully asked the Court this week for an Order directing the Government to immediately disclose and produce materials, not limited to, documents in the possession of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), and any other governmental agency as well as all materials pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 404(b) as follows:
All documents relating to proffers or statements made to the Government by or on
behalf of any witness who may testify at trial, including:
Notes taken by government attorneys, agents or other personnel (and reports
and memoranda of such proffers and meetings) during proffers or meetings with
the prosecution, including the United States Attorney’s Office, the FBI, and any
other governmental agencies;
Proffers or statements submitted by or on behalf of any witness who may
testify at trial (specifically, correspondences, letters, emails, and notes of
telephone and/or personal conversations by attorneys or other representatives of
potential witnesses for the Government.
Notes and memoranda of any attorney or representative of any potential
witness that contains any Brady or Giglio material.
Grand Jury testimony, factual basis questions, and proposed or changed
factual basis questions, for any potential Government witness; and
Any proffer agreements, cooperation agreements, plea agreements, proposed
plea agreements and plea allocutions;
Any memoranda relating to the prosecution of Mr. Mazzone, and the non-prosecution
of any other persons, to the extent that such memoranda contain any Brady, Giglio, or
Jencks material;
Any and all notes of law enforcement agents taken during interviews of potential
witnesses;
The identity of any expert witness and any and all information, studies and reports
upon which any expert witness will base his/her testimonial opinions; and
Finally, the Court should also direct the government to respond to Defendant’s
request for any “other crimes” evidence the government will introduce at trial.
Here is the Defense statement to the court in support of this motion.
“On November 18, 2020, Mr. Mazzone was charged in a Superseding Indictment with five
counts of criminal conduct – Count One: a racketeering conspiracy from 2015 to the date of
Indictment; Count Two: conducting an illegal gambling business from October 2016 to July
2017; Count Three: a conspiracy to make extortionate extensions of credit for one month, from
June 19, 2017 to July 19, 2017; Count Four: a Hobbs Act extortion conspiracy from October
2015 to October 2016; and Count Five: a Hobbs Act extortion conspiracy from October 2015 to
August 2016. See, generally, Superseding Indictment. Specifically, Mr. Mazzone is alleged to
have engaged with different groups of co-defendants in Philadelphia referred to as “the
Philadelphia LCN” or “the Enterprise.” Id.
The extent of the Government’s claims, which encompass over five years, different
states, and the unique assertion that different, seemingly separate defendants accused of separate
criminal activities, have morphed into a rather generally described entity known as the
Philadelphia LCN, has made the task of identifying precisely what Mr. Mazzone is alleged to have done.
The Government asserts Mr. Mazzone’s affiliation as that of an “underboss” but only identifies the alleged “street boss” and consigliere” by initials in the Superseding Indictment.
The Government does not have sufficient evidence in its possession to allege the charges
with sufficient specificity to satisfy the statutory requirements. Moreover, despite defense
counsel’s requests, the government has yet to provide the Court and defense counsel a letter
setting forth the criminal acts allegedly committed by each defendant in furtherance of the
charged racketeering enterprise.
In addition to the Superseding Indictment deficiencies, this matter is further complicated
by the government’s failure to preserve materials during its handling of a pertinent cooperating
witness (“CW-1”).
As defense counsel has argued in its December 16, 2020 letter to the
government, its January 16, 2021 letter motion to the Court, and in its March 11, 2021 under seal
motion, defense counsel has reason to believe there is a bevy of materials that should be produced concerning this witness that would constitute Brady material.
Upon information and belief, there exists a 20-page memorandum, in addition to subsequent memorandums, from
Newark FBI agents that dispute the veracity of CW-1. Per an affidavit submitted by one agent,
which was annexed to defense counsel’s March 11, 2021 submission as Exhibit A, it was
deemed that CW-1 was untruthful about his criminal activity and continued to engage in crimes
throughout his cooperation.
In light of CW-1’s “discrepancies” in his versions of events and his
continued cooperation in this matter, issues surrounding the potential preservation, spoliation,
and deletion of evidence are concerning and have made the below requests all the more pertinent
to Mr. Mazzone’s defense. Moreover, it is extremely important for this Court to be aware that the
CW-1 involved in this investigation has committed numerous frauds while under the supervision
of the FBI, even after the FBI was put on notice of his lack of truthfulness. The extent of these
frauds, perpetrated during CW-1’s cooperation with the government, are so egregious that an
inquiry as to the FBI’s and government’s knowledge of these crime by the Court is warranted.
