Score:   1
Docket Number:   ED-NY  1:20-cr-00071
Case Name:   USA v. Baker et al
  Press Releases:
Three criminal complaints were unsealed today in federal court in Brooklyn, New York, charging 21 defendants with conspiring to bribe correction officers employed by the New York City Department of Corrections (“DOC”) as part of narcotics smuggling conspiracies.  Three defendants remain at large.  The initial appearances for 12 of the defendants are scheduled for this afternoon before United States Magistrate Judge Ramon E.  Reyes, Jr. 

Richard P. Donoghue, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, William F. Sweeney, Jr., Assistant Director-in-Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office (FBI), and Margaret M. Garnett, Commissioner, New York City Department of Investigation (DOI), announced the charges. 

“The corruption of correction officers presents a security risk to the entire jail population, and a potential danger to the residents of our communities,” stated United States Attorney Donoghue.  “We will continue to aggressively investigate and prosecute those who place their personal enrichment over the public duties they have sworn to perform.”  Mr. Donoghue thanked Homeland Security Investigations, New York, and the New York City Police Department for their assistance in the investigations.

“The correction officers charged today allegedly accepted bribes to sneak contraband onto Rikers Island—propagating behavior that has the potential to harm other officers and prisoners alike. The smuggling of contraband into our jails is a common Hollywood storyline, but while there’s an element a fiction in many a screenplay, there’s nothing fake about this real-life threat to our correctional facilities. Along with our partners at the DOI, we are dedicated to confronting this issue head-on,” stated FBI Assistant Director-in-Charge Sweeney.

"Contraband smuggling enterprises have long plagued City jail facilities.  The arrests today are another example of a pattern in which inmates and outside conspirators identify correction officers vulnerable to corruption, and use them to carry drugs and other illegal substances into the jails,” stated DOI Commissioner Garnett.  “These schemes threaten the safety of fellow officers and other inmates, and undermine order and discipline in the City’s jails.  DOI will continue to prioritize safety and integrity in the jails, and continue to relentlessly pursue those who threaten it.  DOI thanks its partners at the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York and the FBI for their partnership in the pursuit of these individuals charged today in our shared effort to root out criminal activity in the City's correction system."

Since early 2019, the FBI and DOI have been investigating contraband rings involving the payment and receipt of bribes by DOC officers in exchange for transporting marijuana, the narcotic Suboxone and K2 (a synthetic cannabinoid) and an unauthorized smart phone into the George R. Vierno Center and the Otis Bantum Correctional Center on Rikers Island.

As set forth in the complaints, the defendants conspired to smuggle the contraband into Rikers Island facilities with the assistance of New York City Correction Officers Darrington James, Patrick Legerme, Aldrin Livingston, Michael Murray, Angel Rodriguez and Christopher Walker.  Defendants James Albert, Clarence Brooks, Kyle Charles, John Mohammed and Christopher Rivas, who were incarcerated for unrelated offenses, arranged for marijuana and other contraband to be packaged and secretly delivered to those correction officers by defendants Celena Burgess, Veronica Jagdeo, Jorcetta King, Aboudou Krigger, Jonathan Medina, Styles Shephard and Tony West.  The defendant correction officers allegedly received thousands of dollars in bribes to smuggle the drugs past DOC security, for distribution inside the Rikers Island facilities. 

As a part of their investigations, law enforcement officers reviewed financial records related to online money transfer tools, such as CashApp, conducted surveillance and reviewed recorded telephone calls made by defendants who used coded language in their conversations.  For example, on February 19, 2019, an inmate at the Vierno facility called a co-conspirator to discuss supplying the inmate and Albert with marijuana: “I’m trying to get, um four ‘Oakland Raider jerseys’ [code for marijuana].  “…’Got Pink Panties’ [code for correction officer] on the line right now, you heard?  Gangsta. You just gotta make it to the ‘Jungle’ [code for Brooklyn] to drop it off to them and, more or less, we lit from there.”  In recorded telephone calls between Rivas and a co-conspirator in October 2019, Rivas requested a ‘joint’ [code for a cellular telephone] with a Facetime application.  In a subsequent telephone conversation, Rivas asked West whether the joint is a Size 5 or Size 6 [code for iPhone 5 or iPhone 6], and West replied that it was a Size 6, referring to an iPhone 6 that was delivered to the Vierno facility the previous night. 

On October 25, 2019, a DOC Special Search Team seized an iPhone 6 and an iPhone charger from Rivas’s laundry bag and 12 clear plastic bags containing marijuana from his person.

The charges in the complaint are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.  If convicted, the defendants each face a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment.    

The government’s case is being handled by the Office’s Public Integrity Section.  Assistant United States Attorneys Nathan Reilly, Margaret Gandy, Drew Rolle, Alicia Washington and Virginia Nguyen are in charge of the prosecution.

The Defendants:

JAMES ALBERT

Age: 43

Comstock, New York

CLARENCE BROOKS

Age: 39

Bronx, New York

CELENA BURGESS

Age: 43

New York, New York

KYLE CHARLES

Age: 32

Brooklyn, New York

VERONICA JAGDEO

Age: 24

Freeport, New York

DARRINGTON JAMES

Age: 30

Queens, New York

JORCETTA KING

Age: 33

Bronx, New York

ABOUDOU KRIGGER

Age: 25

Bronx, New York

PATRICK LEGERME

Age: 29

Queens, New York

ALDRIN LIVINGSTON

Age: 31

Queens, New York

JONATHAN MEDINA

Age: 29

Queens, New York

JOHN MOHAMMED

Age: 27

Rome, New York

MICHAEL MURRAY

Age: 28

Brooklyn, New York

CHRISTOPHER RIVAS

Age: 32

New York, New York

ANGEL RODRIGUEZ

Age: 23

Bellport, New York

STYLES SHEPHARD

Age: 24

New York, New York

CHRISTOPHER WALKER

Age: 28

Brooklyn, New York

TONY WEST

Age: 24

Brooklyn, New York

E.D.N.Y. Docket Nos.: 20-MJ-25; 20-MJ-26; and 20-MJ-31.

BROOKLYN, N.Y. – Earlier today, at the federal courthouse in Brooklyn, a six-count indictment was unsealed charging Wesley Blake Barber, the owner of Surgical Assistance Inc. and Medical Funding Consultants LLC, and Christopher Walker, a licensed urogynecologist and owner of MedSurg Holdings LLC, for their roles in an alleged scheme to defraud women across the United States in connection with surgeries to remove transvaginal mesh (TVM) implants.

Barber and Walker are each charged with committing wire fraud, violating the Travel Act and related conspiracies.  Both defendants were arrested this morning.  Barber is expected to appear this afternoon before U.S. Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford of the Northern District of Texas at the federal courthouse in Dallas, and Walker is expected to appear before U.S. Magistrate Judge Gregory Kelly of the Middle District of Florida at the federal courthouse in Orlando.

Richard P. Donoghue, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Brian A. Benczkowski, Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, and William F. Sweeney, Jr., Assistant Director-in-Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office (FBI), announced the indictment.

“As alleged in the indictment, the defendants and their co-conspirators exploited and defrauded women, misrepresenting health risks from TVM implants to pressure the women to undergo procedures to the defendants’ economic advantage,” stated United States Attorney Donoghue.  “This Office, the Department of Justice and the FBI will continue to investigate and prosecute medical professionals and others who prey on the vulnerable to line their own pockets.”

“Barber and Walker convinced their victims to subject themselves to surgical procedures based on misrepresentations of fact, as alleged, causing them to incur a financial loss, and likely presenting them with a significant emotional burden,” stated FBI Assistant Director-in-Charge Sweeney.  “They used the bodies of women as a conduit for their greedy behavior, and that is simply not allowed. Medical professionals play a vital role in our society, and they're required to adhere to a strict set of standards. As evidenced today, those who don't will be held accountable.”

According to the indictment, Barber and Walker sought to profit in connection with lawsuits filed throughout the United States relating to alleged harm that TVM implants had caused women.  The alleged scheme sought to take advantage of settlements in these lawsuits in which women who had their TVM implants surgically removed were entitled to receive larger settlements than women whose inserts remained implanted.  As part of the scheme, the conspirators allegedly persuaded women around the country to undergo removal surgeries by fraudulently misrepresenting both the health risks associated with the TVM implants and the need to travel long distances to use pre-selected doctors for the surgeries, including Walker, rather than their local doctors.  Barber’s companies allegedly coordinated the removal surgeries and then purchased and resold for profit the medical debts incurred by the women.  In addition, Walker and others paid kickbacks and bribes to Barber in exchange for the referral of these women for their surgeries.

The charges in the indictment are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. 

If convicted of all the charges, Barber and Walker each face up to 90 years’ imprisonment.

The investigation was conducted by the FBI.  Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth Geddes of the Eastern District of New York and Trial Attorney Andrew Estes of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section are prosecuting the case.

The Defendants:

WESLEY BLAKE BARBER

Age:  49

Detroit, Michigan

CHRISTOPHER WALKER

Age:  49

Orlando, Florida

E.D.N.Y. Docket No. 19-CR-239 (RJD)

 

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1t-GUS6Cq7WSROU7V2fz6NWAioSU5jRIFBK3v8N4Dcko
  Last Updated: 2023-10-29 00:20:08 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Magistrate Docket Number:   ED-NY  1:20-mj-00031
Case Name:   USA v. James et al
Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1j_ZYXf-h3Kg6OJqaC2LTwBeVOxCPQlp7K8Nw4KAya9E
  Last Updated: 2023-10-29 00:18:19 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E