Acusación a Rafael Ramos de La Rosa

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

1 0-20~a1~~~R-JORDAN/MCALILEY

18 U.S.c. § 1951(a) 18 U.S.c. § 1956(b)

18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(I)(C) 18 U.S.c. § 982(a)(I)

STEv£,. i.t. L"'ItI!ol~R£ tlEW( ILIL twIn. 4;11', s, tL OF ftk· MIIt!.IJI

Case 1: 1 0-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/201 0 ~.~g~u.eE D .• C.

Nov 18, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs.

~FAEL RAMOS DE LA ROSA, MENUJIN SHADAH,

and

~ODSHAD JEWELS INVESTMENTS LLC,

Defendants.

~------------------------,I

INDICTMENT

The Grand Jury charges that:

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

At all times material to this indictment:

1. The Comision N acional de Valores (hereinafter CNV) was an agency of the

Venezuelan Government under the Ministry of Popular Power for Economic Finance. The CNV

was created pursuant to Venezuelan law in 1973 which was amended in 1998 reinforcing the CNV' s

supervisory role, allowing it to promote the capital markets, impose sanctions on market

participants, and ensure compliance with the Venezuelan laws and regulations. The CNV has

autonomous jurisdiction to protect investments, ensure transparency in financial markets and

oversee the conduct of financial enterprises such as securities brokerage firms, public brokers of

Case 1:1 0-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 2 of 12

stocks and bonds, financial planners and commodities exchanges.

2. The National Superintendent of Securities was the President of the CNV and has

authority to appoint "interventors" or receivers for securities brokerage firms who come under scrutiny by the CNV.

3. "Interventors," under the direction of the National Superintendent of Securities,

conduct investigations of securities brokerage firms and thereafter prepare reports of their findings concerning the legal and financial status ofthose firms. Those reports are provided to the CNV for determination of any action to be taken against the securities brokerage firms under scrutiny by the CNV.

4. Company 1 was a securities brokerage firm, owned by an individual, T.V., which was

located and did business in Venezuela. Company 1 engaged in the business of purchasing and selling securities and other financial instruments in international commerce.

5. Company 2 was a securities brokerage firm, owned by an individual, C.D., which

Was located and did business in Venezuela. Company 2 engaged in the business of purchasing and selling securities and other financial instruments in international commerce.

6. Defendant RAFAEL RAMOS DE LA ROSA (hereinafter "RAMOS") was

appointed by the National Superintendent of Securities of the CNV to be the "interventor" to audit and supervise investigations of Company 1 and Company 2 and thereafter prepare reports on the financial and legal status of those securities brokerage firms.

7. JODSHAD JEWELS INVESTMENTS LLC was a Florida limited liability

corporation with a registered address of 3440 Hollywood Boulevard, 4th Floor, Suite 415, Hollywood, Florida 33021 and maintained a bank account at Bank of America.

2

Case 1 :10-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 3 of 12

8. MENUJIN SHADAH was a Venezuelan National with residences in Florida and

Venezuela and who was registered with the State of Florida as a manager for JODSHAD JEWELS

INVESTMENTS LLC.

MENUJIN SHADAH utilized the electronic mail· address

I

,nenu i inshadah@yahoo.es.

COUNT I

1. Paragraphs 1 through. 8 of the General Allegations section set forth above are

realleged and incorporated in this count by reference as if fully set forth herein.

2. From in or around December 2009, the exact date being unknown to the Grand Jury,

to on or about October 24, 2010, in Miami-Dade County, in the Southern District of Florida, and

elsewhere, the defendant,

RAFAEL RAMOS DE LA ROSA,

did knowingly and intentionally combine, conspire, confederate and agree with others both known

and unknown to the Grand Jury, to obstruct, delay, and affect commerce and the movement of

monetary funds in commerce by extortion as those terms are defined in Title 18, United States Code,

Sections 1951 (b )(2) and (b )(3), in that defendant RAMOS and his co-conspirators did conspire to

obtain the money and property of T.V. and C.D., with the consent of T.V. and C.D. induced by

Wrongful use of fear of economic harm and under color of official right.

PURPOSE AND OBJECT OF THE CONSPIRACY

3. It was the purpose and object of the conspiracy for the defendant RAMOS to enrich

himself and his co-conspirators by using his official position as "interventor" to obtain large payments from the owners of securities brokerage firms by threatening to prepare unfavorable

reports to the CNV about those firms unless the owners consented to make large payments to

defendant RAMOS and his co-conspirators.

3

Case 1:10-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 4 of 12

MANNER AND MEANS OF THE CONSPIRACY

The manner and means by which defendant RAMOS and his co-conspirators sought to

accomplish the objects and purpose of the conspiracy included, among others, the following:

4. Defendant RAMOS would use his official position as "interventor" to threaten to

~repare an unfavorable report to the CNV concerning the legal and financial status of Company 1

unless T.V., as the owner of Company 1, consented to pay the defendant RAMOS and his co-

conspirators one and one-half million dollars ($1,500,000).

5. Defendant RAMOS would use his official position as "interventor" to threaten to

prepare an unfavorable report to the CNV concerning the legal and financial status of Company 2

unless C.D., as the owner of Company 2, consented to pay defendant RAMOS and his co-

conspirators hundreds of thousands of dollars.

6. Defendant RAMOS would travel from Venezuela to Miami-Dade County, Florida,

and would use the telephone and e-mails in interstate and foreign commerce, to coordinate with his

co-conspirators, convey his extortionate threats, and attempt to collect such extortion payments.

7. Defendant RAMOS would direct T.V. and C.D. to wire transfer funds in interstate

and foreign commerce to accounts in the United States in order to comply with his extortionate

demands. The accounts provided by defendant RAMOS had no business relation or other

connection to Company 1 or Company 2.

8. Co-conspirators would assist defendant RAMOS in the collection of monies derived

,

from the extortion scheme. Co-conspirators would also assist in the transfer of monies generated

rrom the extortion scheme by contacting the victims of the extortion and communicating with them

directly,

4

Case 1 :10-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 5 of 12

OVERT ACTS

In furtherance of the conspiracy, and to achieve the objects and purposes thereof, the

defendant committed or caused to be committed at least one of the following overt acts in the Southern District of Florida and elsewhere:

1. In or around April 2010, defendant RAMOS traveled from Venezuela to Miami,

florida.

2. In or around April 20 1 0, defendant RAMOS met with T.V. at the Ritz Carlton Hotel

,

in Coconut Grove, Miami, Florida.

I

3. On or about May 24,2010, defendant RAMOS met with T.V. at the Novocento

Restaurant in Miami, Florida.

4. In or around June 2010, defendant RAMOS met with T.V. at the Warwick Hotel in

New York City, New York.

5. On or about August 4,2010, defendant RAMOS sent a text message from Venezuela

to T.V. in Miami-Dade County, Florida.

6. On or about August 10,2010, defendant RAMOS sent an electronic mail message

from Venezuela to a co-conspirator, A.G., in Miami-Dade County, Florida.

7. On or about August 13, 2010, co-conspirator A.G., in Miami-Dade County, Florida,

sent an electronic mail message to defendant RAMOS in Venezuela stating that T.V. was "terrified

With fear."

8. On or about August 19,2010, defendant RAMOS sent an electronic mail message

from Venezuela to C.D. providing C.D. with bank account information.

9. On or about August 28,2010, defendant RAMOS met with T.V. at the Mandarin

Oriental Hotel in Miami, Florida.

5

;

Case 1:10-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 6 of 12

10. On or about October 23,2010, defendant RAMOS accepted a purported check for

i;seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) which he believed constituted an extortion payment made on behalf of T. V., at the Viceroy Hotel in Miami, Florida.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1951(a).

COUNT 2

1. Paragraphs 1 through 8 of the General Allegations section set forth above are

realleged and incorporated in this count by reference as if fully set forth herein. I

i

i 2. From in or around December 2009, the exact date being unknown to the Grand Jury,

,

~o on or about October 24, 2010 in Miami-Dade County, in the Southern District of Florida, and

;

elsewhere, the defendants,

RAFAEL RAMOS DE LA ROSA, MENUJIN SHADAH,

and

JODSHAD JEWELS INVESTMENTS LLC,

! ,

did knowingly combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with each other and other persons, both !

known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to commit certain offenses against the United States, in ~iolation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956, that is, to knowingly conduct financial

transactions affecting interstate and foreign commerce, which transactions involved the proceeds

pf specified unlawful activity, knowing that the property involved in the financial transactions I

represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, knowing that the transactions were

!

besigned in whole and in part to conceal and disguise the nature, location, source, ownership and I

!

¢ontrol of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity, in violation of Title 18, United States Code,

Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(i). It is further alleged that the specified unlawful activity is conspiracy to

interfere with interstate and foreign commerce by extortion induced by wrongful use of fear of

6

Case 1:10-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 7 of 12

economic harm and under color of official right, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section

I

951.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(h).

FORFEITURE ALLEGATIONS

1. The allegations of Counts 1 and 2 of this Indictment are re-alleged and by this

reference fully incorporated herein for the purpose of alleging forfeiture to the United States of

(\merica of certain property in which the defendants have an interest.

2. Upon conviction of the violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1951, as

alleged in Count 1 of this Indictment, the defendant, RAMOS, shall forfeit to the United States any

property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to such conspiracy

violation, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1)(C).

3. Upon conviction of the violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(h),

as alleged in Count 2 of this Indictment, the defendants, RAMOS, MENUJIN SHADAH, and

JODSHAD JEWELS INVESTMENTS LLC, shall forfeit to the United States all property, real

or personal, involved in the offense and any property traceable to such property, pursuant to Title

I ;

~ 8, United States Code, Section 982(a)(l).

7

I

Case 1: 1 0-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 8 of 12 I

I

I

All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981 (a)(1 )(C) made applicable through

,

Title 28, United States Code, Section 2461; Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(l); and the

rrocedures set forth at Title 21, United States Code, Section 853 made applicable through !

982(b).

A TRUE BILL

--FOREPERSON

~L---IC4 c,_~,/

C WIFREDO A. FERRER tyNITED STATES ATTORNEY

i~$'

juCHARDD.REGORlE -¥

ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

8

Case 1:10-cr-20842-AJ Doc~~11~h~~kcket 11/19/2010 Page 9 of 12

vs.:

UN~TED STATES OF AMERICA

i

CASE NO.

CERTIFICATE OF TRIAL ATTORNEY·

RAItAEL RAMOS DE LA ROSA, MENUJIN SHADAH,

and

JOI)SHAD JEWELS INVESTMENTS LLC,

Defendants.

Superseding Case Information:

Co~rt Division: (Select One)

Miami __ FTL

Key West WPB _

New Defendant(s)

Number of New Defendants Total number of counts

Yes

No __

FTP

I do hereby certify that

1.

I have carefully considered the allegations of the indictment, the number of defendantshthe number of probable witnesses and the legal complexities of the Indictment/Information attached ereto.

I am aware that the information supplied on this statement will be relied upon by the Judges of this Court in setting their calendars and scheduling criminal trials under the mandate of the Speedy Trial Act, Title 28 U.S.C. Section 3161.

2.

3.

xas., SPANISH

Interpreter: (Yes or No) List language and/or dialect

4.

This case will take

_jQ_ days for the parties to try.

5. Please check appropriate category and type of offense listed below:

(Check only one)

(Check only one)

I

II III IV V

Petty Minor Misdem. Felony

o to 5 days 6 to 10 days 11 to 20 days 21 to 60 days 61 days and over

Has this case been previously filed in this District Court? (Yes or No)

x

x

No

6. If yes:

Judge: (Attach copy of dispositive order) Has a complaint been filed in this matter? If yes:

Magistrate Case No. _1u.Ol:..-3~4t1,;6LQ.8::t:-A::I..IlM""S.;1..._ _

Related Miscellaneous numbers:

Defendant(s) in federal custody as of Defendant(s) in state custody as of Rule 20 from the

Case No.

(Yes or No)

Rafael Ramos de la Rosa 10/23/2010

District of

Is this a potential death penalty case? (Yes or No) No

7.

Does this case originate from a matter pending in the Northern Region of the U. S. Attorney's Office prior

to October 14, 2003? __ Yes _N_lo_ No

8.

Does this case originate from a matter pending in the Central Region of the U.S. Attorney's Office prior toSeptember1,2U07? -- Yes ~/;t~

RICHARD D. GREGO~

ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Florida Bar No. 549495

"Penalty Sheet(s) attached

REV 4/8/08

Case 1: 1 0-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 10 of 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENALTY SHEET

Defendant's Name: RAFAEL RAMOS DE LA ROSA

Case No:

-------------------

Count # I

Conspiracy to obstruct. delay and affect commerce and the movement of monetary funds in

commerce by extortion.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 1951 (a)

* Max.Penalty:

Twenty Years' Imprisonment

Count # 2

Conspiracy to launder money.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(h)

: * Max.Penalty:

Twenty Years' Imprisonment

*Refers only to possible term of incarceration, does not include possible fines, restitution, special assessments, parole terms, or forfeitures that may be applicable.

Case 1:10-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 11 of 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENALTY SHEET

Defendant's Name: MENUJIN SHADAH

Case No: _

Count # 2

Conspiracy to launder money.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956Ch)

* Max.Penalty:

Twenty Years' Imprisonment

*Refers only to possible term of incarceration, does not include possible fines, restitution, special assessments, parole terms, or forfeitures that may be applicable.

Case 1:10-cr-20842-AJ Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/19/2010 Page 12 of 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENALTY SHEET

Defendant's Name: JODSHAD JEWELS INVESTMENT LLC

'Case No:

-----------------

Count # 2

Conspiracy to launder money.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(h)

>I< Max.Penalty:

$500,000 or twice the value of the property involved in the transaction.

*Refers only to possible term of incarceration, does not include possible fines, restitution, special assessments, parole terms, or forfeitures that may be applicable.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful