CASE NO. 89 -8 Q2-"-:Cr-":'KE~(c)-
18 U.S.C. S371
-----
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. ROBERT GURIN, Defendant. INFORMATION
--------------------------_1
The United States Attorney Charges That:
1.
At all
times material
herein, AEA Aircraft
Recovery
(hereinafter "AEA") was engaged in the business of the recovery of seized aircraft. in
the Foreign
AEA is a "domestic concern" as tha.t term is used
Corrupt
Practices
Act
of
1977,
as
amended
(hereinafter "FCPAtI),
2. At all
15 U.S.C.
7Bdd-2(h)(1)(B). ROBERT GURIN,
times material herein defendant
(hereinafter "GURIN"), a United States citizen, was the sole owner
of AEA Aircraft Recovery
and engaged
in the business
of
the
recovery of seized aircraft.
concern
2(h)(1}A).
fI
Defendant GURIN was a "domestic
in the
as
that
term
is used
FCPA,
15 U.S .C. 78dd-
3.
At all times material herein Joaquin Pou, a Dominican
Republic citizen, was an agent of domestic concerns, to wit, AEA,
and
defendant GURIN.
4.
At all time material herein Alfredo G. Duran, a United
States citizen, was an agent of domestic concerns, to wit, AEA, and defendant--G{fRl}L~----------------~ _ ~
5.
At
all times material herein Jose Guasch, a Un!ted States of domestic concerns
I
citizen, was an agent defendant GURIN.
6.
to wit,
ABA
and
From on or about April
5,
12,
1989,
through on or about District of
November
1989,
in Dade
County
in the Southern
Florida, and elsewhere, the defendant,
ROBERT GORIN
willfully and knowingly
did combine,
conspire,
confederate
and
agree with other persons to commit an offense against the United States of America, to wit, to use the means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce in furtherance of an offer, payment, promise to pay and authorization of the payment of money and anything of value to officials of the Dominican Republic for the purpose of influencing the acts and decisions of said foreign officials in
their official capacities - - and inducing said officials to do or omit to do an act in violation of their lawful duty -- and for the purpose of indUCing such foreign officials to use their influence with the government thereof, of the Dominican Republic or any
lnstrwnentality
to affect
and influence
the acts and
decisions of that government, and to induce said foreign officials to use their influence with the government of the Dominican
Republic or any instrumentality thereof, to affect and influence the acts and decisions of that goverrunent
2
I
to assist AEA
and
defendant ROBERT GURIN in obtaining and retaining business for or
with, and directing
business to any person, to wit, the recovery
of aircraft-seTz9<f"by -ttre-gove-E'nment--O.L-the __ ~mtl!:i.~_~!l_Republic, in violation of Title 15, United States Code, Sections 78dd-2(a)(1) and (3). PURPOSE OF THE CONSPIRACY 7. It was a purpose and object of the conspiracy to offer,
pay, promise to pay and authorize the payment of money and anything of value, directly and indirectly, to officials of the government of the Dominican Republic in order to obtain the release of a Piper Navajo FAA registration number N6846L.
OVERT ACTS
In furtherance of this conspiracy and to effect the object thereof, the following overt acts, among others, were committed within the Southern District of Florida and elsewhere: 1. On or about May 30, 1989, defendant GURIN and another
person had a telephone conversation
and discussed the preparation
of fictitious paperwork in order to obtain the release of aircraft N6846L. 2. On or about June in Miami, 12, 1989, defendant and received GURIN met with $482.00 for his
another person
Florida
services in obtaining the release of aircraft from the Dominican Republic. 3. On or about June 27, 1989, documents relative to aircraft
N6846L were faxed from Miami, Florida to the Dominican Republic.
3
4.
On or about June 28, 1989, defendant GURIN, a Dominican
official and another person had a telephone conversation in which the Dominican off leT aT ConI:tnned--reee4:9t--O£__doCJJrn.~p._~~ __!=,elative to aircraft N6846L. 5. On or about July 6, 1989, defendant GURIN and another
person had a telephone conversation and discussed travelling to the Dominican Republic. 6. On or about July 17, 1989, defendant GURIN had a
telephone conversation with Pou and discussed meeting Pou in the Dominican Republic N6846L. 7. On or about July 19, 1989, defendant GURIN and another airlines from Miami, Florida to in order to obtain the release
of
aircraft
person travelled via commercial
Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. 8. On or about July 20, 1989, defendant GURIN, another
person and Pou met in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. 9. On or about July 23, 1989, defendant GURIN and another and discussed the payment of
person had a telephone conversation
$5,000
to General Pou to distribute to Dominican officials. On or about July 25, 1989, Pou travelled from the
10.
Dominican Republic to Miami, Florida via commercial airline.
11. On
or about July 26,
1989, Pou defendant Club in Miami
$5,000
GURIN
and
another
Airport.
person met at
the Clipper
POll
International
in cash to pay
During the meeting,
received
officials to effect the release of aircraft N6846L.
4
12. On or about August 1, 1989, defendant GURIN and another person met with Alfredo G. Duran in Miami, Florida.
meeting, During the
Duran agreed---£ooe--Ehe----esc-raw--agent
-fQ£ __ t_l'!_~_
release of
additional monies to Pou in order to obtain the release of aircraft N6846L. 13. On or about September 12, 1989, Jose Guasch met with
defendant GURIN and another person in Miami, Florida and received $990 in cash to pay officials in the Dominican Republic. All in violation of Title IS, United States Code, Section 371.
dEXTER W. LEHTINEN UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
]2;;>~UQ
Jah~
Ql
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
--------------un
tte-d--5t-a-t-e-s--a.LA.IIJ_e_t:j..
ca
Plaintiff
vs. Robert Gurin
---
._--,------)
)
CASE NO:
89-802-Cr-KEHOE(S)
----- --~ ~----
)
)
ESTIMATED TRIAL TIME
--------------------------) OF CD1'IFICATE
I do hereby certify:
Defendant
)
)
TRIAL ATTORNEY
1. I have carefully oonaidered the allegations of the indictment, the number of defendant., the number of probable witneases and the legal complexities of the indictMent/information.
2. I am aware that the information INPPliecl on this statement will be relied upon by the Judge. of thi. Court in setting their calendars and scheduling criminal trials under the mandate of the ipeecSy Trial Act, Titl. 28, U.S.C., Section 3161
-try.
3. 4.
Thi. cause
will take
0
days for
the
parties
to
(Check the appropriate cat.gory)
X
I II III IV
V
o to 5 day. 6 to 10 daya 11 to 20 4aya
21 to 60 daya
61 daytI and over
in this Court? _
If
Hu ttd.. Y8aio Judg., N\IIber:
5.
cue beeR previously f1l.,
Cue
A copy of the cUapoa1t1ve order rauat be attached hereto.
Attornay for thi8 Di.-trict?
state. Attorney at tt. t1me Judge
6.
Wa. thi. matter pend1ng
Marc:u8
in the
wa.
Office
the
Un! ted
of the United
Statea
Ye.
BOND RECOMMENDATION "DEFeNDANT
ROBERT GURIN
_ Cash) (Marshal's
l-O,OOO P.S.B.
$ ----------------~
,
Custody)
(Surety, Recognizance, Corp. Surety, (Jail) (On Bond) (Warrant) (Summons)
UNITED Last Known Address:
STATES ATTORNEY
What Facility:
Agent:
Frank
Customs (FBI) (SECRET SERVICE) (DEA) (IRS) (CUSTOMS)
Rifenberg, U.S.
(OTHER)
BOND
RECOMME~DATION
DEfE~1JANT
(Surety, Recognizance, Corp. Surety, Cash) (Jail) (On Bond) (Warrant) (Summons) (Marshal's Custody)
ASSISTANT Last Known Address:
UNITED
~
STATES ATTORNEY
.
\"hat Agent:
Facility:
(FEn) (SECRE'l'
SERVICE)
(DEM
(IRS)
(CUSTOMS)
(OTHER)