- 46 -
fraud and the Department’s presentation to a grand jury were well
founded, no matter what the outcome.
Moreover, we fail to see any prejudice in connection with
Mr. Schreiber’s death in August 1991, 1 month before petitioner
claims the grand jury investigation ended. Also, although
petitioner proposes as a fact that Mr. Hansen is dead, he
provided no reference to any evidence in support of that proposed
finding, nor did he propose a finding that Mr. Hansen was even a
subject of the grand jury investigation. Finally, petitioner
alleges that the grand jury investigation deprived petitioner of
access to items seized pursuant to the warrant. Petitioner has
failed to prove that any of those items seized were the
partnership’s books and records.
Petitioner’s complaint with respect to respondent’s alleged
misrepresentation of the status and duration of a related grand
jury investigation fails to establish any ground on which to base
any sanction of respondent in this case.
XI. "Improper dissemination of grand jury materials."
In petitioner’s memorandum, he states: “Because of
Respondent’s attorney’s laxity, grand jury documents were
disseminated to unauthorized persons, including attorney-members
of the AMCOR Litigation Team and Special Agent Goolkasian.”
Petitioner proposes the following finding of fact:
The documents which were improperly disclosed to the
Respondent in violation of Rule 6(e) of the Federal
Page: Previous 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011