{"id":"court_sdny_128_2","court":"SDNY","case_no":"23-cr-00118","doc_number":128,"sub_number":2,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":"2023-08-18","title":"UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,","summary_zh":"美国律师助理宣誓证言 —— 美国诉 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵 / Guo Wengui / Miles Guo）案，SDNY 1:23-cr-00118 ECF #128（2023年8月18日）。AUSA Elizabeth Hanft 宣誓陈述其与 AUSA Ravener 自2019年9月起共同从事反恐和国际毒品事务部门对 Ho Wan Kwok 的调查工作，包括搜查令的拟草与执行、证据分析和与监督官的协调。","summary_en":"Declaration by Assistant United States Attorney —— United States v. Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui / Kwok Ho Wan), SDNY Case 1:23-cr-00118, ECF #128 (August 18, 2023). AUSA Elizabeth Hanft declares under penalty of perjury her work with AUSA Ravener on the Terrorism and International Narcotics investigation of Ho Wan Kwok from September 2019, including drafting and execution of search warrant affidavits, analysis of warrant returns, and supervisory coordination.","body_en":"## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK\n\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA,\n\n-against-\n\nYANPING WANG, a/k/a \"Yvette,\"\n\nDefendant.\n\n## S1 23 Cr. 118 (AT) **DECLARATION**\n\nI, Elizabeth Hanft, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, declare as follows:\n\n1. I am an Assistant United States Attorney in the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York (the \"Office\").\n\n2. From approximately November 2017 to approximately January 2020, I was assigned to the Office's Terrorism and International Narcotics (\"TIN\") Unit, which is currently known as the Office's National Security and International Narcotics Unit. I am presently the Co-Chief of the Office's General Crimes Unit.\n\n3. While in TIN, I, along with AUSA Kimberly Ravener, was assigned to an investigation involving Ho Wan Kwok, a/k/a \"Miles Guo\" (\"Guo\"), which began in or about September 2019 (the \"TIN Matter\").\n\n4. On September 19, 2019, Emil Bove (\"Bove\") and Shawn Crowley (\"Crowley\") were appointed Co-Chiefs of TIN and, in that capacity, were my direct supervisors. As TIN Co-Chiefs, Bove and Crowley were responsible for overseeing all matters in TIN, unless they were specifically recused.\n\n5.\n\n6. From approximately mid-September 2019 through October 4, 2019, AUSA Ravener and I drafted the search warrant affidavits and warrants (the \"Warrants\"). I believe that Crowley and/or another supervisor reviewed the Warrants before they were submitted to the court.\n\n. In the weeks after the\n\n7. The FBI recovered over a hundred devices and a significantly large volume of data as a result of the Warrants.\n\n8. Bove was on trial for periods in September and October 2019. After Bove's trial ended in approximately mid-October 2019, Bove and Crowley supervised the TIN Matter. It was my general practice to update supervisors concerning my cases, which would include the TIN Matter. As is common in the Office, those updates were often oral. It was the practice of Crowley and Bove to join their Co-Chief into calls and/or meetings about cases they supervised.\n\n9. After the Warrants were executed, the TIN Matter remained active. Over the next several months, AUSA Ravener's and my work on the TIN Matter, along with the work of the FBI agents, focused on analyzing the electronic devices that were seized during the execution of the Warrants.\n\nWarrants were executed, and throughout my involvement in the TIN Matter, the FBI agents and analysts provided periodic updates to me and/or AUSA Ravener on the review of search warrant materials or other significant events in the investigation.<sup>1</sup>\n\n<sup>1</sup> During the execution of the Warrants, and until approximately December 2019, I was frequently working at an offsite location on another case without regular access to my office email and cellphone. Accordingly, I had fewer conversations with supervisors than was typical for me during this period. When I was out of the Office, AUSA Ravener assumed most of the responsibilities concerning the TIN Matter.\n\n10. Aside from my practice of generally updating supervisors concerning my cases, I specifically recall at least one telephone conversation about the TIN Matter that included Bove, Crowley, and AUSA Ravener. During that call, AUSA Ravener and I explained that there were some suggestions that\n\n Accordingly, Crowley informed us that she was recused from the TIN Matter, and we should consult only with Bove going forward. I do not recall if Bove was on the line at the time and we continued the conversation with him after Crowley disconnected, or if we terminated the call with Crowley and then called Bove to discuss the issue. Nonetheless, AUSA Ravener and I informed Bove of the following regarding the TIN Matter:\n\nWe asked\n\nfor Bove's advice on how to contend with these issues, including\n\n. I recall that Bove provided me and AUSA Ravener with guidance on these topics, but I do not presently recall what that guidance was.\n\n11. On or about July 25, 2023, the AUSAs handling the CFU Matter contacted me regarding Bove's supervision of the TIN Matter. The AUSAs later asked me to search my emails\n\nfor communications with Bove regarding the TIN Matter, which I did to the extent I was able. Based on that review, I located emails, including the following:\n\na. On October 21, 2019, AUSA Ravener sent me an email concerning a teleconference (\"T/C\") she had with one of the FBI case agents on the TIN Matter. In that email, AUSA Ravener updated me on the topics she discussed with the agent. (I understand that this email is marked as Government Exhibit G.) In that email, AUSA Ravener also informed me that she \"spoke to Emil about the status of the [TIN] matter and next steps.\" Based on my review of this email, I believe this email indicates that, following the execution of the search warrants, Bove was updated on the TIN Matter and provided advice and guidance to me and AUSA Ravener concerning how to proceed in this investigation.\n\nb. On October 31, 2019, Bove sent an email to me and AUSA Ravener titled \"Guo,\" requesting the internal case tracking number for the TIN Matter. (I understand that this email was attached to the Government's Motion as Exhibit A.) Based on my experience in the Office, I am aware that, at that time, the TIN Co-Chiefs drafted monthly updates regarding certain TIN cases for the Office's management. As a general practice, chiefs in the Office request information on the status of certain cases—including, for example, significant events or new developments—to assist in their drafting of such updates, which updates include an internal case tracking number for each case. Based on my familiarity with the Office's practice of monthly updates and my review of this email, I believe that Bove requested the TIN Matter internal tracking number for the purpose of drafting such a monthly update regarding the TIN Matter.\n\nc. On January 20, 2022, I received an email from the then-Associate U.S. Attorney, John McEnany. (I understand that this email was attached to the Government's Motion as Exhibit D.) I recall that Bove—who had left the Office by this time—had inquired with\n\nMcEnany whether it would present a conflict for Bove to represent Mei Guo, who is Guo's daughter. On that day, I spoke with McEnany, provided him with information about the TIN Matter, and confirmed that Bove had supervised the TIN Matter. Thereafter, McEnany advised me and AUSA Ravener that he had spoken with Bove and that Bove had agreed not to represent Mei Guo on the case.\n\n12. In approximately January 2020, I was assigned to another unit in the Office and left the TIN unit. Thereafter, although I continued to work on the TIN Matter, my work on the TIN Matter was much more limited. I believe Bove continued to supervise the TIN Matter until he left the Office in December 2021.\n\n13. Other than what is set forth herein, I do not at this time have a specific recollection of oral conversations with Bove about the TIN Matter.\n\n14. I declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this declaration is true and correct.\n\nDated: New York, New York August 18, 2023\n\nRespectfully submitted,\n\n## Ettanft\n\nPrinted Name\n\nElizabeth Hanft Assistant United States Attorney Southern District of New York","body_zh":"UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）\n\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA（美利坚合众国），\n\n诉\n\nYANPING WANG（王雁平），又名“Yvette”，\n\n被告。\n\nS1 23 Cr. 118 (AT) 声明书\n\n我，Elizabeth Hanft（伊丽莎白·汉夫特），依据 28 U.S.C. § 1746 作出如下声明：\n\n1. 我是 United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦检察官办公室，以下简称“检察官办公室”）的助理联邦检察官（AUSA）。\n\n2. 大约自2017年11月至大约2020年1月期间，我被指派至检察官办公室的 Terrorism and International Narcotics Unit（恐怖主义与国际毒品组，简称“TIN”），该组目前被称为检察官办公室的 National Security and International Narcotics Unit（国家安全与国际毒品组）。我目前担任检察官办公室 General Crimes Unit（普通犯罪组）的联席主管。\n\n3. 在 TIN 组期间，我与 AUSA Kimberly Ravener（金伯利·拉夫纳）一同被指派负责一项涉及 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵），又名“Miles Guo”（以下简称“郭”）的调查，该调查大约始于2019年9月（以下简称“TIN 案件”）。\n\n4. 2019年9月19日，Emil Bove（埃米尔·博夫，以下简称“博夫”）和 Shawn Crowley（肖恩·克劳利，以下简称“克劳利”）被任命为 TIN 组联席主管，并以此身份担任我的直接主管。作为 TIN 组联席主管，博夫和克劳利负责监督 TIN 组内的所有事务，除非他们明确回避。\n\n5.\n\n6. 大约自2019年9月中旬至2019年10月4日期间，AUSA 拉夫纳和我起草了搜查令宣誓书及搜查令（以下简称“搜查令”）。我相信克劳利和/或其他主管在搜查令提交给法院之前对其进行了审查。\n\n在搜查令执行后的数周内\n\n7. FBI 因执行搜查令收缴了上百台设备和极其庞大数量的数据。\n\n8. 博夫在2019年9月和10月期间曾有一段时间出庭受审。在博夫的庭审于大约2019年10月中旬结束后，博夫和克劳利对 TIN 案件进行了监督。我通常的做法是向主管汇报我的案件进展，其中包括 TIN 案件。正如检察官办公室的惯例，这些汇报通常是口头的。克劳利和博夫的惯例是让其联席主管一同参与有关他们所监督案件的电话和/或会议。\n\n9. 在搜查令执行后，TIN 案件仍处于活跃状态。在随后的几个月里，AUSA 拉夫纳和我对 TIN 案件的工作，以及 FBI 探员的工作，主要集中在分析搜查令执行期间查扣的电子设备上。\n\n在搜查令执行后的数周内，以及在我参与 TIN 案件的整个过程中，FBI 探员和分析员定期向我和/或 AUSA 拉夫纳提供有关搜查令材料审查或调查中其他重大事件的最新进展。1\n\n1 在搜查令执行期间，以及直至大约2019年12月，我经常在异地就另一起案件工作，无法经常访问我的办公室电子邮件和手机。因此，在此期间我与主管的交谈比平时要少。当我不在检察官办公室时，AUSA 拉夫纳承担了有关 TIN 案件的大部分职责。\n\n10. 除了我通常向主管汇报案件进展的惯例之外，我特别记得至少有一次关于 TIN 案件的电话交谈，参与者包括博夫、克劳利和 AUSA 拉夫纳。在那次通话中，AUSA 拉夫纳和我解释说，有迹象表明\n\n因此，克劳利告知我们她已回避 TIN 案件，今后我们应仅向博夫请示。我不记得博夫当时是否在通话线上且在克劳利挂断后我们继续与他交谈，还是我们在结束与克劳利的通话后致电博夫讨论该问题。尽管如此，AUSA 拉夫纳和我向博夫通报了以下有关 TIN 案件的情况：\n\n我们征询\n\n博夫关于如何应对这些问题的建议，包括\n\n我记得博夫就这些主题向我和 AUSA 拉夫纳提供了指导，但我目前不记得该指导的具体内容。\n\n11. 大约在2023年7月25日，负责 CFU 案件的 AUSA 就博夫对 TIN 案件的监督事宜与我联系。随后，这些 AUSA 要求我检索我的电子邮件\n\n查找与博夫就 TIN 案件进行的通信，我在我力所能及的范围内进行了检索。基于该项审查，我找到了包括以下内容在内的电子邮件：\n\na. 2019年10月21日，AUSA 拉夫纳向我发送了一封电子邮件，内容涉及她与 TIN 案件的一名 FBI 办案探员进行的电话会议（“T/C”）。在该邮件中，AUSA 拉夫纳向我通报了她与该探员讨论的主题。（我理解该邮件已被标记为政府方证据 G。）在该邮件中，AUSA 拉夫纳还告知我，她“与 Emil 讨论了[TIN]案件的现状和下一步行动。”基于我对该邮件的审查，我相信该邮件表明，在搜查令执行后，博夫获得了 TIN 案件的最新进展汇报，并就如何推进该调查向我和 AUSA 拉夫纳提供了建议与指导。\n\nb. 2019年10月31日，博夫向我和 AUSA 拉夫纳发送了一封题为“Guo”的电子邮件，索取 TIN 案件的内部案件跟踪编号。（我理解该邮件已作为证据 A 附于政府方的动议之后。）根据我在检察官办公室的经验，我知道在当时，TIN 组联席主管每月为办公室管理层起草有关某些 TIN 案件的月度进展汇报。作为一般惯例，办公室的主管会要求提供某些案件的进展信息——例如包括重大事件或新进展——以协助他们起草此类汇报，该汇报包括每个案件的内部案件跟踪编号。基于我对检察官办公室月度汇报惯例的了解以及我对该邮件的审查，我相信博夫索取 TIN 案件内部跟踪编号是为了起草关于 TIN 案件的此类月度汇报。\n\nc. 2022年1月20日，我收到了时任助理联邦检察官 John McEnany（约翰·麦克纳尼）发来的一封电子邮件。（我理解该邮件已作为证据 D 附于政府方的动议之后。）我记得博夫——此时他已离开检察官办公室——曾向\n\n麦克纳尼询问博夫代理 Mei Guo（郭美，郭的女儿）是否会构成利益冲突。在那一天，我与麦克纳尼进行了交谈，向他提供了有关 TIN 案件的信息，并确认博夫曾监督过 TIN 案件。此后，麦克纳尼告知我和 AUSA 拉夫纳，他已与博夫交谈，且博夫已同意不在该案中代理郭美。\n\n12. 大约在2020年1月，我被调至检察官办公室的另一个部门，离开了 TIN 组。此后，尽管我继续参与 TIN 案件的工作，但我在 TIN 案件中的工作已大幅减少。我相信博夫继续监督 TIN 案件，直至他在2021年12月离开检察官办公室。\n\n13. 除此处所述内容外，我目前对与博夫关于 TIN 案件的口头交谈没有具体的回忆。\n\n14. 我谨在受伪证罪处罚的准则下声明，本声明书中所包含的信息真实且准确。\n\n日期：纽约州纽约市 2023年8月18日\n\n谨此提交，\n\nEttanft\n\n打印姓名\n\nElizabeth Hanft 纽约南区助理联邦检察官","key_entities":["Guo","Kwok","Miles Guo","Ho Wan Kwok","Yanping Wang"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":1201,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-08-18 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-08-18","updated_at":"2026-08-23 07:24:53"}