{"id":"court_sdny_148_0","court":"SDNY","case_no":"23-cr-00118","doc_number":148,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":"2023-09-21","title":"U.S. Department of Justice** Case 1:23-cr-00118-AT Document 148 Filed 09/21/23 Page 1 of 6","summary_zh":"政府回应信函 —— 美国诉 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）案，SDNY 1:23-cr-00118 ECF #148（2023-09-21 立案）。联邦检察官回应被告 Ho Wan Kwok 提出的暂停破产诉讼动议；政府对暂停不表态，但反对其所有替代请求（包括修改保护令、允许未经陪同进入 Mahwah 豪宅、阻止售出该豪宅等）；政府指称该豪宅系用欺诈所得购置、系没收财产。","summary_en":"Government Letter Brief (Motion Opposition) — United States v. Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui), SDNY 1:23-cr-00118, ECF #148 (filed September 21, 2023). Assistant U.S. Attorneys respond to defendant Ho Wan Kwok's motion to stay bankruptcy proceedings; Government takes no position on stay but opposes all alternative requests including modification of protective order, unchaperoned access to Mahwah Mansion property, and precluding government from facilitating its sale; Government asserts mansion was purchased with fraud proceeds and is subject to forfeiture.","body_en":"*United States Attorney Southern District of New York*\n\n*The Silvio J. Mollo Building One Saint Andrew's Plaza New York, New York 10007*\n\nSeptember 21, 2023\n\n**VIA ECF**  Hon. Analisa Torres Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl St. New York, NY 10007-1312\n\n# **Re:** *United States v. Ho Wan Kwok***,** *et al.***, S1 23 Cr. 118 (AT)**\n\nDear Judge Torres:\n\nThe Government respectfully submits this letter brief in response to defendant Ho Wan Kwok's August 30, 2023 motion. (*See* Dkt. 131 (\"Kwok Br.\").\n\nKwok's motion principally seeks a stay of the bankruptcy proceedings that Kwok himself voluntarily initiated in February 2022. (*Id.*). Kwok's co-defendant Yanping Wang has joined in that motion. (*See* Dkt. 135 (\"Wang Ltr.\")).\n\nIn the event a stay is denied, Kwok also makes several requests in the alternative. (Kwok Br. 1, 28-30). First, Kwok requests a modification of the Protective Order in this case to allow production of criminal discovery to the bankruptcy Trustee. (*Id.* at 28-29). Second, Kwok seeks an order that Kwok's \"defense team\" have continued, unchaperoned access to the property located at 675 Ramapo Valley Road, Mahwah, New Jersey 07430 (the \"Mahwah Mansion\"). (*Id.* at 29- 30). Relatedly, Kwok moves to \"preclude\" the Government \"from facilitating the sale\" of the Mahwah Mansion until the conclusion of this case. (*Id.*). Lastly, Kwok requests an order that the Government not solicit or receive Kwok's privileged information or records from the Trustee. (*Id.*).\n\n## **A. The Government's Position on a Stay of the Bankruptcy Proceedings**\n\n The Government presently takes no position on Kwok's motion to stay the bankruptcy proceedings.\n\n## **B. Kwok's Alternative Requests Should Be Denied**\n\n If the Court declines to stay the bankruptcy proceedings, Kwok's alternative requests should also be denied for the reasons explained below.\n\n#### **1. Two of Kwok's Requests Are Moot**\n\nKwok's first and last alternative requests should be denied as moot.\n\nFirst, Kwok's request to modify the Protective Order should be denied as moot. Kwok's counsel submits there is not good cause for such a modification and is only seeking such a modification because the Trustee obtained an order requiring Kwok to do so. (Kwok Br. 29). The Trustee is no longer seeking to enforce the order at this time. (Dkt. 145 (\"Trustee Br.\") at 6, 23). Kwok's request is therefore moot.\n\nSecond, Kwok's request regarding potentially privileged materials should be denied as moot. The Government has neither solicited nor received Kwok's potentially privileged information or records from the Trustee does not presently intend to do so, and will not do so absent agreement from Kwok's counsel (or the appropriate holder) or an order of this Court finding that such materials are not privileged and/or subject to the crime-fraud exception. Thus, Kwok's request regarding potentially privileged materials is moot.\n\nAccordingly, even if the Court reaches the alternative requests, both of these requests should be denied as moot.\n\n### **2. Kwok's Request For Unfettered Access to the Mahwah Mansion Should Be Denied**\n\nKwok's request for an order permitting his \"defense team\" unchaperoned access to the Mahwah Mansion through the conclusion of this case and any appeals should be denied for the reasons that follow.\n\nAs background, the Mahwah Mansion was purchased, renovated, and furnished with fraud proceeds, specifically G|CLUBS membership funds, after the funds were funneled through bank accounts in other entities' names. (Dkt. 19 (\"Indictment\") ¶ 16(b)-(c)). As alleged in the Indictment, G|CLUBS was used by Kwok and his conspirators to defraud victims by falsely promising them purportedly highly valuable stock in GTV (*i.e.*, using G|CLUBS as a vehicle to continue the unlawful private placement offering after the SEC intervened to stop the GTV offering) and falsely promising them \"a full spectrum of services\" once they became \"members.\" (*Id*. ¶ 15). The Mahwah Mansion and furnishings that were purchased with misappropriated G|CLUBS membership funds were identified as specific property subject to forfeiture in the Indictment. (*Id.* ¶ 55(v)).\n\nOn March 15, 2023, agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (\"FBI\") executed a search warrant at the Mahwah Mansion. Multiple FBI photographers meticulously documented the premises and its contents, taking over 2,000 photographs in the course of the search, which have been produced to the defendants in discovery. The FBI also conducted aerial surveillance of the Mahwah Mansion prior to the search, which photographs and videos have been produced to the defendants. The Government also seized voluminous physical evidence from the Mahwah Mansion, including, for example, electronic devices, Kwok's personal items (*e.g.*, customdesigned Brioni suits), and certain of the extravagant furnishings purchased with misappropriated G|CLUBS membership funds.\n\nFollowing Kwok's arrest, individuals claiming to be associated with the \"New Federal State of China\" (\"NFSC\"), a purported alternative government for the people of China founded by Kwok that is affiliated with the Himalaya Farm Alliance described in the Indictment, began using the Mahwah Mansion as their new base of operations. (*See* Indictment ¶ 14). Based on the Government's investigation, NFSC members are fiercely loyal to Kwok, and individuals in the NFSC are also associated with entities that are part of Kwok's fraud enterprise. The NFSC's occupation of the Mahwah Mansion was documented in videos and broadcasts posted publicly on social media services, GNews, and other instrumentalities of the fraud controlled by the defendants. (*See, e.g.*, attached Exhibit A (Trustee's complaint against Mahwah Mansion) ¶¶ 41- 42, 55-66 (documenting this evidence with citations)). [1](#page-2-0) In other words, after Kwok's arrest, Kwok's followers and agents have sought to perpetuate Kwok's criminal enterprise—using as a base of operations the very same mansion Kwok and his co-conspirators purchased with fraud proceeds.\n\nSubsequent to the Government's public filings regarding the Mahwah Mansion and the public broadcasts of the defendants' associates occupying the Mahwah Mansion, which threatened to diminish its value, the Trustee conferred with the Government regarding the disposition of the Mahwah Mansion. Unlike chattel or funds in a bank account, the Government generally cannot seize real property with a forfeiture-based seizure warrant prior to a final order of forfeiture which order would come only after a criminal conviction, at the conclusion of the subsequent ancillary forfeiture proceeding. Given that the defendants' associates were using the Mahwah Mansion (itself purchased with fraud proceeds) and that their occupation of the Mahwah Mansion could dissipate the property's value, on July 6, 2023, the Government provided the Trustee with 12 photographs taken during the Government's March 15, 2023 search illustrating that Kwok used the Mahwah Mansion as a personal residence.[2](#page-2-1)\n\nOn July 11, 2023, the Trustee filed an *ex parte* motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction regarding Kwok's associates' access to the Mahwah Mansion. *In re Ho Wan Kwok, et al.*, Case No. 23-05017, Dkt. 4 (D. Conn. Bankr.) (JAM). On August 1, 2023, Judge Manning granted the order in part. *See id.*, Dkt. 17. On July 13, 2023, the Government executed a proposed settlement with the Trustee that would permit the Trustee to secure the value of the Mahwah Mansion during the pendency of the criminal case. *In re Ho Wan Kwok, et al.*, Case No. 23-05017 (D. Conn. Bankr.) (JAM), Dkt. 24, Ex. 1; *see also id.* at Dkt. 53, 56. On August 31, 2023, following additional briefing and hearings, Judge Manning granted the Trustee's motion and issued a modified preliminary injunction to restrict access to the Mahwah Mansion to (a) the Security Services (as defined in the Preliminary Injunction); (b) the Trustee and his representatives and/or professionals; (c) the United States Department of Justice and its employees and representatives; (d) the FBI and its employees and representatives; (e) other federal, New Jersey state, or Mahwah municipal law enforcement agencies and their employees and\n\n<span id=\"page-2-0\"></span><sup>1</sup> The FBI conducted aerial surveillance of the Mahwah Mansion after the March 15, 2023 search on two occasions —once members of the NFSC and the defendants' enterprise began inhabiting and broadcasting from the Mahwah Mansion. Photographs and videos of this aerial surveillance have also been produced to the defendants.\n\n<span id=\"page-2-1\"></span><sup>2</sup> Kwok suggests that this was a violation of the Protective Order. (Kwok Br. 3, 21). Kwok is wrong. The Protective Order applies to the Government's \"disclosure[s] to the defendants\" of evidence pursuant to its discovery obligations and restricts *the defendants'* use of those materials acquired from the Government. (Dkt. 63 ¶ 1). It does not restrict the Government's use of its evidence. (*See id.*).\n\nrepresentatives; (f) any other persons expressly authorized by the Trustee in writing (which can include email); and (g) any other person expressly authorized by the United States District Court for the Southern District for New York or the bankruptcy court. *In re Ho Wan Kwok, et al.*, Case. No. 23-05017, Dkt. 58 (D. Conn. Bankr.) (JAM).\n\nOn September 1, 2023, the Trustee conducted a walkthrough of the Mahwah Mansion, which was video-recorded and photographed. After the instant motion from Kwok seeking to \"preserv[e] the status quo\" of the Mahwah Mansion (Kwok Br. 3), on September 12, 2023, the Trustee provided the Government with six photographs from the Trustee's September 1, 2023 walkthrough. Significantly, those photographs illustrate that the defendants' co-conspirators have been tampering with the interior of the property in an apparent effort to obstruct this criminal case by modifying the Mahwah Mansion to suit a defense narrative. Specifically, the defendants' coconspirators posted placards at room entrances that appear to suggest that the rooms of Kwok's Mahwah Mansion are, in fact, NFSC and/or G|CLUBS [3](#page-3-0) offices or rooms, as shown in the photographs below:\n\n![](_page_3_Picture_4.jpeg)\n\nThese after-the-fact placards were not present as of March 15, 2023, when the Government searched the Mahwah Mansion pursuant to a search warrant issued in this case.\n\nIn light of the foregoing, this Court should not credit Kwok's claim that a ruling against him would \"permit the Trustee in the Bankruptcy Cases to control *and potentially alter an alleged crime scene of critical importance to this proceeding*.\" (Kwok Br. 4 (emphasis added)). In fact, it is *Kwok* and his associates who appear to have been doing what Kwok claims to seek to prevent, by materially altering the Mahwah Mansion to serve a defense narrative.\n\n<span id=\"page-3-0\"></span><sup>3</sup> Kwok's motion states the Mahwah Mansion was purchased \"in furtherance of the business of *GTV*.\" (Kwok Br. 20 (emphasis added)). Kwok has not explained why then the placards denote \"NFSC\" and \"G|CLUBS.\"\n\nSimply put, the record provides no basis for permitting the “defense team[4](#page-4-0)” unfettered and unchaperoned access to the property that the defendants and their associates have been using as an instrument to attempt to obstruct justice. Such access is unnecessary, particularly given the voluminous documentation—comprising *thousands* of photographs, as well as videos—of the Mahwah Mansion that already exists in the defendants' possession (with even further evidence forthcoming). [5](#page-4-1) Contrary to Kwok's assertions, evidence regarding the condition and use of the Mahwah Mansion is not \"beyond Mr. Kwok's reach.\" (Kwok Br. 20). Rather, that evidence is in the possession of Kwok's and Wang's counsel, and Kwok's attempt to analogize the circumstances here to thwarting access to a material witness is baseless. (*Id.* at 22). There is simply no need for Kwok's \"team\" to have ongoing and continual access, potentially for years, to the Mahwah Mansion. If granted, Kwok's requests could needlessly incur costs, diminishing the Mahwah Mansion's value at the expense of victims and creditors alike, and risk providing opportunity to NFSC members who seek to exploit a mansion purchased with fraud proceeds in furtherance of a scheme to obstruct this criminal prosecution on behalf of NFSC's leaders, the defendants.\n\nNevertheless, to the extent Kwok's or Wang's criminal defense attorneys of record seek to conduct a site visit to the Mahwah Mansion—as they were permitted to do with the Sherry Netherland apartment, with the Government's consent (*see* Dkt. 72, 78, 79)—the Government would not object to such a visit on similar terms to the visit of the Sherry Netherland. (*See also*  Trustee Br. 6-7, 27, 29-30 (Trustee would not object to such a site visit \"subject to potential safeguards surrounding [Kwok's] counsel's access to the Mahwah Mansion\")). [6](#page-4-2)\n\nFinally, there is no need for this Court to \"preclude\" the Government \"from facilitating the sale\" of the Mahwah Mansion until the conclusion of this case. (Kwok Br. 29-30). It is unclear, as an initial matter, what that means. In any event, Kwok's request is at least premature, as there is no imminent sale, and any such sale would be subject to the ordinary course of the bankruptcy\n\n<span id=\"page-4-0\"></span><sup>4</sup> Kwok's brief does not define who the members of the \"defense team\" are, nor did either defendant submit a proposed order to the Court regarding this request.\n\n<span id=\"page-4-1\"></span><sup>5</sup> The Government has served a subpoena on the Trustee for the videos and photographs arising from his September 1, 2023 walkthrough, and will produce those materials to the defendants promptly after receipt. The Government produced to the defendants earlier today the six photographs from that walkthrough that the Trustee has already provided.\n\n<span id=\"page-4-2\"></span><sup>6</sup> Kwok did not confer with the Government regarding such a request prior to the filing of his motion.\n\nprocess in which Kwok is participating. (*See* Trustee Br. 7, 26, 30).\n\nAccordingly, Kwok's requests should be denied.\n\nRespectfully submitted,\n\n DAMIAN WILLIAMS United States Attorney\n\nBy: */s/*\n\nMicah F. Fergenson Ryan B. Finkel Juliana N. Murray Assistant United States Attorneys (212) 637-2190 / -6612 / -2314\n\nCc: All Counsel of Record (by ECF)","body_zh":"United States Attorney Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦检察官办公室）\n\nThe Silvio J. Mollo Building One Saint Andrew's Plaza New York, New York 10007（纽约州纽约市圣安德鲁斯广场 1 号西尔维奥·J·莫洛大楼，邮编 10007）\n\n2023年9月21日\n\n通过 ECF 送达 Hon. Analisa Torres（阿纳丽莎·托雷斯法官）Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse（丹尼尔·帕特里克·莫伊尼汉美国联邦法院）500 Pearl St. New York, NY 10007-1312\n\n事由：United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（美国 诉 郭文贵）, et al., S1 23 Cr. 118 (AT)\n\n尊敬的托雷斯法官：\n\n政府谨此提交本简短陈词，以回应被告 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）于2023年8月30日提出的动议。（参见 Dkt. 131（“Kwok 简短陈词”））。\n\n郭文贵的动议主要请求中止郭文贵本人于2022年2月自愿发起的破产程序。（同上）。郭文贵的同案被告 Yanping Wang（王雁平）已加入该动议。（参见 Dkt. 135（“Wang 信函”））。\n\n在中止请求被驳回的情况下，郭文贵还提出了多项备选请求。（Kwok 简短陈词第 1、28-30 页）。首先，郭文贵请求修改本案的保护令（Protective Order），以允许向破产 Trustee（受托人）提供刑事证据开示材料。（同上，第 28-29 页）。其次，郭文贵请求下达命令，允许郭文贵的“辩护团队”在无陪同监督的情况下继续进出位于 675 Ramapo Valley Road, Mahwah, New Jersey 07430 的物业（“Mahwah 豪宅”）。（同上，第 29-30 页）。与此相关，郭文贵提议“阻止”政府在本案结束前“为 Mahwah 豪宅的出售提供便利”。（同上）。最后，郭文贵请求下达命令，禁止政府向受托人索取或接收郭文贵的特权保密信息或记录。（同上）。\n\nA. 政府关于中止破产程序的立场\n\n政府目前对郭文贵关于中止破产程序的动议不持立场。\n\nB. 郭文贵的备选请求应予驳回\n\n如果法院拒绝中止破产程序，基于下文所述的理由，郭文贵的备选请求也应予以驳回。\n\n1. 郭文贵的两项请求已无实际意义\n\n郭文贵的第一项和最后一项备选请求应因无实际意义（moot）而被驳回。\n\n首先，郭文贵关于修改保护令的请求应因无实际意义而被驳回。郭文贵的律师主张并不存在进行此类修改的正当理由，且仅仅是因为受托人获得了一项要求郭文贵这样做的命令才寻求此类修改。（Kwok 简短陈词第 29 页）。受托人目前已不再寻求执行该命令。（Dkt. 145（“受托人简短陈词”）第 6、23 页）。因此，郭文贵的请求已无实际意义。\n\n其次，郭文贵关于潜在特权材料的请求应因无实际意义而被驳回。政府既未向受托人索取也未从中接收过郭文贵具有潜在特权的信息或记录，目前亦无此意图，且在未获得郭文贵律师（或相应权利人）的同意，或本院作出裁定认定该等材料不享有特权且/或受制于犯罪欺诈例外（crime-fraud exception）之前，政府不会这样做。因此，郭文贵关于潜在特权材料的请求已无实际意义。\n\n据此，即便法院审理备选请求，这两项请求也均应因无实际意义而被驳回。\n\n2. 郭文贵关于无限制进出 Mahwah 豪宅的请求应予驳回\n\n郭文贵关于请求下达命令允许其“辩护团队”在本案及任何上诉程序结束前在无陪同监督的情况下进出 Mahwah 豪宅的请求，基于以下理由应予驳回。\n\n背景情况是，Mahwah 豪宅是在欺诈所得款项——具体为 G|CLUBS 会员费——通过其他实体名下的银行账户进行转移后，用该等款项购买、翻新和装修的。（Dkt. 19（“起诉书”）第 16(b)-(c) 段）。正如起诉书所指控的，郭文贵及其共谋者利用 G|CLUBS 欺诈受害者，虚假承诺向其提供所谓价值极高的 GTV 股票（即在 SEC（美国证券交易委员会）介入制止 GTV 发行后，利用 G|CLUBS 作为工具继续进行非法私募发行），并虚假承诺其一旦成为“会员”即可享受“全方位的服务”。（同上，第 15 段）。用被挪用的 G|CLUBS 会员资金购买的 Mahwah 豪宅及其陈设家具，在起诉书中已被明确指定为应予没收的特定财产。（同上，第 55(v) 段）。\n\n2023年3月15日，FBI（联邦调查局）特工在 Mahwah 豪宅执行了搜查令。多名 FBI 摄影人员对该处场所及其内部物品进行了详尽记录，在搜查过程中拍摄了超过 2,000 张照片，这些照片已在证据开示中提供给被告。FBI 在搜查前还对 Mahwah 豪宅进行了空中监控，相关照片和视频也已提供给被告。政府还从 Mahwah 豪宅扣押了大量实物证据，例如包括电子设备、郭文贵的个人物品（例如定制设计的 Brioni（布里奥尼）西服），以及用挪用的 G|CLUBS 会员资金购买的部分奢华陈设。\n\n在郭文贵被捕后，自称与“New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）”（“NFSC”）——一个由郭文贵创立、据称为中国人民设立的替代政府，隶属于起诉书中所述的喜马拉雅农场联盟（Himalaya Farm Alliance）——有关联的人员开始将 Mahwah 豪宅作为其新的行动基地。（参见起诉书第 14 段）。根据政府的调查，NFSC 成员对郭文贵极度忠诚，且 NFSC 中的人员亦与构成郭文贵欺诈犯罪实体的各个机构存在关联。NFSC 对 Mahwah 豪宅的占领已被记录在公开发布于社交媒体服务、GNews 以及被告控制的其他欺诈工具上的视频和广播中。（例如，参见附录 Exhibit A（受托人针对 Mahwah 豪宅的起诉状）第 41-42、55-66 段（记录了该等证据及引用来源））。1 换言之，在郭文贵被捕后，郭文贵的追随者和代理人一直企图使郭文贵的犯罪实体持续运作——使用的行动基地正是郭文贵及其同谋用欺诈所得购买的同一座豪宅。\n\n在政府公开提交有关 Mahwah 豪宅的文件以及被告的关联人员占领 Mahwah 豪宅的公开广播（此举可能导致其贬值）之后，受托人就 Mahwah 豪宅的处置事宜与政府进行了协商。与动产或银行账户中的资金不同，在最终没收命令下达之前，政府通常无法凭基于没收的扣押令扣押不动产，而该命令只有在刑事定罪后、在随后的附随没收程序结束时才会作出。鉴于被告的关联人员正在使用 Mahwah 豪宅（其本身系用欺诈所得购买），且他们对 Mahwah 豪宅的占领可能导致该财产贬值，2023年7月6日，政府向受托人提供了政府在2023年3月15日搜查期间拍摄的 12 张照片，证明郭文贵将 Mahwah 豪宅用作个人住所。2\n\n2023年7月11日，受托人就郭文贵的关联人员进出 Mahwah 豪宅一事提交了单方（ex parte）临时限制令及初步禁令动议。In re Ho Wan Kwok, et al.，案号 23-05017，Dkt. 4（D. Conn. Bankr.（康涅狄格区破产法院））（JAM）。2023年8月1日，Manning 法官部分批准了该命令。参见同上，Dkt. 17。2023年7月13日，政府与受托人签署了一项拟议和解协议，该协议将允许受托人在刑事案件审理期间保全 Mahwah 豪宅的价值。In re Ho Wan Kwok, et al.，案号 23-05017（D. Conn. Bankr.）（JAM），Dkt. 24，Ex. 1；亦见同上，Dkt. 53、56。2023年8月31日，在进行了额外的简短陈词和听证后，Manning 法官批准了受托人的动议，并发布了一项经修改的初步禁令，将进出 Mahwah 豪宅的权限限制为：(a) 安保服务人员（定义见初步禁令）；(b) 受托人及其代表和/或专业人员；(c) United States Department of Justice（美国司法部）及其雇员和代表；(d) FBI 及其雇员和代表；(e) 其他联邦、新泽西州或 Mahwah 市政执法机构及其雇员和\n\n1 在2023年3月15日的搜查之后，FBI 曾两次对 Mahwah 豪宅进行空中监控——时间是在 NFSC 成员和被告的犯罪实体人员开始居住在 Mahwah 豪宅并从中进行广播之后。该空中监控的照片和视频也已提供给被告。\n\n2 郭文贵暗示这违反了保护令。（Kwok 简短陈词第 3、21 页）。郭文贵是错误的。保护令适用于政府依据其证据开示义务向“被告披露”证据的情形，并限制被告使用从政府处获得的该等材料。（Dkt. 63 第 1 段）。它并不限制政府对自己掌握的证据的使用。（参见同上）。\n\n代表；(f) 受托人以书面形式（可包括电子邮件）明确授权的任何其他人员；以及 (g) 由 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）或破产法院明确授权的任何其他人员。In re Ho Wan Kwok, et al.，案号 23-05017，Dkt. 58（D. Conn. Bankr.）（JAM）。\n\n2023年9月1日，受托人对 Mahwah 豪宅进行了实地巡视，并进行了录像和拍照。在郭文贵提出本案动议寻求“维持 Mahwah 豪宅的现状”（Kwok 简短陈词第 3 页）之后，受托人于2023年9月12日向政府提供了受托人2023年9月1日实地巡视中的六张照片。值得注意的是，这些照片表明，被告的同谋一直在篡改该物业的内部，显然企图通过修改 Mahwah 豪宅以契合辩护说辞来阻碍本刑事案件。具体而言，被告的同谋在房间入口处张贴了标牌，似乎试图表明郭文贵的 Mahwah 豪宅的房间实际上是 NFSC 和/或 G|CLUBS 3 的办公室或房间，如下方照片所示：\n\n[照片]\n\n这些事后张贴的标牌在2023年3月15日政府根据本案签发的搜查令搜查 Mahwah 豪宅时并不存在。\n\n鉴于上述情况，本院不应采信郭文贵的下述主张，即针对其作出不利裁定将“允许破产案件中的受托人控制并可能改变一个对本诉讼至关重要的涉嫌犯罪现场”。（Kwok 简短陈词第 4 页（后加强调））。事实上，恰恰是郭文贵及其关联人员似乎一直在做郭文贵声称试图阻止的事情，即通过实质性改变 Mahwah 豪宅来服务于辩护说辞。\n\n3 郭文贵的动议称，购买 Mahwah 豪宅是“为了推进 GTV 的业务”。（Kwok 简短陈词第 20 页（后加强调））。郭文贵尚未解释为何标牌随后标注的是“NFSC”和“G|CLUBS”。\n\n简而言之，记录并未提供任何依据来允许“辩护团队[4]”不受限制且在无人陪同的情况下进入该处房产，而被告及其同伙一直在利用该处房产作为企图妨碍司法的工具。允许此类进入是没有必要的，特别是鉴于被告已经掌握了关于 Mahwah Mansion（马 Wah 庄园）的大量记录文件——包括数千张照片以及视频（且还将有进一步的证据提供）。[5] 与 Kwok（郭文贵）的断言相反，有关马 Wah 庄园的状况和使用情况的证据并非“郭先生无法获取”。(Kwok 简短书状第 20 页)。相反，该等证据已由郭和 Wang（王雁平）的辩护律师掌握，且郭企图将此处的情形类比为阻碍接触重要证人是毫无根据的。(同上，第 22 页)。郭的“团队”完全没有必要在可能长达数年的时间里持续且不断地进入马 Wah 庄园。如果获准，郭的请求可能会产生不必要的费用，从而以牺牲受害者和债权人的利益为代价降低马 Wah 庄园的价值，并可能给 NFSC（新中国联邦）成员提供机会，使其企图利用这处以诈骗所得购买的庄园，代表 NFSC 的领导人（即本案被告）进一步实施妨碍本起刑事起诉的计划。\n\n尽管如此，如果郭或王的记录在案刑事辩护律师寻求对马 Wah 庄园进行实地勘查——正如经政府同意后获准对 Sherry Netherland（雪莉·尼德兰）公寓所做的那样（见 Dkt. 72、78、79）——政府不会反对按照与勘查雪莉·尼德兰公寓类似的条款进行此类勘查。（亦见 Trustee（破产受托人）简短书状第 6-7、27、29-30 页（受托人“在对[郭的]律师进入马 Wah 庄园设置潜在保障措施的前提下”，不反对进行此类实地勘查））。[6]\n\n最后，本法院没有必要在本案结案前“阻止”政府“协助出售”马 Wah 庄园。(Kwok 简短书状第 29-30 页)。首先，目前尚不清楚该请求的具体含义。无论如何，郭的请求至少是不成熟的，因为并不存在迫在眉睫的出售，且任何此类出售都将受制于郭正在参与的破产\n\n[4] 郭的简短书状并未界定谁是“辩护团队”的成员，两名被告也均未就该请求向法院提交拟定命令。\n\n[5] 政府已就受托人在 2023年9月1日 预检中拍摄的视频和照片向其送达了传票，并将在收到后立即向被告出示该等材料。政府已于今天早些时候向被告出示了受托人已经提供的该次预检中的六张照片。\n\n[6] 郭在提交其动议之前并未就该项请求与政府进行协商。\n\n程序的常规流程。（见破产受托人简短书状第 7、26、30 页）。\n\n因此，郭的请求应予驳回。\n\n谨此提交，\n\nDAMIAN WILLIAMS（达米安·威廉姆斯）\nUnited States Attorney（美国联邦检察官）\n\n签署人：/s/\n\nMicah F. Fergenson（迈卡·F·弗根森）\nRyan B. Finkel（瑞安·B·芬克尔）\nJuliana N. Murray（朱莉安娜·N·默里）\nAssistant United States Attorneys（助理美国联邦检察官）\n(212) 637-2190 / -6612 / -2314\n\n抄送：所有记录在案的律师（通过 ECF）","key_entities":["Kwok","Je","Ho Wan Kwok","forfeiture","GTV","CIPA","Torres","Yanping Wang","Analisa Torres","Fergenson","Murray","Finkel","Himalaya"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":4,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":17,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":19,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":24,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":53,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":58,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":63,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":72,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":131,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":135,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":145,"court":"SDNY"}],"word_count":2219,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-09-21 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-09-21","updated_at":"2026-08-23 07:29:28"}