DOJ Case Dismissed by Federal Judge Virginia Kendall & DOJ Assistant United States Attorney Rick D. Young Dismisses Department of Justice and SEC Case Matters Against Charles Dushek on December 16, 2020 at Federal Court Final Hearing
SEC & DOJ Regulatory Case Dismissal Matters 2012 through 2020 of Charles J Dushek
SEC and DOJ Legal Matters Update on Case Number 16-CR-811, on January 1, 2021 for Charles J Dushek...United States DOJ Attorney Dismisses Indictment Counts Against Charles Dushek *Source: sec.gov
As of December 16, 2020...Department of Justice (DOJ) Dismisses All Indictment Counts Against Charles J Dushek, (* See POGO Below) Whereby Important Defensive Evidence was Held-Back by DOJ Prosecution Attorneys from Dushek’s Defense Attorneys after the Unfounded DOJ Indictment was issued in December 2016.
This Holdback Implied Efforts to Influence Defendant Charles Dushek to Do a "Plea Bargain", to being guilty of a Lesser Charge, so as to Avoid Having the DOJ Admit, that Their Indictment in 2016 was Ill-Conceived and False Biased the DOJ Use of SEC Contrived and Falsified Prosecutorial Allegations Against Dushek within the Earlier SEC Complaint Filed in 2012 and Settled in 2014 involing Charles Dushek.
DOJ Prosecutors Intentionally withheld Defensive Evidence from Defendant’s Attorneys for 4 Years resulting in Dismissal of DOJ Indictment charges by Federal Judge Virginia Kendall on December 16, 2020.
* Case Dismissal Document issued by Federal Judge Virginia Kendall is presented below.
The Assistant United States Attorney Rick D. Young on December 16, 2020, in the Court Hearing presided over by Honorable Judge Virginia M Kendall by leave of court, filed a Case Dismissal, under “Rule 48 Dismissal” of the Indictment, Information or Complaint against Charles J. Dushek and the DOJ prosecution shall thereupon terminate.
Regarding Charles Dushek, Federal Case Number 16-CR-811, DOJ Assistant United States Attorney Rick D. Young Dismisses Indictment Case Charges on, December 16, 2020 in Federal Court with Judge Ms. Virginia M. Kendall Presiding Over this Final Hearing to Close All Matters of the Case. (See all documents below.)
DOJ Dismisal of Indictment Charges by US Attorney
SEC and DOJ Prosecuting Attorneys withheld, suppressed, coveted vital information that is Defensive Exculpatory Evidence in Content that biased the Prosecutions of SEC and DOJ. Said evidence, the Confidential Master Services Agreement between SEI Trust Company and GreatBanc Trust Company of 2007, which, within the Agreement, fundamentally adversely changed the Stocks Trading Accounts Allocations System, which directly caused multi-days delays in having all Current-Day Securities Trades delayed by as much as 5 calendar days from Trade Date of Transactions to the actual GBTC Client Accounts Bookkeeping Posting Date.
This change in Process for handling Securities Transaction Accounting Timing Outcomes violated Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulations (IDFPR Regs). This caused CMA Employees to delay their Ontime Same-Day Trades Account Allocations that had been functioning perfectly for same-day posting bookkeeping on the TradersApp GBTC System since April 2003.
* POGO.org Project On Government Oversight (POGO) Insiders state: That US Department of Justice frequently ignores the Discovery and Disclosure of Exculpatory Defensive Evidence to Defendants of a DOJ Indictment, in order to strengthen their Indictment Prosecutorial Cases in an attempt to greviously and unfairly influence Indictment Defendants to make Guilty Pleas to lesser charges to avoid a Federal Court Trial.
Whereas, The Brady Rule in Federal Cases against Individuals Requires Federal Prosecutors to use Full Efforts and Disclosure Ethics to Find and Share to Defendants All Evidence that Can be Used in the Defense of Individuals Indicted in any Federal Case. In the case matters against Dushek, the DOJ Attornies after doing "prosecutorial diligence to seek all evidence in support of a case, intentiaonally supressed the disclosure to Dushek and his Defense Attornies of defensive evidence that Dushek actually achieved substantail capital gains and investment income, that greatly exceeded the major stock index performance for the 4 year period of the SEC and DOJ cases. Whereas the SEC and DOJ falsely alleged that Dushek created investment losses to his clients.
All legal matters of Charles J Dushek regarding his financial services employment and business ownership history going back to the 1970s, when Mr. Dushek entered the regulated financial services industry via a Financial Futures Markets Specialist Role with Merrill Lynch Futures Division in Chicago through and including the ending of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) litigation against Mr. Dushek has been chronicled and assessed by myself, Mr. Awais Bajwa Esq, International Attorney at Law hired and appointed by Mr. Dushek to continually update this Post to provide authoritative reporting on all his legal matters associated to his work and business ownerships in US financial market settings.
If any reader of this Post is interested in obtaining answers to any questions about Mr. Dushek's past and current involvement in the financial services industry, you are invited to connect with me, Mr. Dushek's Legal Representative at Law, using this contact information: AwaisBajwaLawyer@Live.com
*Mr. Awais Bajwa Esq is a Practicing Administrative Law Attorney and Legal Expert in United States Civil, Criminal, and other Tort Case Matters to US Citizens and to US Federal & State Bar Attorneys for Legal Case Law Review Assessments, Preparation of Court Documents, Legal Briefs & Motions. and other Legal Assistance Matters in International Remote Services.
(Please Contact Attorney Mr. Awais Baywa Esq at: AwaisBajwaLawyer@Live.com for Advices and Legal Services in Corporate, Fiduciary, Securities, Civil & Criminal Case Research Briefs.)
SEC and DOJ Legal Update on Case Number 16-CR-811, January 1, 2021 for Charles J Dushek...United States DOJ Attorney Dismisses Indictment Counts Against Charles Dushek * DOJ Attorney and Judge Kendall's Court Findings are that Capital Management Associates (CMA) Clients, whereby Charles Dushek Managed Certain Portfolio Investments of 37 Clients, which clients Had No Realized Investment Losses for the Subject 4 Years Investment Time period of 2008 through 2012, and Instead Had a 12.5% Realized Capital Gains in Profits on These Client's Investment Portfolios exclusively managed by Charles Dushek, compared to the S&P 500 Stocks Index Benchmark which had No Capital Gains nor Stock Market Value Appreciation during same period from June 2008 at its 1300 ticker value through its June 2012 ticker value. According to a DOJ Created Investment Analysis Review Study, that was held back by DOJ, and finally entered into Court Records after Defendant Dushek was influenced/steered to enter a Plea Agreement for Minimal Compliance Violations...Read All Details Below....By Mr. Awais Bajway Esq JD, International Attorney's Legal Brief
“Mr. Charles J Dushek, After Having Been Prosecuted by both the SEC and DOJ since 2012, Has Now Completed the Resolution of His 2016 DOJ Indictment Case by Receiving a Minimal Probationary Sentence Concerning an alleged Lack of Full Disclosure of Information, the outcome of a Plea Agreement entered by Mr. Dushek. Yet, Mr. Dushek had provided fully signed Investment Services Agreement Documents Disclosing All Matters of Interest to all clients, countersigned by CMA and Each Client.
Subsequently, probation supervision was officially terminated on January 10, 2023 by Chief U.S. Probation Officer, Marcus Holmes, pursuant to the document displayed below:
*These Minor Compliance Investment Services Document Statement Deficiencies Alleged to Mr. Dushek are Deemed to Have No Criminal Intent nor Fraud Implications.
Since, Mr. Dushek was required by legal due process to admit, or enter a Minimal Plea Bargain, to some degree of guilt, in order to attain a "Judicial Review or Verdict by a Presiding Federal Judge", which is a possible, often-used protocol in Federal Cases as a quid pro quo to settle or dismiss an Invalid Indictment Condition under Rule 48 Dismissal, whereas DOJ Prosecutors failed to have a credible and provable Indictment Case at the onset of this later-determined Invalid Indictment process in December 2016.
What percentage of Department of Justice Indictments are dismissed due to being invalid indictments?
Government Statistics:
"The data tracks numbers from the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice, and state that 16.6 to 50 percent of all cases were declined from federal prosecution. A declination is a decision by a U.S. attorney not to pursue criminal prosecution of a referral from a law enforcement agency."
* These Minor Compliance Deficiencies Alleged to Mr. Dushek are Deemed to Have No Criminal Intent nor Fraud Implications.
* The Indictment Dismissal Action by the DOJ Attorney, and Presiding Federal Judge is an action under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, TITLE IX. GENERAL PROVISIONS Rule 48. Dismissal.
SEC and DOJ Legal Update on Case Number 16-CR-811, January 1, 2021 for Charles J Dushek...United States Attorney Dismisses Indictment Counts * Capital Management Associates (CMA) Clients Had No Realized Investment Losses and Instead Had $1,245,000 Capital Gain Profits According to a New DOJ Investment Allocations Review Study...Read All Details Below....By Mr. Awais Bajway Esq JD, International Attorney's Legal Brief
See Exhibit A Below, a DOC submitted by Department of Justice at Final Court Hearing on December 16, 2020.
“Mr. Charles J Dushek, After Having Been Prosecuted by both the SEC and DOJ Since 2012, Has Now Completed the Closure of His 2016 DOJ Indictment Case by Receiving a Minimal Probationary Sentence for DOJ general allegations relating to investment advisory non-compliance, No Monetary Restitution was Set by the Court for any Offense, and 1 through 9 Counts of the Indictment Were Dismissed, and Count 10, is effectively Dismissed without Prejudice, as being just a Restatement of all Paragraphs included in Count 1, by the United States Attorney.”…Pursuant to Court Reports Dated: December 16, 2020. (This report, its supporting facts, explanations and its legal opinions are prepared and presented by Mr. Awais Bajwa Esq, International Attorney at Law * Corporate Law * Fiduciary Law * Securities Law * Supreme Court & Federal Government Law * Assistant to Supreme Court Justices * University of London LLB & JD at AwaisBajwaLawyer@Live.com. Attorney Mr. Awais Bajwa Esq was engaged by Mr. Charles J Dushek in 2017 to fully analyze his legal case matters with the SEC and DOJ and produce researched Legal Briefs for Public Disclosure.)
Regarding Mr. Dushek and his firm Capital Management Associates (CMA), this Firm became registered as an Investment Advisor in 2001, and FINRA designated the Illinois Department of Securities (IL-DOS) as the Sole Designated Regulator for CMA and Mr. Dushek’s investment practices and general operations.
Furthermore, since the establishment of CMA as an Investment Advisor in 2001, CMA and Mr. Dushek have had on-site discovery audits by IL-DOS Auditors for several days each, and there are no reported findings published by IL-DOS that CMA nor Mr. Dushek were at anytime non-compliant with IL-DOS Regulations for Registered Investment Advisors operating in the State Jurisdiction of Illinois.
Comments
Post a Comment