Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings U.S. v. Francesco Distefano Government's Memorandum in Support of Continued Detention — United States v. Francesco…

Court filing

Government's Memorandum in Support of Continued Detention — United States v. Francesco Distefano

No. 1:24-cr-00424 · Doc. 45 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:225




                        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                        NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
                             EASTERN DIVISION


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                                              Case No. 24 CR 424
        v.
                                              Honorable Jeffrey Cole
FRANCESCO DISTEFANO


               GOVERNMENT’S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT
               OF CONTINUED DETENTION OF DEFENDANT

      This memorandum is submitted in support of the government’s position that

defendant continue in pretrial detention pending resolution of the Second

Superseding Indictment that charges defendant with 11 counts of wire fraud in

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, 5 counts of money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 1957(a), and 1 count of making a false statement to a financial institution in

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014. Defendant has been detained since September 11,

2024, when he was arrested at O’Hare Airport on an arrest warrant issued in

connection with the original indictment, which charged defendant with a single

count of making a false statement to a financial institution. The government moved

for a detention hearing under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(2) following that arrest, outlining

at defendant’s initial appearance some of its proffered evidence as to defendant’s

serious risk of flight and the serious risk that he will obstruct or will attempt to

obstruct justice if he is not detained pending trial. A detention hearing was

scheduled for September 17, 2024. Prior to that hearing, defendant, through his




                                         1
     Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 2 of 14 PageID #:226




counsel, withdrew his objection to detention. Defendant now seeks pretrial release,

and a hearing has been set for December 13, 2024, at 1:30 p.m.

       For the reasons described below, which will be expanded upon at the

upcoming hearing, the government submits that defendant poses a serious risk of

flight and that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure his

appearance.

I.     LEGAL STANDARD

       Detention prior to trial is appropriate if the Court finds that there is no

condition or combination of conditions that will both assure the appearance of the

person as required and assure the safety of any other person and the community. 18

U.S.C. § 3142(e)(1). In making its detention determination, the Court may consider

factors including the nature and circumstances of the offense charged, the weight of

the evidence against the defendant, and the history and characteristics of the

defendant. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g). If, after a detention hearing, the Court finds that

“no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of

the person as required and the safety of any other person and the community, [the

Court] shall order the detention of the person before trial.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(1).

With respect to risk of non-appearance, the government bears the burden of proof

by a preponderance of the evidence. United States v. Portes, 786 F.2d 758, 765 (7th

Cir. 1985); United States v. Daniels, 772 F.2d 382, 383 (7th Cir. 1985).




                                          2
       Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 3 of 14 PageID #:227




II.      NATURE AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENSE

         Defendant is charged with 11 counts of wire fraud, five counts of money

laundering, and one count of making a false statement to a financial institution.

These charges arise from and relate to defendant’s conduct in filing fraudulent

Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”), Economic Injury Disaster Loan (“EIDL”), and

mortgage loan applications between March 2020 and February 2021. Defendant

engaged in two charged schemes that fraudulently obtained approximately

$3,330,947 in PPP and EIDL funds, and would have obtained an additional

$3,458,696 in fraudulent second draw PPP loans, but for the intervention of law

enforcement in February of 2021.

III.     THE STRENGTH OF THE EVIDENCE

         The evidence in this case is strong. The defendant submitted fraudulent loan

applications accompanied by fraudulent tax returns and fraudulent ADP records for

his own company (Distefano Enterprises), as well as his co-defendant’s two

companies using his own name, his own name and his own email account, and he

did so from an unmasked IP addresses at his parents’ house (while he lived there)

and later his own home, in Addison, Illinois. Defendant caused a substantial portion

of the funds derived from the charged offenses to be deposited into his own personal

bank account where he used them for, among other things, exotic motor vehicles.

         When law enforcement approached and interviewed defendant concerning the

suspected fraud on February 13, 2021, he repeated the lies from Distefano

Enterprises PPP application, telling agents that the entity had 14 employees and



                                            3
      Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 4 of 14 PageID #:228




$79,166 in monthly payroll, when, in reality, it had no employees and was just the

defendant with occasional help from individuals paid under the table as contractors.

IV.     NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DEFENDANT

        Defendant’s Background

        At the time of the charged offenses, defendant was 24 years-old and working

in the payments processing industry through his Distefano Enterprises entity. At

the time the charged scheme began, defendant resided in his parents’ home in

Addison, Illinois. During the course of the charged scheme, defendant moved out of

his parents’ house and into his own home (the “8TH Avenue Property”), also in

Addison, Illinois. In December 2023, defendant was convicted of nonconsensual

dissemination of a sex image, a fourth-degree felony, and he is presently on

probation. See People of the State of Illinois v. Francesco Distefano, No.

22CR0622401 (Cook County Circuit Court).

        Defendant was born in Illinois on March 24, 1996. Defendant is now a dual

citizen of the United States and Italy. 1 In June and August of 2021, defendant was

issued passports by the United States and Italy, respectively. The United States

passport indicates that it was issued to replace a lost or stolen passport.




1 The government does not know exactly when defendant obtained Italian citizenship. The

government has been provided an image of a text message sent on or around August 2,
2021, that the recipient attributes to defendant that shows a picture of what appears to be
an Italian citizenship document containing defendant’s name, followed by the statement “no
more usa [sic] buddy”.

                                            4
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 5 of 14 PageID #:229




      Ties to the Community

      In the 15 months preceding defendant’s arrest, he steadily reduced his ties to

the community.

      On or about May 22, 2023, defendant caused Distefano Enterprises to

purchase a 2017 Maserati Levante, paying $33,473 for the vehicle by a cashier’s

check in the amount of $35,000. On or around July 16, 2024, according to a public

records database, title to the 2017 Maserati Levante was transferred from Distefano

Enterprises to Relative A.

      On or about June 29, 2023, X1 Merchant Services LLC was formed in

Delaware, with an individual who has performed handyman services for defendant

as its sole member. The following day, June 30, 2023, the entity opened a bank

account with its member and defendant as the two designated signers on the

account. According to its website, X1 offers payment processing solutions to

customers, a business very similar to the business of Distefano Enterprises.

      On or around August 2, 2023, Relative A entered into a purchase agreement

to acquire a 2017 Lamborghini Huracan coupe, in the exterior color of orange, for a

sale price before taxes and fees of $230,000. The vehicle was paid for several days

later through a $20,000 trade-in allowance for a 2013 Maserati GranTurismo coupe

(that, according to public records, was previously titled to Distefano Enterprises), a

$60,000 cashier’s check, and a $167,400.97 loan from Credit Union A. While the




                                          5
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 6 of 14 PageID #:230




loan from Credit Union A is in Relative A’s name alone, defendant’s email address

appears on the application. The Lamborghini is titled to Relative A.

      On or around August 23, 2023, defendant executed a quitclaim deed

transferring the 8TH Avenue Property to Relative B. Defendant continued to reside

at the residence after the transfer of title. Defendant had purchased the home in or

around June of 2020, and had held title in his own name before transferring title to

Relative B.

      On or about November 21, 2023, a 2023 Mercedes G-Class was purchased in

Relative A’s name. The purchase price for the vehicle, inclusive of taxes and fees,

was $242,527.40, of which $201,527.40 was financed for a 72-month term. While the

loan and title for the vehicle are in Relative A’s name, defendant’s email address

and phone number appear on the retail installment sale contract.

      In February 2024, four different lien releases were filed with the DuPage

County Recorder effecting the release of liens that had been filed against the 8TH

Avenue Property. Each of the releases states that it was prepared by Distefano

Enterprises. Each release purports to be signed by the same individual who signed

the original lien claim to which it pertains. Each signature appears above

defendant’s notary stamp and apparent signature. From              interviews with

representatives of the four lien claimants, the government understands that none of

the claimants have been paid, and none authorized or caused the release of their

lien to be filed. The fraudulently released liens are:




                                           6
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 7 of 14 PageID #:231




                        Lien   Release        Claim
       Claimant      Recorded Recorded       Amount         Basis for Claim
      Contractor A   11/4/2020  2/7/2024       $26,995   Windows and door
      Contractor B   1/15/2021  2/7/2024       $14,595   Roof and downspout
      Contractor C   1/26/2024  2/8/2024        $3,000   Floor refinishing
      Contractor D    2/8/2024 2/15/2024     $3,522.50   Duct sealing


      In August 2024, the government received information indicating that

Relative A had been shopping for shipping containers to ship cars and furniture to

Italy. While defendant did not at that time have any vehicles titled in his own he

possessed and enjoyed the use of the Orange Lamborghini, a Porsche Teycan, and

the Mercedes G-Class, as if they were his own and not Relative A’s.

      Defendant’s recently diminishing ties to the community, and the brazenness

of the lien release fraud committed in February 2024, suggests that defendant has

plans to relocate.

      Financial Resources

      The government does not have high confidence that it currently knows of all

defendant’s accounts, and its visibility into defendant’s known accounts is not real

time, however, based on personal and business account balances in the 12 months

preceding defendant’s arrest, the government expects defendant likely has

immediate access to tens of thousands of dollars. Defendant also has future income

streams in the form of residual payments that he receives from the processing

charges from his business’s payments customers.




                                         7
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 8 of 14 PageID #:232




      Capacity for Flight

      The government is now in possession of defendant’s U.S. and Italian

passports. But there is an unaccounted-for U.S. passport that defendant reported

lost or stolen in May 2021, and his Italian citizenship enables him to get a new

passport by visiting an Italian embassy or consulate in the United States, Mexico,

Canada, or beyond. And there is of course no requirement that defendant take flight

to a foreign country in order to not appear; defendant could try to hide in the United

States rather than face what could be a substantial custodial sentence for the

charged conduct.

      Past Conduct

      Defendant’s past conduct demonstrates that he is willing to engage in

unlawful conduct even when he knows he is under a microscope, which strongly

suggests that he will not comply with any conditions of release. The nature of

defendant’s past obstructive acts also speaks to his capacity to produce or procure

fake documents to assist flight.

      Defendant has been aware that he is under investigation for loan fraud since

at least February 13, 2021, when agents visited his house and interviewed him by

telephone. This knowledge did not dissuade him from continuing to engage in fraud.

      On April 28, 2021, FBI issued a Notice of Seizure and Initiation of

Administrative Forfeiture Proceedings against the $677,932.25 seized from

defendant’s bank account, and four luxury vehicles that are now the subjects of

forfeiture allegations in the pending indictment and in a separate civil forfeiture



                                          8
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 9 of 14 PageID #:233




proceeding. See USA v. 2016 Lamborghini Huracan VIN:ZHWUC2ZF1GLA04413,

et al, No. 22-cv-01684 (N.D. IL). On or around May 3, 2022, defendant submitted a

petition for remission or mitigation of forfeiture to the FBI Chicago field office,

seeking return of the $677,932.25 seized from his bank account. In the petition,

defendant represented that the funds in the account were “for work that he

legitimately performed.” Defendant contended that even if the funds originated

from fraudulent PPP/EIDL loans obtained by West Coast and National, those

entities owed him the funds that were transferred into his account for debts that

were evidenced by invoices attached to the petition. The petition was electronically

signed by defendant under penalty of perjury. The petition attached four undated

purported invoices totaling $1,010,000 issued to purported customers, care of West

Coast or National. Law enforcement has interviewed the purported customers

referenced in the invoices, and they neither contracted for, nor received, the goods

and services described in the invoices. The documents were simply fabrications, and

defendant submitted those to the FBI in an attempt to obstruct the investigation

that he knew was ongoing and recover the scheme proceeds that had been seized.

      On or around August 28, 2023, a restaurant industry consultant who had

previously referred a customer to defendant, sent a group text message to defendant

and the (by then, former) customer with a link to a news article about Covid fraud

and a follow-on text asking: “Are they still coming after you Francesco?” Defendant

responded in the negative, sending what appears to be a letter from the U.S.

Attorney for the District of Columbia that purports to clear defendant of all



                                         9
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 10 of 14 PageID #:234




wrongdoing, informs that the 2020 Vehicles will be returned “instanter,” and states

that the United States has “accepted wrongdoing” and will be paying defendant

$15,000,000. Defendant followed the picture of a letter with an instruction “read

and weep boys” and then followed that with the below picture of an orange

Lamborghini.




Defendant’s Conduct While on Probation

         As noted above, defendant was convicted of a revenge porn offense in

December 2023 and was sentenced to 18 months of probation. The sentencing order

provides that defendant shall not violate the criminal statutes of any jurisdiction,

and specifies that “defendant allowed to travel for work.” The face of the order itself

is ambiguous about whether defendant is permitted to travel generally (i.e., not for

work).



                                          10
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 11 of 14 PageID #:235




      The government has spoken with the probation officers in both Cook and

DuPage Counties (the defendant’s probation is based in Cook County but he reports

to an officer in DuPage County), and is informed that defendant is not permitted to

travel without first clearing the travel with his probation officer. If defendant wants

to travel for work, he must ask permission from the DuPage County Probation

Officer and supply documentation evidencing the planned travel before the officer

approves the travel. The defendant has sought and been granted such permission

previously, demonstrating that he is aware of the requirement. The government

understands that the defendant must seek court approval if he wishes to travel for

matters other than work.

      The defendant spent most of the month of June outside of the United States,

flying from New York to Rome on June 1, 2024, and returning to Chicago from

Munich on June 29, 2024. The government understands that defendant did not

request permission from the Cook County Circuit Court to make this trip, nor did

he request approval from his DuPage County Probation Officer. Defendant met by

video with his DuPage County Probation Officer on June 20, 2024, and apparently

did not inform the officer that he was out of the country during their video meeting.

The DuPage County Officer informs that defendant did not request permission to

travel to Istanbul, Turkey on September 11, 2024, which is where he was headed at

the time of his arrest.




                                          11
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 12 of 14 PageID #:236




      Defendant’s non-compliance with the conditions of his current probation,

through his involvement in the fraudulent lien releases and unauthorized travel,

suggest that defendant is unlikely to abide any conditions of pretrial release.

Defendant’s Conduct While Detained

      Since his detention on September 11, 2024, defendant has engaged in at least

two notable episodes of dishonest behavior. First, in the early days of his detention,

defendant falsely accused one of the case agents working on this investigation of

visiting him on multiple occasions at the Jerome Combs Detention Center to try and

speak with him outside of the presence of his attorneys. The agent did not even visit

the building on the days that defendant claimed these encounters occurred.

Defendant’s accusations were entirely false. And while the false accusations against

the case agent were quickly dropped, the fact that defendant leveled the accusations

in the first place illustrates the extents to which defendant is willing to go in an

attempt to achieve his aims.

      More recently, after defendant had spent approximately 40 days in detention,

he claimed to have a serious, pre-existing eye condition that, left untreated, would

result in him losing sight in the affected eye within a week. He claimed to have

submitted medical requests to the Jerome Combs facility that went unheeded and

further alleged that he was threatened with a write-up if he continued to submit

requests for medical attention. Defendant went on to assert that he traveling to

Istanbul on September 11, 2024, so that he could have eye surgery in Turkey on




                                          12
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 13 of 14 PageID #:237




September 17, 2024. 2 When the government investigated the claimed lack of

medical attention, serious contradictions in defendant’s claims quickly emerged.

First, the facility had no record of any medical requests from defendant. 3 Next,

when the facility attempted to obtain the purportedly existent medical records so

that treatment for the condition could be arranged, defendant told medical staff

that the undersigned AUSA possessed his medical records (which was not true), and

then provided the name of his purportedly treating doctor, who, as it turns out,

retired 8 years. The only records the facility’s medical staff have been able to obtain

regarding defendant’s eyes are records from his visits to LensCrafters in March

2023 and March 2024.




2 Notably, defendant provided a different reason for the travel to Turkey in his interview

with Pretrial Services, as set forth in the report.

3 Defendant had made three non-medical requests as of October 22, 2024, demonstrating

his awareness of the process for submitting requests.

                                               13
   Case: 1:24-cr-00424 Document #: 45 Filed: 12/12/24 Page 14 of 14 PageID #:238




   V.     CONCLUSION

        The government respectfully submits that no condition or combination of

conditions will reasonably assure defendant’s appearance. Defendant should be

detained pending trial.


                                             Respectfully submitted,

                                             MORRIS PASQUAL
                                             Acting United States Attorney

                                      By:    /s/ Jeffrey S. Snell
                                             Jeffrey S. Snell
                                             Assistant United States Attorney
                                             United States Attorney=s Office
                                             219 South Dearborn Street
                                             Chicago, Illinois 60604
                                             (312) 469-6308
Dated: December 12, 2024




                                        14


File and source

File
gov.uscourts.ilnd.464178.45.0.pdf
Size
325,549 bytes
SHA-256
88ac8728f49ef2ff230e36ee3559a14464b79322b427d6f4652fb093b8ac132f
Our copy
gov.uscourts.ilnd.464178.45.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top