Sentencing Transcript — United States v. Wint

Record facts

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York · No. 1:21-cr-00477-FB · Doc. 30 · 2023-06-27 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
 
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - X
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
   -against-
CHARLENE WINT,
Defendant.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
21-CR-00477 (FB)
United States Courthouse
Brooklyn, New York
November 17, 2022
3:30 p.m. 
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - X
TRANSCRIPT OF CRIMINAL CAUSE FOR SENTENCING 
BEFORE THE HONORABLE FREDERIC BLOCK 
UNITED STATES SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
 
A P P E A R A N C E S:
For the Government:      BREON PEACE, ESQ. 
 
     Acting United States Attorney
   
     Eastern District of New York
     271 Cadman Plaza East 
          Brooklyn, New York 11201
 
   
     BY:  CHAND WARREN EDWARDS-BALFOUR, ESQ.
JENNIFER BILINKAS, ESQ.
 
     Assistant United States Attorneys 
 
For the Defendant:       LAW OFFICES OF LONNIE HART JR.
26 Court Street, Suite 714
Brooklyn, NY 11242
 
     BY:  LONNIE HART, JR., ESQ.
Court Reporter:          DENISE PARISI, RPR, CRR
         225 Cadman Plaza East
          Brooklyn, New York 11201
               Telephone: (718) 613-2605
 
     E-mail: DeniseParisi72@gmail.com  
Proceedings recorded by computerized stenography.  Transcript 
produced by Computer-aided Transcription.
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 1 of 22 PageID #: 228

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
2
(In open court.)
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Criminal cause for 
sentencing, United States of America versus Wint.  
I ask the parties if you can please state your 
appearances.  
MS. BILINKAS:  Jennifer Bilinkas.  Also present, 
Chand Edwards-Balfour for the United States. 
MR. HART:  And for Ms. Wint, Lonnie Hart, 
L-O-N-N-I-E H-A-R-T.  Good afternoon, everyone. 
THE COURT:  Good afternoon Mr. Hart. 
Ms. Bilinkas, is that how you pronounce your name?  
MS. BILINKAS:  Yes, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  It's not Greek, is it?  
MS. BILINKAS:  Lithuanian. 
THE COURT:  Lithuanian.  All right. 
So, let me ask, Mr. Hart, is your client prepared to 
be sentenced?  You obviously were listening to the prior 
sentence. 
MR. HART:  Intently. 
THE COURT:  All right.  And you know a lot of the 
thoughts I have in my mind.  I have a lot of concerns.  You 
know what I'm going to do?  ^ ASK CH ABOUT PARENTHETICAL?? I'm 
going to incorporate, in this sentencing proceeding, the 
record that we just concluded in the prior proceeding as part 
and parcel of this sentencing proceeding; in particular, the 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 2 of 22 PageID #: 229

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
3
nature of the interaction between the bank, the SBA, and 
everything we spoke about instead of repeating it now -- it's 
the same dynamic that we're concerned about here -- and I will 
incorporate all of the prior comments I made, including the 
sentence, because we sort of have to deal with people who are 
co-conspirators and treat them similarly, so we got to talk 
about that too, here.  
Initially, my reaction is that arguably, Ms. Wint is 
more culpable than Mr. Campbell.  I'm troubled by the fact 
that she is the one that initiated the customers that were 
sent, then, to people like Mr. Campbell to do the necessary 
fraudulent paperwork.  So, initially, that troubles me a 
little bit, because if not for her finding the candidates to 
send to the folks who are then going to engage in the 
fraudulent paperwork, they would not have had the opportunity 
to do that apparently.  
So think about that, that concerns me, because I 
think that she may be somewhat more culpable because of that, 
so you can address that, Mr. Hart, when your opportunity comes 
to speak.  
And why don't we just go through what I have in the 
file, make the calculations and move on to the difficult 
things.  
I notice that the order of forfeiture here is not 
$100,000 as it was for Mr. Campbell, but it's 25,000, and does 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 3 of 22 PageID #: 230

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
4
that reflect the amount of monies that she gained from this 
operation compared to the commissions that were earned by 
Mr. Campbell?  Am I reading that correctly?  
MS. BILINKAS:  Yes, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  So she didn't make as much money as 
Mr. Campbell?  
MS. BILINKAS:  That's correct. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  So I'm going to sign the 
forfeiture order.  I take it, Mr. Hart, you have no objection 
to doing that. 
MR. HART:  Correct. 
THE COURT:  All right.  Let me do that now.  Is it 
still November 17th?  
MR. HART:  Yes.  
THE COURT:  So on the one hand she's arguably more 
culpable.  On the other hand, she may have less culpability 
than Mr. Campbell.  
Then, I have the sentencing recommendation.  The 
guideline calculation apparently is the same.  The 
recommendation by Probation is the same -- 33 months -- and I 
will note that, yes, she's going to be excused from the 
mandatory drug testing provisions.  I think that's appropriate 
here.  There's a $100 special assessment that we'll obviously 
have to attach.  Probation doesn't recommend any fine here.  I 
don't think she has the capacity to pay a fine.  She's older 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 4 of 22 PageID #: 231

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
5
than Mr. Campbell; she's a 54-year old woman and they 
recommend, also, two years of supervised release, so you have 
the Probation Department's comments.  
Next, we have the underlying Presentence Report 
dated June 24th, 2022, and Ms. Wint was arrested also at the 
same time that Mr. Campbell was arrested on September 23rd, 
2021, also released on a $50,000 appearance bond.  We have no 
adverse reports from Pretrial Services.  Apparently, she's 
been compliant.  
While we're at it, let's just get through with the 
calculations.  It's the same 33 to 41 months, unless anybody 
takes any serious objection to it, I'm not going to, once 
again, apply sophisticated means.  I'm going to be consistent 
with what I did before, but we calculate the total offense 
level of 20 with a Criminal History Category of I.  It shakes 
out to be exactly what Probation has calculated and what I 
think all of us agree.  
Is there any issue with that?  
MR. HART:  No, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  33 to 41 months, okay.  
So we have taken care of that.  
Then, I have a letter from Sullivan & Cromwell 
again, which calculates the restitution at $3,335,763, and not 
to forget the $0.81.  And you were here listening intently, 
Mr. Hart, and, you know, I think I sort of want you and the 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 5 of 22 PageID #: 232

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
6
Government to sit down and try to work on a restitution number 
within the 90 days that we're going to take to do that.  And 
get something realistic, something that's sensible.  See if 
you can come to some common ground on this.  I would like you 
both to try to do that, all right?  
MR. HART:  Understood. 
THE COURT:  The sentencing memorandum from Mr. Hart 
I've reviewed -- very well done.  And, obviously, Mr. Hart 
would not want his client to be sentenced to jail.  
The Government's letter is somewhat similar to the 
one which the Government sent to me in respect to 
Mr. Campbell.  It's dated November 14th, 2022.  Mr. Hart's 
sentencing memorandum is dated -- I don't see a date on it, 
but I assume that was done fairly recently right. 
MR. HART:  November 10th. 
THE COURT:  November 10th. 
The plea agreement, here, I reviewed it and in 
paragraph 4, it provides that the defendant will not appeal, 
challenge the conviction or sentence if the term of 
imprisonment is going to be 57 months or less, which will be 
the case.  And of course, as you know, there's a narrow window 
of exception.  If there's a constitutional right of hers 
that's been violated, or something very, very fundamental, 
that she has the opportunity to file a notice of appeal within 
14 days to the date judgment will be entered and to be 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 6 of 22 PageID #: 233

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
7
perfected within 30 days thereafter unless she gets an 
extension of time from the proper authorities. 
I did sign an order back on October 13th, as I did 
with Mr. Campbell, except in the plea that was taken before 
Magistrate Judge Mann on September 23, 2021.  I also 
separately reviewed the allocution.  I'm satisfied with that.  
So that contains my take on the so-called 
technicalities and now we have to get down to the hard part of 
this case.  
Let me hear now from Mr. Edwards-Balfour's 
distinguished colleague, Ms. Bilinkas, about what you think is 
appropriate here.  You know my concerns.  Once again, I think 
she may be more culpable.  On the other hand, she profited 
less, and how do we sort this all out?  You know what I did to 
her co-defendant.  What do I do here?  
MS. BILINKAS:  Yes, Your Honor, the Government does 
believe -- the Government does believe that Ms. Wint is more 
culpable than Mr. Campbell in part.  Ms. Wint was an assistant 
manager at a bank, a bank that has locations all across -- 
THE COURT:  She put this in motion. 
MS. BILINKAS:  Correct.  And in participating in 
this scheme, as the second most senior person at the bank, 
taking advantage of being a lender that the SBA agreed to 
partner with this particular bank, and she was the second most 
senior person at this bank, similar to Mr. Campbell, but in a 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 7 of 22 PageID #: 234

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
8
greater extent.  This was not a spur-of-the-moment lapse in 
judgment.  It was a crime that was planned that had 
recruitment involved by not only Ms. Wint, but people above 
her, people below her, working at the bank to recruit people 
like Mr. Campbell to engage in preparing tax documents -- 
THE COURT:  He made more money out of this, so why 
is it that she at least did not see to it that she was going 
to be making a little bit more than $25,000?  
MS. BILINKAS:  Well, I don't want to speculate on 
the reason that she didn't collect as much in commissions.  
But, that being said, Mr. Campbell's scheme only rose -- not 
only, but rose to about a million dollars in fraudulent loans, 
whereas Ms. Wint's was 3.5 million because Mr. Campbell was 
recruited at times to help out with certain applications, 
whereas being a bank employee, she was consistently -- 
THE COURT:  She had a bigger reach into people who 
would be able to do these things.  
MS. BILINKAS:  Yes, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Campbell was a little bit more 
circumscribed, I guess, by comparison to the others who were 
doing this as well, right?  
MS. BILINKAS:  He was naturally not as involved in 
every single loan that an employee at the bank would be. 
THE COURT:  Yes.  I have no idea what the numerosity 
is, but obviously she was more involved than Mr. Campbell in 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 8 of 22 PageID #: 235

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
9
terms of initiating all of this.
So what do you say about that, Mr. Hart?  
MR. HART:  Well, first, Your Honor, I would have to 
respectfully disagree about her level of involvement as the 
Government said and I think is born out in that the Probation 
Report, as the assistant manager she reported to the actual 
manager of the branch who was the brain, so to speak, of this 
particular operation.  My client was directed by the manager 
to engage in some of the activities that she did, in fact, 
engage in.  The Probation Report states that some of the loans 
had to go through the manager, not my client, for approval 
before they were sent out to be financed -- 
THE COURT:  You're telling me she was duped by the 
head honcho; that she had no choice but to go along with his 
or her directions to do this?  
MR. HART:  I wouldn't say -- I wouldn't use the word 
"duped"; however, there is an aspect of -- from the manager -- 
let me say this.  Obviously, the PPP loan at the time was 
something very brand-new.  The rules weren't 100 percent 
clear, but my client was -- maintains she was misled by the 
manager that this -- these loans could be made above board 
through tax filings, and that's part of the reason why -- that 
she engaged in the activity that she engaged in.  
Now, in terms of recruitment, some of the people who 
received the loans were neighborhood businesses that my client 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 9 of 22 PageID #: 236

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
10
already knew.  She was aware that there were some hairdressers 
and some other people.  So I wouldn't necessarily call it 
recruitment.  And these people weren't approached to -- 
THE COURT:  She took advantage of her contacts and 
her relationships with other people.  I assume she suggested, 
I can get some money for you. 
MR. HART:  Well, I think when these people were 
approached, she didn't approach them with the mind that we're 
going to defraud SBA with PPP -- these PPP loans.  It was, 
initially, these people were contacted about legitimately 
applying as small business owners for PPP loans.  And it turns 
out that those people, perhaps, didn't qualify that's when -- 
THE COURT:  They didn't qualify and that's where the 
fraud started. 
MR. HART:  Correct.  So the initial contact for the 
PPP loan was -- 
THE COURT:  Benign.  Was benign. 
MR. HART:  Benign, yes, correct, correct, and it was 
done legitimately.  And, again, as you stated, the fraud came 
after, once those people were deemed to be not qualified and 
then with the paperwork -- the fraudulent paperwork ensued 
thereafter. 
THE COURT:  The paperwork went through her, she knew 
they were not qualified, she knew that these were phony 
applications. 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 10 of 22 PageID #: 237

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
11
MR. HART:  Right.  And, again, she was told by her 
boss who directed -- again, directed much of this activity 
that these -- some of the discrepancies could be corrected 
through subsequent years tax filings.  You know, again, not 
making any excuses, just as a matter of trying to come up with 
an explanation as to why these behaviors happened.  I asked 
the Court to understand that my client, while she was an 
assistant manager of the bank, there were many, many people in 
the bank who were involved in this scheme, and she was caught 
up in this environment. 
THE COURT:  How many was she involved with?  I mean, 
how many of these was she responsible for sending to other 
people?  
MR. HART:  I don't know.  Perhaps, the Government 
has the exact number.  Because I wasn't made privy to the 
exact number. 
THE COURT:  I don't have a sense of that.  Are we 
talking about hundreds, a handful?  I don't know.  
MS. BILINKAS:  I believe in the PSR, it's dozens 
amounting to a total of 3.5 million, collectively. 
THE COURT:  That means that she was involved with 
thousands of people?  
MS. BILINKAS:  Dozens of applications. 
THE COURT:  Dozens.  
MS. BILINKAS:  Yeah.  Totaling 3.5. 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 11 of 22 PageID #: 238

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
12
THE COURT:  Well, it wasn't hundreds.  It was 10, 
15, 20, I don't know.  But, apparently, a lot of these were 
people, like what Mr. Hart said, the hairdresser, the people 
who she knew, apparently.  It's a mixed combination here, I 
guess. 
MS. BILINKAS:  Well, yes, there were some entities 
that did exist.  It's also, I believe, in the PSR, or the 
information, that there were other companies that were not in 
existence that the bank -- 
THE COURT:  I don't have a real good sense of it.  I 
can understand reaching out to people she knew saying we can 
get some PPP money for you, but I don't have a sense that she 
was out there, you know, actively soliciting everybody to come 
to the bank to do this.  I don't see her that way.  I may be 
wrong. 
MR. HART:  If I may, Your Honor.  I believe some of 
these entities were already customers of the bank, so they 
were known people already.  So it's not like she went up and 
down -- 
THE COURT:  That's what I'm saying.  I don't think 
she was actively soliciting business.  These were 
opportunities that she had that she availed herself of by 
reason of her employment, I guess. 
So what are we going to do here, Mr. Hart?  You know 
what I did to Mr. Campbell.  
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 12 of 22 PageID #: 239

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
13
MR. HART:  Your Honor, yes, I would like to try to 
differentiate my client from Mr. Campbell.  I do think, again, 
Mr. Campbell was not directed, necessarily, to engage in the 
behaviors that he did, and my client was.  Although, my client 
was again the assistant manager of the bank, she was not a 
manager of this scheme.  She did answer to someone higher.  
Someone else that all of the paperwork went through and was 
approved, and when my client had any types of concerns about 
what was going on, she spoke with this manager who attempted 
to alleviate her concerns about what was going on in the bank.  
So she was, you know, very, very low on the scale, 
so to speak, I think, as opposed to, you know, Mr. Campbell, 
who, with his educational expertise, was someone who engaged 
in the fraud in a different manner. 
THE COURT:  That troubles me.  So let me ask you 
this, Ms. Bilinkas.  
Mr. Campbell was licensed to prepare these types of 
documents.  It seems to me that he was more knowledgeable 
about what was going on.  He was more knowledgeable about the 
fraudulent paperwork that he was engaged in.  She was, you 
know, I don't know -- she had a manager on top of her.  She 
seems to be a person that just had to funnel this material to 
people like Mr. Campbell and others.  How do I see her 
relative culpability compared to somebody like Mr. Campbell 
who was knowledgeable, who was well-educated?  And she's had a 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 13 of 22 PageID #: 240

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
14
tough time of it.  She's unemployed.  I read the papers.  She 
had to make an income as a housekeeper for a period of time.  
She blew a good chance to really have herself a nice, you 
know, economic opportunity here for a long period of time, but 
these are these kind of factors that make her situation either 
up or down, or a little different than Mr. Campbell's.  What 
do you think about all of that?  
MS. BILINKAS:  Well, Your Honor, I don't want to 
necessarily, like, agree that Ms. Wint is somehow less 
knowledgeable about what -- alternatively, being the actual 
lender in charge of distributing these loan funds, she should 
actually be expected to be more knowledgeable about the actual 
loan application, what's required by the SBA, the rules.  
She's one of many of bank employees, but she is -- 
THE COURT:  Let me ask you this.  So, initially, it 
may well be that in the inception, a number of these 
referrals, so to speak, to people like Mr. Campbell was 
relatively benign.  She knew people, make an application, 
maybe you can get a loan, right?  And so at that particular 
point in time, she may not have known that they were going to 
be fraudulent documents prepared by other people, unless I 
really don't have a good grasp of this.  There came a point in 
time when she knew that was the case, but I don't think that 
was the case in the inception.  
Mr. Campbell, on the other hand, knew from the 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 14 of 22 PageID #: 241

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
15
inception that he was making up fraudulent papers.  
Do I have the right handle on this or not?  
MS. BILINKAS:  Yes, Your Honor, I do believe that, 
generally, the bank involved here, the employees, the 
individual who was above Ms. Wint, wanted to actually exercise 
the loan program properly and took applicants that could get 
loans, but the problem was -- is that Ms. Wint, along with her 
co-conspirators, ultimately, took that level of trust provided 
by the SBA and turned it into a scheme that just involved 
greed -- 
THE COURT:  Tell me how she did that, all right.  
She sent people to apply -- nothing wrong with doing that, 
right?  They may qualify, they may not qualify.  I don't think 
she was that knowledgeable about whether somebody was 
qualified or not.  And, then, she found out afterwards that 
these people were getting loans that they were not entitled 
and she sort of blinked at it or she just, passively, maybe, 
just went along with it, but somebody else had to approve of 
it, finally; right? 
MS. BILINKAS:  Well, just with regards to whether 
she knew there -- the PSR I believe it's paragraph 14 -- that 
said that she assisted and directed applicants without 
legitimate businesses to co-conspirators such as Mr. Campbell.  
So I don't think it was an after the fact, oh, I realized last 
Friday I approved a loan that was illegitimate.  I think, 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 15 of 22 PageID #: 242

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
16
while there were, I'm sure, applicants that she thought had 
legitimate businesses and sent to some of the co-conspirators, 
there became a plan and a scheme, within the bank to, then, 
bring on tax preparers to help out -- 
THE COURT:  Maybe.  Yeah, well, kind of a mixed bag 
type of thing.  It's hard to really pin your fingers on this.  
What else would you like me to consider from the 
Government's perspective?  
MS. BILINKAS:  Also, while she received $25,000, I 
just do want to follow up on that point of the scheme did 
involve once the applicants/borrowers received money into 
their bank accounts at this bank, that's when withdraws were 
made at the direction of Ms. Wint and other co-conspirators, 
but in regards to other things to consider, which was 
considered for Mr. Campbell as well, it was just the general 
deterrence with regards to these cases.  
The PPP and idle programs by the SBA relied upon 
good faith of these lenders, the integrity of these lenders, 
and the integrity of the public to be honest and forthcoming 
in executing this program during a global pandemic, so I do 
that think it is important for the Court to send a message 
that there are consequences for defrauding these federal 
programs. 
THE COURT:  So, you know, I see some differences 
here, some more, some less than Mr. Campbell.  I want to treat 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 16 of 22 PageID #: 243

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
17
co-conspirators somewhat equally, though there were 
differences here, yes, but I'm thinking about really imposing 
the same type of sentence I imposed upon Mr. Campbell, and is 
there a reason for me not to do that?  
MR. HART:  Well, Your Honor, I would say that my 
client is now 55 years old.  She is a grandmother.  She is 
basically financially ruined by this -- the guilty plea that 
she's taking in this case.  She -- her career is ruined.  
Currently, she is doing some childcare out of her home, 
including her grandchildren -- two of her sons are in the 
gallery.  If they can just raise their hands.  Two adult 
children, so she helps raise their children, as well as some 
other children in her apartment.  You know, for her to be 
incarcerated for any period of time, I think, would be onerous 
not only to her, but to her family members, extended family, 
grandchildren and I ask the Court -- I know the Court is 
considering that the impact of someone who is 55 years old, 
who has never been in any trouble before, never spent a day in 
jail, or even a month in jail, could have a devastating impact 
on her. 
THE COURT:  Well, I could impose, you know, a 
considerable amount of home confinement here, in lieu of any 
incarceration and it may well be that that's the right thing 
to do here because her personal situation is different than 
Mr. Campbell and you just pointed out her family circumstances 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 17 of 22 PageID #: 244

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
18
and her background and I considered all of that, so I'm not 
going to impose an incarceratory sentence here, but I'm going 
to impose two years of supervised release, but as a condition 
of supervised release, she's going to be spending a year in 
home confinement, and she'll be able to take care of her 
children, and I think that -- to me, that's significant 
punishment. 
MR. HART:  Sorry, she is just asking -- I know the 
answer, but she's asking about medical appointments. 
THE COURT:  Of course.  Probation supervises these 
things, and if there's a reason, naturally, to be released to 
go to a doctor, they do that.  And they also will consider -- 
there are people who have religious needs as well who are 
accommodated, we do that of course.  If somebody is employed, 
sometimes, we even allow them to do that, but that's not the 
situation here.  
But I think that sitting at home for a year with her 
children and with her family, whatever, is a significant 
amount of punishment here, so I think that's what I'm going to 
do with her.  But before I do that, I want to hear from her, 
because I have to hear from the defendant before I impose 
sentence, and she may talk me out of this.  
You can speak to me.  I'm inclined to give you a big 
break in terms of not putting you in jail.  You did something 
here which is very foolish.  You knew about it.  I do think 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 18 of 22 PageID #: 245

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
19
you were caught between a rock and a hard place to some extent 
here.  I have a sense of that.  It doesn't excuse your 
behavior.  You knew what was going on, but you can speak to me 
now before sentence is officially imposed if you would like 
to. 
MR. HART:  Take your time. 
THE COURT:  You don't have to, but it's your right. 
THE DEFENDANT:  I apologize.  As I said, I 
apologize.  And as I said, some of the people, those were my 
personal friends, my hairdresser, and I did recommend them for 
the loan.  I really did.  And, understand, my manager is 
Mr. Sheenford (ph), but what was told to the rest of the 
employee was not correct, and some of the loans that were 
done, only the manager knew about it because only she had to 
override.  Only everything went on her desk, but I do 
apologize, Your Honor.  I really do. 
THE COURT:  I think you're sincere.  
So I'm going to impose a sentence of supervised 
release for two years with the condition being that you will 
have home confinement for nine months, I think that's 
sufficient.  There's a $100 special assessment, which you have 
to pay.  I'm not going to fine you.  You don't have the 
ability to pay a fine.  And you will think about the fact that 
what you did was wrong and weigh what we call 3553(a) factors 
and the nature of your crime, which you have spoken about 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 19 of 22 PageID #: 246

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
20
already, against what, otherwise, was a law-abiding life.  
You've had some tough times in your life.  I've considered 
that.  
I've considered your economic circumstances, the 
fact that there are enormous collateral consequences that are 
attached here, and you will sit at home for nine months and 
your children can be there with you to comfort you, and you 
are going to be punished because of that, but it's not going 
to be the same as being in jail, but you have to be at home 
confined, and it's serious, but it's doable, and I think that 
we will also have these special conditions of supervised 
release -- well, there are, actually, no special conditions of 
supervised release here, so I'm not going to impose them, but 
there are general conditions of supervised release, which your 
lawyer knows all about, which will be part of the judgment as 
well.  
And I just hope that, you know, that you're able to 
make a good future for yourself under difficult circumstances.  
I understand how difficult it's going to be for you, but 
you've got to really try hard to do that.  And do not be 
tempted because you are going through difficult times to 
commit any unlawful acts.  You don't want to be motivated to 
doing that.  That's just going to be the wrong thing to do.  
I think a hundred hours of community service is also 
indicated here as well.  You will have a chance to give back 
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 20 of 22 PageID #: 247

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
21
to the community, and the Probation Department will govern 
that and regulate that and find out exactly how you can best 
contribute to the community.  
And you have your family here, which is supportive 
of you.  I think you will be okay.  I feel badly for you, but 
you have to really realize what you did was terrible, and you 
will think about that during the nine months that you are 
going to be in confinement, although at home and not in jail.  
Did I inadvertently forget anything?  I don't think 
so.  Ms. Bilinkas?
MS. BILINKAS:  No, Your Honor.  We will work on the 
restitution aspect. 
THE COURT:  Work on the restitution thing and come 
to an agreement on that, okay?  
Mr. Hart, thank you for your cooperation.
MR. HART:  Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT:  That completes the sentence.
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Actually, it's time served, 
right?  Time served plus three years of supervised release?  
Or is it --
THE COURT:  It should be technically time served. 
THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:  And three years. 
THE COURT:  Yes.  Plus two years of supervised 
release with the condition of nine months of home confinement, 
okay?  
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 21 of 22 PageID #: 248

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Proceedings
Denise
 Parisi
, RPR , CRR
Official Court Reporter
22
And the same thing with the other one.  
MR. HART:  Thank you, Judge.  
(Matter concluded.) 
*
*
*
*
*
I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the 
record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 
    /s/ Denise Parisi
    
November 29, 2022 
_________________________________      ________________ 
      DENISE PARISI
    
    DATE
Case 1:21-cr-00477-FB     Document 30     Filed 06/27/23     Page 22 of 22 PageID #: 249

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.nyed.469459.30.0.pdf

Size

186,336 bytes

SHA-256

0b02aaa145e9cb79a6e4a9cda3fc4696b6647158d8de7d8d47d7d08a2d081b40

Our copy

gov.uscourts.nyed.469459.30.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)