Response to the Government’s Reply to Mr. Bell’s Sentencing Memorandum — No. 1:21-cr-00284 (Dkt. 20, D.D.C.)

Summary

A response to the government's reply to defendant James Kyle Bell's sentencing memorandum, filed December 5, 2021 as Document 20 in United States v. Bell, No. 21 CR 284 (JDB), in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, with a sentencing date listed as 12/3/21. Defense counsel defends the request for home incarceration, citing the pandemic and a Bureau of Prisons guidance memo of April 13, 2021 on home confinement. The response asks for a sentence of sixteen months of incarceration, suspended, with an equivalent period of home confinement, or alternatively eighteen months suspended with eighteen months of home confinement. It disputes the government's account of refunds to donors and states that $860,000 has not been recovered.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

             Case 1:21-cr-00284-JDB Document 20 Filed 12/05/21 Page 1 of 3




                              UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                                   :
                                                           :
                                                           :
        v.                                                 :       No. 21 CR 284 (JDB)
                                                           :
                                                           :       Sentencing Date: 12/3/21
JAMES KYLE BELL,                                           :
    Defendant.                                             :


                        RESPONSE TO THE GOVERNMENT’S REPLY
                       TO MR. BELL’S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM


        Mr. Bell, through counsel, submits this response to the government’s reply to Defendant's

sentencing memorandum. The government argues that Mr. Bell’s request that he be sentenced to

home incarceration is a “wild suggestion.” See Gov’t Reply at 1. Notwithstanding the

government's criticism of Mr. Bell’s position, it is the appropriate sentence based on the

circumstances of this case.

        The country is in the throes of a tumultuous pandemic with two new variants that have

emerged. 1 Pursuant to the CARES Act Mr. Bell’s sentencing is being held remotely because is in

the interests of justice to do so. On April 13, 2021, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) updated its

guidance related to COVID-19 and home confinement. 2 The suggestion is that individuals

currently in BOP custody be released to home confinement if certain criteria are met.

        Mr. Bell is unvaccinated. He suffers from Chron’s disease which is a chronic disease that

causes inflammation in the digestive tract. Flare-ups may be induced by stress and cause pain

and even immobility. 3


1
  https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/omicron-variant.html
2
  https://www.fd.org/sites/default/files/news/2021.4.13_-_bop_home_confinement_cares_memo.pdf
3
   https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/crohns-disease/symptoms-causes/syc-20353304.
              Case 1:21-cr-00284-JDB Document 20 Filed 12/05/21 Page 2 of 3




With a suppressed immune system, Mr. Bell is more likely to develop severe consequences

should he contract COVID-19. 4

           Mr. Bell, therefore, requests that this Court exercise its discretion, and sentence him to a

period of sixteen months incarceration, suspended as to all, and in light of the BOP memo place

him on an equivalent period of home confinement. This is by no means a “time out” as described

by the government. See Gov’t Reply at 1. Alternatively, the Court should impose a sentence of

eighteen months of incarceration, and in light of the BOP memo, suspend imposition of the

sentence, and place Mr. Bell on an equal period of home confinement for eighteen months.

           The government’s critique of Mr. Bell’s argument of the facts as being “fast and loose”,

see gov’t memo at 2, is flatly wrong. Mr. Bell’s point in ¶ 33 of the PSI, was to inform the

writer that he did not receive the $100,000 in funds. The government takes a quote from Mr.

Bell’s interview with the FBI, where Mr. Bell fully cooperated and consented to an interview

without counsel, and admitted his involvement. Mr. Bell was not trying to hide or minimize his

conduct. The point related to the refunds was that he did not enrich himself from those proceeds

and that donors were refunded.

           Regarding the $860,000 that the government has not recovered, the FBI seized Mr. Bell’s

accounts and the USAO scoured Mr. Bell’s bank records. The government has not and cannot

point to one instance of luxury or exortbitant spending. Because that is not what happened here.

While it is not in dispute that Mr. Bell misappropriated funds, he used the majority of those

funds to pay delinquent bills, business operating costs, and household expenses for his wife and

children.




4
    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/people-with-medical-conditions.html
          Case 1:21-cr-00284-JDB Document 20 Filed 12/05/21 Page 3 of 3




       The government’s claim that Mr. Bell’s argument that “the guidelines overstate[ ] the

serious[ness] of the offense” because the “intended [loss] amount and the amount derived from

bank[s] are duplicative in nature” is nonsense, is misguided. This was a clear reference to

sections in the guidelines which enhance Mr. Bell’s conduct separately pursuant to

§§2B1.1(a)(1) and 2B1.1(b)(17)(a). There is nothing nonsensical about Mr. Bell’s position.

       The cryptocurrency information is attached as Exhibit A. Mr. Bell provided this

information during the PSI, and has never intended to hide his minimal assets. He is also willing

to cash out the cryptocurrency and deposit the funds into the Court’s registry. In addition to the

letters previously provided, please see two supplemental letters on behalf of Mr. Bell.

       WHEREFORE, for all reasons stated above and any that may appear to the Court during

the sentencing hearing, Mr. Bell respectfully requests that the court impose a variance, and

sentence him to a period of sixteen months incarceration, suspended as to all, and in light of the

BOP memorandum, place him on an equivalent period of home confinement.

                                                      Respectfully submitted,

                                                      /s/ Brandi Harden
                                                      ____________________
                                                      Brandi Harden
                                                      Bar No. 470706
                                                      Counsel for James Kyle Bell
                                                      Harden|Pinckney, PLLC
                                                      400 7th Street Suite 604
                                                      Washington, DC 20004
                                                      bharden@hardenpinckney.com


File and source

File

20.pdf

Size

175,275 bytes

SHA-256

043737a7bc2cd082794a2b8586725540a986b1b1c417c48690e9a7ed37e50b95

Our copy

20.pdf

Original

No public link identified.