More Rubashkin Documents May Be Released

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly found Monday that the "FBI failed to demonstrate that it conducted an adequate search for potentially responsive documents, and also failed to justify why certain information was redacted pursuant to Exemptions 6, 7(C) and 7(E).

Former Agriprocessors VP Sholom Rubashkin is currently serving a 27-year sentence for bank fraud, money laundering, related crimes and perjury

Courthouse News reports:

…Lawrence Rosenberg asked the FBI to release documents related to a[n immigration] raid [that took place at Agriprocessors glatt kosher slaughterhouse in Postville, Iowa in May 2008] under the Freedom of Information Act, but he never responded to the agency's "commitment to pay" request, which included a bill for production fees due in 30 days.

The FBI did not produce the documents as a result, prompting Rosenberg to sue in Washington, D.C.

By Sept. 7, the FBI had handed over 1,233 pages, including 257 pages of duplicates, 39 full pages and 322 partial pages.

The agency cited FOIA exemptions to entirely exclude 150 pages and withheld another 450 pages as court materials sealed by the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Iowa.

After considering the documents in camera, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly found Monday that the "FBI failed to demonstrate that it conducted an adequate search for potentially responsive documents, and also failed to justify why certain information was redacted pursuant to Exemptions 6, 7(C) and 7(E)."

With regard to the first two exemptions, the FBI must "justify why information redacted on 27 specific pages would reveal the identities of law enforcement personnel, witnesses or third parties, and the court shall reserve judgment as to the FBI's use of exemptions 6 and 7(c) in combination with exemption 7(d) pending further explanation from the FBI regarding its claim that interviewees were implicitly guaranteed that their identities would remain confidential as required to invoke exemption 7(d)," according to the ruling. "Otherwise, the FBI met its burden to show that it properly invoked exemptions 6 and 7(c)."

As for the FBI's use of the 7(E) exemption, Kollar-Kotelly said the agency must supplement its motion.

"It is unclear from the court's review how the information on these three pages reflects internal FBI methodology, or how the disclosure of this information would enable perpetrators to alter their behavior and thwart detection," she wrote.

The agency is not liable, however, "for failing to produce responsive documents to the plaintiff 'promptly,' and properly invoked Exemption 3," the 27-page opinion states.

"The plaintiff offers no authority for the proposition that the FBI's decision to produce documents in response to this litigation triggered any statutory duty to produce documents within a particular time frame," Kollar-Kotelly wrote. "Therefore the plaintiff is not entitled to summary on its claim that the FBI failed to make the responsive records available."

Comments

[havrey finkel]

wait a min, rubischan is serving 27 years for being a thief, not for immagration failure

let him rot

[Moisheb]

What a mess , obviously the govt is corrupt in this case or incompetent at best ,let him out with time served and lets move on

[Shmarya Rosenberg]

Please.

Rubashkin had an extensive appeals process. He lost.

He then appealed to the US Supreme Court, which rejected his case.

He had the best attorneys money can buy, a huge legal team, endless money.

And he lost over and over and over again BECAUSE HE'S GUILTY.

He stole more than $26 million from his lenders. He stole He stole uncounted hundreds of thousands from his from his workers. He stole from his suppliers. He perjured himself.

He used Chabad charities he controlled to launder stolen money.

He took at least $1.5 of the stolen money for his own personal use.

And his corrupting, evil impact on the Chabad and haredi communities is truly horrific.

[Moisheb]

Shmarya you obviusly have some personal feelings here which is sad ,he is still a jew who is in need of help, second of all you are naive to think that our judiciary system in the U.S is not flawed when you write "HE WAS FOUND GUILTY) ~ and # 3 he didn't steal from his lenders he had an inflated line of credit he was paying back the loans untill they shut him down ,come on i could think of allot worse that people have done with a far less punishment if any ,and dont't go off on one of your tantrums "oh don't give me your yeshiveshe crap" I actually agree with alot of your other points but with this you are way off base ~Rubashkin commited a crime that should have reached parole at most

[ruthie]

moisheb,

listen up.
1. he allowed women to be raped in his building.
2. he overworked young adults (minors) that SHOULD have
been in school.
3. and last but not least, his family has plenty of money stocked away and they MOOOOOOOCH in monsey.
yes, he's a jew....
but anyone that allows women to be raped, children not having the chance for school and being an idiot in general....let him stay in jail....it's not the end of the world...unless he's being raped!

[Shmarya Rosenberg]

Moisheb –

No.

He STOLE millions of dollars from his lenders and from his employees.

He had appeals and lost ALL of them.

The US Supreme Court REFUSED to take his case.

These are FACTS, proven well beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Moisheb]

OHH!!! i have no information on that so I cannot comment on that.. I was talking about his case that resulted in a 27 year sentence... let me try to explain my point..any one who racks up massive loans and declares bankruptcy anyone who forces the bank into a loan modification or loan reduction is also WRONG and corrupt, in Canada if you do that they garnish your wages.. My point is and was (I happened to follow the case very closely) What rubashkin did although wrong and corrupt was not much worse than the schmuck down the street who lived off the bank and others for years and then declared bankrupt also wrong and also corrupt, so at the end of the day Rubashkin got a terrible deal and now we go back to why ? lets state the obvious there is still anti semitisim in this world and when given a chance it will rear its ugly head The judiciary system was not intrested in justice they had a modern day auto-da-fe on their hands with trumped up charges

[Shmarya Rosenberg]

Moisheb –

If you followed the case closely, you would know how ridiculous you sound.

Banks lost millions. Employees were stolen from and then later lost money again when the bankruptcy was declared.

Rubashkin LOOTED Agriprocessors.

He laundered money through charities he controlled to hide it from lenders and from the government.

Millions more was paid out by Agriprocessors to Chabad charities for no legal reason.

These are not minor crimes.

Now add to that obstruction of justice, perjury and conspiracy.

Rubashkin got 27 years because that's the penalty the US Sentencing Commission recommended for crimes like these.

Should that recommendation have been much less?

Yes. And one day, if congress acts, it will be.

But now it isn't. That's why criminals like Rubashkin who don't plead guilty get such long sentences.

The only way to get a lesser sentence with any reliability is to plead guilty in plea deal.

Rubashkin was offered a plea deal that came with a 12-year sentence.

He refused that deal.

[Moisheb]

I guess Paul Clement also sounds rediculous, Well I won't argue with you but Paul Clement disagrees with you (i know he is a hired lawyer but the prosoction is also hired)And Paul knows a thing or two about law he is a beast of a lawyer and he took this case and vehemently disagrees with that whole corrupted debacle so Shmarya lets not play lawyer here let's call a spade a spade and actually I agree with you with the plea deal, at that point he should of taken the plea ,they say the Munkatcher rebbe begged them to take the plea for the simple reason no jew in Iowa is going to get a fair shake you know that perfectly well

[Shmarya Rosenberg]

Moisheb –

Again, you show that you did not closely follow the case despite your claims of having done so, and you show how little you understand of the American legal system.

Paul Clement wrote his arguments in support of Rubashkin and submitted them the US Supreme Court. But the Supreme Court did not take Rubashkin's case.

Rubashkin is guilty as sin. He stole tens of millions of dollars and helped his family plunder Agriprocessors.

And one day, what Rubashkin did will probably bring down other members of his family – and various haredi and Chabad rabbis, as well.