During Guo’s arraignment hearing, Judge Parker referenced the landmark case of Brady v. Maryland and ordered the prosecutors to disclose any and all exculpatory evidence relating to Guo. Denying exculpatory evidence to the accused has been common in the political targeting of various figures, including Michael Flynn and those involved in January 6th. To little surprise, in this case, the New York prosecutors had admitted they worked a lot with China.
It’s been getting almost no attention that Yvette Wang, a close ally and supporter of Guo for two decades that has also been persecuted by the CCP, was also arrested that same day and is also being denied due process. Her situation may foreshadow how they’re going to further deny it to Guo. Prosecutors are charging her with acting as Guo’s “chief of staff” despite there being no formal employment relationships between the two.
Wang has been granted bail on paper, but the government has made it impossible for her to satisfy the conditions of bail despite meeting it.
Wang was “granted” a $5 million bond to be secured by $1 million in cash or property, and she offered a list of at least eight people willing to co-sign her bond, putting them on the hook if she defaulted on it. Three of them were willing to post their own property as collateral. The government’s rules require two co-signers that they approve of.
In response, the government has refused all co-signers on the basis that they’re either close to her are thus also close to Guo (and viewed suspiciously by the government), or that they’re not close enough to her to have “moral suasion” over her (meaning they don’t know her well enough to make her unlikely to violate the conditions of the bond).
The government is playing a “heads I win, tails you lose” game with these standards to make it impossible for Wang to post bond.
Most absurdly, the government also denied some of Wang’s proposed co-signers on the basis that they view her to be victims of her alleged crimes – while the sole fact that they’re willing to be co-signers proves these supposed “victims” cannot possibly be that. This is the sort of logic you expect in a show trial (which the CCP knows a lot about), not out of a U.S. court.
Wang’s connections in the U.S. are limited to Guo and other members of the NFSC movement, making it impossible for her to satisfy the government’s arbitrary criteria for bail. Wang had been arrested multiple times in China for her anti-CCP activism, and because of her activism, lost her entire family, husband, and son, who was 11 when she fled China. And like Guo, Wang couldn’t even return to China when their parents passed away; it’s beyond ridiculous that they are being held without bail despite them having nowhere to flee.
Wang has given up everything for her principles, and naturally, dissident groups are going to be Wang’s only contacts in America, but the government has ruled them out as potential sureties. This would be the equivalent of a judge denying a Republican the ability to have another Republican post their bail, just due to their political affiliation.
Wang’s defense counsel also offered the government to post additional security in the form of a bank account of Wang’s which contains approximately $400,000, and to pledge $130,000 the government seized from her apartment when she was arrested. She had those funds in cash because banks including Santander and Bank of America have closed her accounts following influence campaigns against her, and perhaps due to influence from the feds themselves.
They also offered to secure Wang’s bond by $4 million in cash in real estate, which would be secured by $2 million from a “well-known public figure” (believed to be Steve Bannon), Wang’s apartment (valued at over $1 million), and $530k, along with two co-signers. In other words, Wang offered to pay collateral four times what the government asked – yet, this was rejected, and all attempts at reasoning with the government proved impossible.
These sort of shenanigans ironically put New York’s prosecutors in violation of the very same Bail Act that has enabled actual criminals out on the street – but of course, the law isn’t enforced equally in politically charged cases. Just weeks ago a New York man was sentenced to 27 months in jail after being found guilty in a scheme to flood the northwest U.S. with opioids – and he was let out on bail pending appeal. Even the guilty can go free on bail in New York.
The case of United States v. Batista (2001) established that only one co-signer must possess “moral suasion” over her, while United States v. Hammond (2002) found that the other must be financially responsible, but wouldn’t even need to know her. Thus, all of her co-signers satisfy at least one of the two conditions needed to serve as her bond sureties.
That Guo hasn’t been granted bail yet is a miscarriage of justice itself, and if this is any clue, if he is granted bail, it’s likely to similarly be bail in name only, with the government’s criteria impossible to satisfy.
Lawyers for Prakazrel Michel have requested that Guo testify in his case. Michel was indicted in 2021 by the Department of Justice, who charged Michel for allegedly engaging in undisclosed lobbying campaigns for the CCP, including lobbying the Trump administration to send Guo back to China in exchange for over $100 million in personal gain. Even Michel, after being indicted, was immediately released on his own “recognizance”, which is a court’s decision to allow a person charged with a crime to remain at liberty pending the trial, without having to post bail.
Yet, the DOJ won’t let Guo out of jail even to testify in this case, where his testimony is essential, likely because that testimony would further expose the CCP’s infiltration of the Justice Department itself.
Under the CCP-infiltrated DOJ, New York’s legal system has long had a soft spot for violent criminals – so it’s no surprise they’re aiding in the persecution of the opponents of what is the largest, most violent authoritarian regime in the world; the CCP.