CPIA-Related Obstruction Case Concludes with Probation, a Fine, and Forfeiture of Chinese Cultural Objects

Sentencing of a Chinese artifacts dealer and his company for obstruction of justice took place last week in the Southern District of Florida. The U.S. Attorney in Miami commenced the prosecution when the defendants tried to thwart import restrictions authorized by the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA).

In the cases of U.S. v. Francois B. Lorin and U.S. v. Lorin & Son, LLC, federal district court judge Jose E. Martinez fined Lorin & Son (doing business as Asiantiques) $25,000 plus an assessment of $400. He also placed the company's manager, Francois Lorin, on probation for a period of three years, imposing a special condition that he "shall provide complete access to financial information, including disclosure of all business and personal finances, to the U.S. Probation Officer."

Today, the court issued a further order forfeiting 22 Chinese objects seized from the defendants in 2011. The forfeiture is part of the plea agreement reached between the parties this past December.

Prosecutors say that the defendants supplied fake paperwork to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in an effort to convince authorities that the Chinese artifacts arrived in the U.S. prior to the enactment of a bilateral agreement between the U.S. and China. That bilateral agreement, also known an MoU, was adopted in 2009 under authority of the CPIA. It restricts imports of designated archaeological materials from China unless specifically authorized. Import restrictions enacted under the U.S.-China MoU were renewed by the President last month.

If the defendants could show that the archaeological objects to be imported were located in the U.S. prior to January 14, 2009—the enactment date of the U.S.-China MoU—then the archaeological objects could be re-imported with little difficulty. So when the defendants offered fraudulently backdated customs paperwork to prove that the goods were in the U.S. as early as May 9, 2006, Miami's top federal prosecutor charged the defendants with obstruction under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2). The U.S. Attorney's office further alleged to the court that the defendants declared false values for the imports and failed to declare some others. Fuller details of the facts can be found here and here. 

When sentencing Francois Lorin, Judge Martinez agreed to depart downward from the federal sentencing guidelines, a move supported by both the government and the defense. That is to say that the court agreed with the parties' recommendation that a term of probation could be imposed on the 75 year old defendant without sending him to prison.

Today's court order describes the objects forfeited to the government as part of the plea deal reached with the government:

• Nephrite Jade “Bi” Disk composed of Three “Huang” from the Neolithic or Shang Dynasty.

• Nephrite jade “Bi” disk composed of three Huang from the late Shang or Western Zhou Dynasty.

• Pan Bronze Footed Tray with Two handles from the Archaic-Zhou Dynasty, first millennium BC.

• Nephrite Jade Insignia Blade from the Late Neolithic Period.

• Lion and Grapevine mirror with elaborate wood.

• Nephrite Jade “Bi” Disk from the Han Dynasty.

• Nephrite Jade “Bi” Disk from the Han Dynasty.

• Three-part Nephrite Jade “Bi” Disk from the Shang Dynasty.

• Gold and Silver Inlaid Bronze Cylindrical Lidded Container from the Late Zhou Dynasty.

• Nephrite Jade Phoenix from the Warring States Period.

• Nephrite Jade Bird hand piece from the Neolithic Period, possibly Hongshan culture.

• Nephrite Jade model of a pig from the Han Period.

• Nephrite Jade Falcon-type Bird from the Neolithic Period, said to be Hong Shan.

• Nephrite Jade “humanoid'' Figure from the Shang Dynasty.

• Nephrite Jade Three-pong Attachment from the Neolithic Period, perhaps Liangzhu Culture, 5th 6^th Millennium BC or Hongshan Culture, 5th-3rd Millennium BC.

• Nephrite Jade “Bi”' Form from the Warring States.

• Nephrite Jade Fish Toggle from the Neolithic Period.

• Bronze and Nephrite Jade Lidded Container (“Lian'') from the Han Dynasty, Early Western Han, Xang.

• Archaic, yellow jade blade from the Han Dynasty or earlier.

• Bronze mirror with fish and birds from the Tang Dynasty.

• Four Chinese Bronze weapons or articles of adornment from an undetermined Period, possibly Qin-Han Period. Pre-907 AD.

• Bronze mirror with fish and birds from the Tang Dynasty.

Photo credit: Jason Morrison

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Plea Deal Reached with Chinese Artifacts Dealer Charged with Obstruction

An antiquities gallery and its manager entered agreements with federal prosecutors last week to plead guilty to obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2).

U.S. Attorney Wifredo Ferrer

The U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida last month charged Lorin & Son, LLC, a Nevada-based company doing business in Florida as Asiantiques, as well as its manager, Francois Lorin, with illegally tampering with the customs process by supplying false information about imported Chinese artifacts.

The plea agreement filed by U.S. Attorney Wifredo Ferrer's office last Thursday in federal district court makes the following offer of proof:

Pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and the People's Republic of China entered into as of January 14, 2009 (the ''MOU'') archaeological materials representing China's cultural heritage from the Paleolithic Period (c. 75,000 B.C.) through the end of the Tang Period (A.D. 907) could not be imported into the United States absent specific prior government approvals, If, however, such items were already in the United States as of the MOU date, the items could be re-imported without prior authorization.  

On or about May 14, 2011, Asiantiques exported a shipment of Chinese artifacts to Hong Kong for an antiques trade show. The value upon export was declared as $1,592,695. On or about June 10, 2011, Asiantiques submitted a Formal Entry Form 3461 to U,S. Customs and Border Protection ("CBP"') in order to import what purported to be the same shipment of Chinese artifacts back to the United States through the Port of Miami, in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Upon return of the shipment to the United States, the shipment was described as "return exhibition of goods'' and was valued at $1,470,965.   

The shipment from Hong Kong was interdicted by CBP at the Port of Miami on or about June 4, 2011. CBP officials conducted an inventory of the shipment and observed anomalies between the contents of the shipment and the invoice and other paperwork that had been submitted. While the shipment consisted of approximately 488 items, the paperwork accompanying the shipment failed to list approximately 50 items. Upon further review, questions were raised about the provenance: of certain items contained within the shipment, including items of Chinese fine art that pertained to the time period prior to 907 A.D. (the "Pre-907 items'). It was later determined that the shipment had approximately 27 Pre-907 items.  

... 

Subsequent to the items being interdicted at the Port of Miami, CBP officers observed four Chinese artifacts contained within a FedEx box located in the shipment that were not listed on any invoice or manifest, two of which were Pre-907 items, Other items in the shipment were not listed on any invoice or manifest. ... An appraiser hired by CBP determined that the domestic value of the shipment was approximately $3,177,825. 

The government adds that the defendants' "'proof' that the Pre-907 items contained in the shipment were in fact inside the United States prior to January 14, 2009" consisted of paperwork falsely backdated to May 9, 2006. Prosecutors contend that the defendants supplied the fake paperwork in an effort to convince authorities that the artifacts arrived on American soil prior to the enactment of the MoU between the U.S. and China.

Sentencing of the defendants is expected to take place in February.

Photo credit: U.S. Department of Justice

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2013 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Chinese Artifacts Case: Florida U.S. Attorney Files Obstruction Charges

An antiquities gallery and its manager/director were charged by federal prosecutors last week for obstructing justice. Lorin & Son, LLC and Francois Lorin were both charged with obstruction of proceedings under 18 USC § 1512(c)(2). That statute declares, "Whoever corruptly ... obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so" is guilty of a crime. The maximum penalty is a fine of $500,000 for a corporation and 20 years imprisonment plus a fine of $250,000 for a person.

The criminal information filed by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida alleges that Lorin and his company illegally tampered with the customs process by supplying, through their lawyer, false information concerning the import of Chinese artifacts.

A person or corporation is innocent unless the prosecution proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The criminal complaint alleges that the defendants did

frustrate the ability of CBP [U.S. Customs and Border Protection] to implement and carry out the terms of the Tariff Act of 1930 ... with regard to examination of merchandise imported to the Port of Miami on or about June 4, 2011 ... by causing their attorneys ... to submit to CBP correspondence dated June 30, 2011 and a Petition for Expedited Procedures and Early Release dated July 3, 2012, containing false and fraudulent information and phony supporting documentation, falsely alleging provenance for items of Chinese fine art contained in the shipment, including false information related to items dated to the period pre-907 A.D ., in order to frustrate the ability of CBP to accurately determine whether such items were lawfully imported into the United States.

CBP reportedly sought to inspect the objects to find out if they were restricted imports under the terms of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act's Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) covering Chinese archaeological and ethnological material in jeopardy of pillage.

The shipment number, identified in the criminal information as EQY-0001437-3, suggests that the defendants allegedly used or purported to use a Miami-based shipping logistics company to import the objects. The format of the shipment number appears consistent with the three digit alphanumeric filer code, seven digit entry number, and one digit check typically entered on Form 7501.

The U.S. Attorney's Office describes Lorin & Son as "a Nevada limited liability company

registered to do business in Florida and that conducted business from a location in Winter Park." And a November 4 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) bulletin says that "Lorin & Son, LLC conducted business in Florida under the name 'Asiantiques.'"

A review of available public records in Nevada reveals that Lorin & Son, LLC filed as a domestic limited liability company on September 16, 2003 and that it's business license expired on September 30, 2013. Francois Lorin and others are listed as Managing Members. Florida corporate filings show that Asiantiques, Inc. formed on September 29, 1988 and administratively dissolved on September 25, 2009 after the company failed to submit an annual report. Francois Lorin is listed as a director of the corporation, but the name Lorin & Sons does not appear in the index of Florida's records. Asiantiques web site states that the business has been operating since 1978.

Although the of January 14, 2009 MoU between the U.S. and the People's Republic of China prohibits archaeological materials from China entering the U.S. without permission, the defendants in the case are not being charged with smuggling contraband items. They are instead charged with supplying information to authorities claiming that the Chinese artifacts seized by CPB were already in the U.S. prior to the adoption of import restrictions.

The criminal information alleges that the defendants "imported a shipment of approximately 488 items of merchandise from Hong Kong to the Port of Miami, in Miami-Dade County, Florida .... The shipment included approximately 27 items of Chinese fine art that dated to periods prior to the year A .D. 907. The shipment was interdicted by CBP...."

ICE's bulletin adds:

invoices accompanying the shipment indicated that the entire contents had originated in Florida and were being returned to the United States after having been shipped to Hong Kong for a trade show. After the items were interdicted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) inspectors, Francois B. Lorin and others created false documents to justify provenance for certain items in the shipment that were prohibited from entering the United States without such provenance. Thereafter, Lorin & Son, LLC and Francois B. Lorin, through counsel, filed a petition for remission with CBP and provided supporting materials, in which they argued for release of the interdicted items by using false invoices and providing other false information. The invoices that were submitted were backdated, falsely claimed that items had been acquired from third-parties before the MOU date, and otherwise falsely claimed that these documents established “proof” that the items could be lawfully imported.

Shipping records covering goods arriving in Miami on June 4, 2011 from Hong Kong show 362 entries on that day, but they do not describe imports bound for Asiantiques or Lorin & Sons.

The artifacts seized by CBP include objects from the Ancient and Imperial periods such as bronze mirrors, weapons, and containers as well as nephrite jade bi disks.

The defendants have waived indictment, and the federal court has set bail at $100,000 surety.

U.S. Attorney Wifredo Ferrer's office, notably, is also handling the current forfeiture case targeting Peruvian cultural artifacts.

Photo credit: linder6580

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2013 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited.  CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com