My Story
My name is Alfred Koonin. I am 71 years old. I was born in South Africa and have been living In the United States since 1973. I am a naturalized citizen. I am a physician and have been spending the past 14 years involved in medical research. I am now in my fifth year of incarceration in a Federal prison (FCI Lompoc) having been found guilty of a crime that I had nothing to do with. In January 1996, I was living in a penthouse in Westwood. I was still recovering from a quadruple heart bypass operation for which I was still on medication. The operation was performed 6 months previously. On December 2, 1995 Ronald Abel, a childhood friend of mine had called me regarding putting up an associate for him. He told me that he would let me know the details shortly before the person was to leave South Africa. He never mentioned the person’s name or details of the business. He merely indicated that this person was coming to do business for him. I (wrongly) assumed that this visit may have had something to do with the distribution of a product I had formulated. It was a cream for women’s thighs that helped reduce the appearance of cellulite. I had sent him a fax regarding this product on November 9, 1995 (available as newly discovered evidence) and we had talked about it following this fax. Also on January 15, 1996, he sent me a fax regarding a client of his in Yugoslavia who was interested in selling the product (available as newly discovered evidence).
On February 18, 1996 in the morning, Abel called. He told me the flight number and the name of his business associate. On February 18, 1996, I went to LAX international terminal to pick up Valter Nebiolo. He was a tall, well dressed, swarthy, Italian.
The following day, Monday February 19th, I drove Valter to a car rental place where he rented a car. I then gave him directions on how to get to San Diego where his business meeting was to take place. I knew no details of his precise destination. When there, he went in by himself and rented the car by himself with his own credit card. He also obtained maps from the agency. I knew he had my address and phone number because I had asked him if he knew how to get back to my place. He showed me a slip of paper with my name and address, which I confirmed was correct. The rental agent, in a statement to FBI Agent Monroe, (302 Form 03/27/96) confirmed that Nebiolo was a walk-in who rented a car by himself with his own credit card. When asked for a local address Nebiolo gave mine because that is the only local address he knew. When he had completed the transaction, he came out of the rental agency. I was waiting outside to ensure he had no problem in getting a car. He showed me the map and asked how he should proceed to San Diego (Not La Jolla.) As the agency was near the corner of Westwood Blvd and Santa Monica Blvd., I was able to point out the on-ramp to the 405 Freeway and tell him how to get to San Diego. He then headed west on Santa Monica Blvd to the 405 South on-ramp and I headed to work. Now I do believe that I “helped” him rent a car in exactly the same manner that anyone hosting an out-of-towner would do. Nothing in this behavior can possibly suggest anything sinister to a reasonable person. So, Nebiolo left for San Diego on the Monday morning 02/19/96. I didn’t see him, or even hear from him until I returned from work on Thursday, 02/22/96.
On Friday 23rd February. 1996, Nebiolo left early in the morning. When I awoke at 7:30 a.m. he had already left. That night, as was my routine, I went to bed at 11:00 p.m. after taking a sleeping pill prescribed after my bypass surgery. Nebiolo had not yet returned. At approximately 12:30 a.m. I was awakened by the telephone ringing. I was expecting to hear Valter Nebiolo’s voice but instead it was the police. They wanted to come upstairs and speak to me regarding Nebiolo. My first thought was that he had been involved in an automobile accident, especially since he had come from South Africa where they drive on the left side of the road.
I invited the police in. There were four of them, two uniformed LAPD officers and two plain-clothes detectives from San Diego. The names of the officers on the report were LAPD Sergeants Hussey and Voge, and SDPD detectives Gerry Kramer (#3120), Al Libiran (W4U35) and C. Drilling (#1271) who also wrote the report. (SD Regional Officer’s Report Narrative 02/14/96 pp.1; paragraph 1.) One of these five must have stayed downstairs as I only saw four officers. Officer Kramer informed me about Nebiolo’s attempt on Sydney Kahn’s life earlier that morning in La Jolla, CA. They recorded my reaction in a taped interview, as “Koonin seemed very surprised.” (pp2; line 5). Kramer questioned me about Nebiolo and asked to see his belongings; I identified a duffel bag as belonging to Valter and gave them permission to examine the contents in my presence. The transcript of this taped interview reveals that I almost immediately told them about Ronnie Abel (transcript of taped interview pp. 1; line 10; pp; 2; lines 1-17). The police then departed with Nebiolo’s duffel bag.
Abel called me on 02/26/96, Monday morning my time from Cape Town. This call is not listed on the toll call analysis prepared by the FBI, so it is possible that he called from somewhere other than his home or office. I consciously allowed him to speak first in an effort to explain the circumstances as I was furious over the possibility of a murderer staying at my home, and the jeopardy he had put me in. Abel opened the conversation with the usual salutations and then immediately inquired whether Nebiolo was on his way back to South Africa. When I told him Nebiolo had been arrested, he became extremely upset and hung up on me. Within 15 minutes he called back asking for more details, to which I replied, “So do I.” I told him what the police had told me and asked him what was going on. His reply was, “Oh my God, I am in deep shit!” and again he hung up. (Why would I ask him what was going on if I was supposed to already know what was going on as a co-conspirator?)
Two days later, Wednesday 28th, he again called. This time I could hear his wife in the background. He asked me if an article had appeared in the LA Times about him. I told him that none had. I then heard him tell his wife. “You see. There’s nothing in the Los Angeles papers about me.” At the time, I had not seen any newspapers especially from San Diego. In any case, the first time Abel’s name appeared in the San Diego Union Tribune was on that day (02/28/96.) Though I found out later that other articles about this crime had been printed immediately after it happened. (02/24/96; 02/25/96 SDUT) How could I therefore know that this particular article had appeared on this Wednesday morning? I had never even read a San Diego Union Tribune. I once again demanded to know what was going on. He told me he would call me back and again hung up.
On Monday March 4, 1996 (just five days later, 302 form) I received a call from FBI Agent Dale Monroe from San Diego. He asked me if he could interview me over the telephone. I agreed. My head being clearer at that time I was able to recall more details. I gave Agent Monroe all the information that I was privy to, including the facts that apparently Kahn owed Abel some money from previous business transactions and that Abel had visited Kahn on three previous occasions in order to arrange payments. The last visit was about three months previously when, as far as I knew, Abel had come to some agreement with Kahn regarding payments. That was the sum total of my knowledge at the time. I offered to call Abel to get more details but Agent Monroe advised me not to do that but rather wait for Abel to call and then let him know.
Over the next two months I received newspaper clippings from San Diego and South Africa, from friends and relatives. (Newly discovered evidence.) I have since gathered these articles from both San Diego and the papers in Cape Town, South Africa. I am mentioned in only two articles. It must be noted that in an article in the San Diego Union-Tribune (06/27/96) the prosecutor (Larry Burns) was quoted saying that I was not a suspect. This fact was also quoted in the Sunday Cape Times, (07/19/96). These same friends and relatives also kept me apprised of the latest gossip pertaining to this matter. With all this information I was able to fill in the blanks, which painted an ugly picture of murder-for-hire for the proceeds of some life insurance policies.
Approximately at the end of June 1996, I received a phone call from another FBI agent, Kyle Loven. He informed me that they had returned from South Africa and were convening a Grand Jury hearing and my testimony as a witness would be important. One week after this I was contacted by the A.U.S.A. and arrangements were made for me to come down to San Diego for an interview. A couple of days later I drove down to San Diego and met with A.U.S.A. Larry Burns (now a federal judge) who interviewed me for approximately 1 1/2 hours. Again I told him all I knew prior to the incident and also filled him in on some of the information I had gathered after the event. Mr. Burns made it abundantly clear that my testimony was crucial as it tied Nebiolo, Kahn and Abel together. He reaffirmed the fact that I was a witness only and explained to me that there are some over-zealous prosecutors in his office that would have treated me as a suspect, but he acknowledged that he believed that I had no prior knowledge of this crime and had been used by Abel. After the interview I was paid $50.00 for traveling expenses and sent on my way.
Around July 25, 1996, I was called to testify before the Grand Jury. Before testifying I spent some time with Mr. Burns. He instructed me to keep my answers as short as possible and if he wished to expand on something he would question me accordingly.
While waiting in the hallway outside the Grand Jury room, I was approached by a gentleman who introduced himself as Sydney Kahn (the intended victim). This was the first and only time I had ever seen Mr. Kahn and spoken to him. We exchanged pleasant conversation and then discussed the shock we both felt over this incident. Shortly thereafter Mr. Kahn was called into the jury room to give his testimony.
After about 1 1/2 hours I was called in. I gave my testimony, which was pretty much the same as I had discussed with Mr. Burns. Afterwards I was given another expense check, this time for $100.00 and I went back home to Westwood.
One month later I moved my residence and located to a 35’ sail boat in Marina del Rey. I notified the authorities of my change of address and phone number.
From this Grand Jury hearing Nebiolo and Abel were indicted. In May 1997, Nebiolo pled guilty and was sentenced to 14 years. All attempts to extradite Abel from South Africa failed. Abel never appeared in court in the U.S. and his case was dismissed in South Africa. To the best of my knowledge, he served no time.
The prosecutor involved with this case up to the time of Nebiolo’s guilty plea was AUSA Larry Burns. The initial investigating officers were Detective Kramer and Sgt. Drilling of the SDPD. Within a few days the case was transferred to the FBI and SA Dale Monroe took over the investigation. Around May or June 1996 SA Monroe was replaced by SA Kyle Loven. On 05/27/97 Nebiolo pled guilty. No mention of me was made. Around June 1997 AUSA Burns was replaced by AUSA Shane Harrigan. That’s when everything changed.
When Harrigan took over, he was hungry because of having recently lost a major case involving illegal Chinese immigrants. This case was still open because the attempt at Abel’s extradition was still on-going.
Harrigan had no hold on this case as Nebiolo was already convicted so he decided to see if he could get a quick score. Nebiolo was obviously informed by someone (either his own lawyer or Harrigan) that he could deal if he had anything to offer. All he had was me (Koonin) who was an easy mark. Nebiolo then came out with a second “confession” in which he claimed that I knew all about the conspiracy and helped set it up by giving him a place to stay, helping him rent a car, and supplying him with a weapon. This “confession” was on July 14, 1997.
Based on these fabrications, I was called into the FBI office in Westwood in January 1998. Notice that this was six months after Nebiolo’s statements about my involvement. I am confronted by Harrigan who said that Nebiolo told him that I gave him a gun and that the gun used had my fingerprints on it. I admitted to owning a gun, but denied giving it to Nebiolo. Harrigan became belligerent and the interrogation was ended. Loven even apologized to me for his rudeness. At this time, Harrigan did not have the gun and he should have retrieved the gun from the San Diego Police Department. It was destroyed in 2000 after numerous notices from the SDPD.
I arranged to talk to SA Loven over a week later. I reiterated that Nebiolo may have gotten a gun from me but I did not give him one. I told them about the replica .44 magnum (Dirty Harry’s gun) that I had and that the small gun I owned (I thought that it was a .22) did not work. As most of the questioning was aimed at what I knew at the time of the questioning I gave information that I had garnered from newspapers and gossip. For the record, I had never heard of a Ravens Arms gun.
Another agent was present with Loven at the time but he did not ask any questions. Harrigan was not there. At the end of this interview, Loven asked whether I was willing to take a lie detector test and I answered in the affirmative. For the record, I have never been given a lie detector test.
Also from July 1996 until this time (January 1998) for approximately 1 1/2 years I had received occasional phone calls from FBI Agent Loven to keep in touch and find out whether I had learned anything new. These phone calls should have been a part of Discovery written up as 302 forms. I never received them. Any information I received from friends and family in South Africa I passed on.
Over the next eighteen months Loven continued to call me to ask whether I had heard anything further. I repeated gossip I had heard from South Africa. During this time, he informed me about Abel’s 1992 attempt to hire a hitman…something that I was unaware of. Again, where is the 302 form on this call? After that I heard nothing until my arrest on April 4, 2001.
Two and a half years later, on April 4, 2001, I left work and headed home for lunch. As I parked my car I noticed four individuals. One approached me, asked me if I was me and then flashed a badge and identified himself as FBI Special Agent John Iannarelli. He informed me that Abel was to be extradited from South Africa that week and that the judge, in San Diego, needed to interview me prior to this as I was the most important witness in the case. I agreed to go with them. I went up to my apartment to get my jacket. While there they asked me for my passport as I.D and proof of citizenship. I gave it to them. I was told that my passport would be returned to me and that I should be home by nightfall. I remember telling them that I would have come down to San Diego by myself if they had called me. As I approached their vehicle, Iannarelli informed me that due to procedure anyone riding in an FBI vehicle must be handcuffed. Although I found that strange, not having interacted with the FBI previously. I agreed.
I was cuffed (my hands in front of me) and seated in the back of the vehicle. Iannarelli sat next to me. The other agent, Kyle Muxworthy sat in the front and drove. I never even spoke to Muxworthy. The other two agents left in their own vehicle and returned to Los Angeles. I never saw them again.
We left Pacific Palisades at approximately 1:00 p.m. At no time was I informed that I was under arrest, even though I had asked. At no time was I asked whether I would prefer to see a judge in Los Angeles, which was obviously the nearest court to me. I was not given the choice of going to the nearest magistrate. They insisted in telling me that I was not under arrest, but rather was being taken in as a witness and would be allowed to go after the judge had spoken to me. I was under the illusion, at the time, that judges had some authority.
The drive from Pacific Palisades took approximately 2 1/2 hours, including a stop to get some food. During this drive, (in which Muxworthy claimed took 1 ½ hours) Iannarelli asked me questions about the case. Considering that it was more than five years after the event. (February 23, 1996 – April 4, 2001) I answered the questions as best I could. Most of the information I gave them was based on what I had learned after the incident took place. Iannarelli asked me my opinion about certain elements and I told them about some conclusions I had come to and some guesses I had made concerning certain events. All in all this was more like a casual conversation than an interrogation.
At about 3:40 p.m., just before we were about to pull into the FBI building in San Diego, I was Mirandized by Iannarelli with the following: “Oh, by the way, due to procedure we must read you your rights at this time.” He then read me my rights after which he presented me with a folded piece of paper and asked me to sign it. I requested my reading glasses, which were in my pants pocket, but I was unable to reach them because I was handcuffed. Iannarelli told me that he couldn’t uncuff me to retrieve my glasses but the form was simply to acknowledge that I spoke English and understood what he had just told me. He neglected to tell me that I would also be signing away my right to have an attorney present. I agreed and attempted to sign my name which was difficult because I was cuffed and in a moving vehicle.
After pulling into the underground garage I was escorted into a processing room at which time they removed my handcuffs. I was informed that due to the late hour (it was now 4:00 p.m.) I would not be able to see the judge until the following morning. They said that I would have to spend the night at a place called M.C.C. I requested that I be allowed to call my fiancée and tell her where I was. I called Beth and let her talk to Agent Iannarelli. He told her exactly what he had told me and assured her that I would be home the next day. They photographed and fingerprinted me and took me to M.C.C. where I thought that I would be spending one night only. Before he left, Agent Iannarelli told me that after my court appearance he would personally take me to the train station so that I could return to Los Angeles. I never saw Iannarelli again.
The next day I was taken down to the courthouse and placed in a room situated next to the court. Soon a U.S. Marshall came in and called for Ronald Abel. I was reassured thinking that the FBI agents had told me the truth and that Abel had been extradited and was in court. This was again reaffirmed when, ten minutes later, the Marshall again popped in and once more asked if Ronald Abel was present. This time I answered, telling him that Abel was not in this room but may be in another. Minutes later the Marshall returned and called my name.
In the courtroom I looked around to see if Abel was there. I could not see him. The prosecutor, whom I recognized as A.U.S.A. Harrigan, stepped up to the podium and started reading off the counts which were listed as conspiracy for murder for hire, traveling in commerce across international boundaries, extortion, supplying and using a gun for a violent crime, perjury and aiding and abetting. I once again scanned the courtroom for Ronny Abel because I knew that my “friend” was in big trouble. At this point the judge looked at me and asked me how I would plead. I was in total shock. I could not even speak. I thought I was going to have a stroke. A young lady from the Public Defender’s office stepped forward and pled “not guilty.” She asked for bail to be set whereupon the prosecutor jumped up and told the judge that I was a menace to society and a flight risk because I had a son in South Africa. The judge denied bail. The prosecutor then whispered something to the Public Defender after which she announced to the judge that attorney Paul Turner would represent me who we have found out was not even on the list for appointed counsel.
Although I had no knowledge of this at the time, I later found out that when I was admitted to M.C.C. in San Diego I was admitted under my name and aka Ronald Abel. I have never used an aka (other than the abbreviated version of my first name) and certainly not that of Ronald Abel. I believe that this was presented to the jury, which may have led them to believe that I was Ronald Abel. After all, both of us are White, Jewish South Africans. 95% of the trial was about Abel and I was the one sitting in the accused’s chair.
A superceding indictment against me was filed at 3:45 p.m. on February 23, 2001. Friday afternoon. As the crime was committed on February 23, 1996, at 8:15 a. m., indictment was filed after the 5-year statute of limitations had expired. Even the prosecutor, Harrigan, in his appellate brief, admits that it was filed at “the last possible minute.” We have petitioned the Supreme Court regarding the Statute of Limitations (1957 Grunewald v US) for the October 2004 term. According to Grunewald, the last date this indictment should have been filed would have to have been February 22, 2001. Cert was granted regarding Booker/FanFan in 2005. No decision was made on the statute of limitations.
The indictment was deliberately confusing, but were basically the following
charges.
- Conspiracy to travel in foreign commerce in the commission of murder-for-hire. Title 18 U.S.C. §1958(a).
- Traveling and causing others to travel in the commission of murder-for-hire. Title 18 U.S.C. §1958(a).
- Using a firearm during and in relation to federal crimes of violence. Title 18 U.S.C. §924(c)(1)(2).
- Extortionate collection of debt. Title 18 U.S.C. §894.
- False declaration before a Grand Jury. Title 18 U S.C. §1623.
- Aiding and abetting. Title 18 U S.C. §2.
The text of the same document lists the counts differently as follows:
- and 2. are the same.
- Same as above except only Abel and Nebiolo are named.
- Same as above. Only I am accused of this plus aiding and abetting extortion. I do not understand how I could be charged with extortion when neither Abel nor Nebiolo were. How could I extort Kahn when I never even knew of his existence? Further, how could I aid and abet extortion when I am the only one charged with it?
- This count now refers to count three, viz, use of a firearm, except now this count only applies to me.
- This is now the charge of perjury and refers only to me.
The jury verdict form also shows the charges differently and was one of the points of the original appeal. Common sense shows that the jury was not clear about the charges against me. And, beyond any iota of due process, the judge (Napoleon Jones) the next court day after the jury had been dismissed saying that he was “reflecting the findings of the jury” changed major portions of the verdict form saying it was a “clerical error.”
When I was arraigned on April 5, 2001, many more constitutional violations had already occurred. The “due process clause of the Fifth Amendment would require dismissal of the indictment if it were shown at trial that the pre-indictment delay caused substantial prejudice to appellant’s rights to a fair trial and that the delay was an intentional device to gain a tactical advantage of the accused” (United States v. Marion). There is ample proof that Harrigan deliberately delayed this indictment because he was waiting for the real criminal (Ronald Abel) to be extradited. July 14, 1997 Nebiolo had changed his story to say that I had given him a gun. If he was to be believed, why wasn’t I arrested then? I was then questioned in January 1998. And if what they said I said was true, why wasn’t I arrested then? And to make matters even worse, why was I finally blindsightedly arrested on April 5, 2001 when this indictment was filed over six weeks earlier? It is no coincidence that Harrigan was promoted after “winning” this case. And, less than two months after the trial, Nebiolo was given his freedom and is now back in Italy.
In April 2001 I was given bail after three weeks but had to wear a GPS monitor. I was not too happy about the attorney that the court had appointed and sought out a private attorney. I eventually hired an attorney named John Hedderman. We were given some Discovery (never have received full Discovery) and found out that the only material evidence that they claimed to have against me, namely the gun used in the crime, had been destroyed on January 27, 2000. San Diego Police Department notified the FBI three times (8/11/99; 10/28/99; 11/30/99) regarding this gun. If this was a serious on going investigation, this gun should have been preserved. Under the law, Brady v. Maryland, suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused who has requested it violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution. The duffel bag and sunglasses were preserved as well as the bullets. Why wasn’t the gun?
Trial was scheduled for July 2001. One week before trial the judge called my attorney and myself into court. My attorney, Hedderman, was informed that due to some technicality with his bar license he could not represent me in a Federal Court and the judge dismissed him from the case. We have found out later that he did not have to be dismissed for the reason the judge gave. Paul Turner was reappointed as my attorney. The trial was now postponed until November 2001.
Other than asking for discovery, no pre-trial motions were filed by Paul Turner.
The trial began on November 9, 2001 with jury selection. 95% of the trial was about Ronald Abel and his relationship with Sydney Kahn. The basic evidence against me was Nebiolo’s bought testimony, and a 2x3 ft. blown up photograph of a gun that was similar to, but definitely not, the non-working gun that I owned. I had a non-working .22 and the gun that Nebiolo is supposed to have used was a .25 Raven Arms. They are called “Saturday Night Specials” and are only about 5 inches in length. I also had a replica gun (Dirty Harry .44 magnum) that can still be bought from any reenactment hobbyist. The blow up of the Raven Arms made it look like a much bigger gun. Also, no ballistics tests were ever done on the gun to prove if the gun destroyed was the gun that had been used to shoot Kahn. I have since learned that a criminal, especially a hitman, will use one gun and ‘throw down’ another gun to divert attention from the weapon used. The gun was exculpatory. With all the ambiguity about the weapon used, this case should have never been brought against me.
Also, at trial Agent Muxworthy testified against me. Muxworthy had never questioned me, Iannarelli did. Iannarelli never appeared in court. The only agents who appeared in court were Muxworthy and Loven. This should be a Crawford issue, the right to confront your accused. These agents based their testimony on flawed information from their rewrites of 302 forms, some of which I have never received. We never received the original raw notes of their interviews with me and I never signed a statement as a suspect that is required from the rules in the FBI Handbook. There were no taped or video recordings of me ever confessing to giving a gun to Nebiolo because I never did. Muxworthy testified as if he had cross-examined me personally when I never spoke to him. On the stand he could remember every word I “said” but could not remember any of the questions he “asked.”
At the Grand Jury hearing in July 1996, Loven testified that a fingerprint was found on the gun. Whose fingerprint was it? To this day we do not know whose fingerprints it was. We do know that they were not mine nor were they Nebiolo’s. If it had been mine, that piece of evidence would have surely been brought up at trial. But, because it was brought up in the Grand Jury hearing in 1996 and not used in 2001, this evidence was also suppressed.
The fact that Harrigan went out of his way to convince the jury that Nebiolo was truthful went beyond the bounds of what a prosecutor is supposed to do. Harrigan’s personal aim was to win this trial at all costs. As Justice Sutherland said in Berger v. U.S., ”the prosecutor is not the representative of an ordinary party to a lawsuit, but of a sovereign with a responsibility not just to win, but to see that justice is done.” The ends, in our system, do not justify the means. Harrigan knew quite well that Nebiolo was lying; yet he went ahead and tried to make him out to be a saint. As Justice Trott, of the 9th. Circuit, said in NMI v. Bowie, “Never has it been more true than it is now that a criminal charged with a serious crime understands that a fast and easy way out of trouble with the law is not only to have the best lawyer that money can buy or the court can appoint, but to cut a deal at someone else’s expense and to purchase leniency from the government by offering testimony in return for immunity, or in return for reduced incarceration.” This certainly applies to this case. Every aspect of this case, from the preindictment delay to the destruction and suppression of evidence, was orchestrated by Harrigan to give him the best tactical advantage he could have and to win the case no matter what the truth was. And he is fully aware of the atrocity he has committed.