Case Details & Documented Evidence

Follow Our Public Campaign

Read the complete, question-by-question breakdown of our case on our Advocacy Page or follow along on X (Twitter).

→

When Good-Faith Questions Met the Full Weight of Federal Prosecution

In the spring of 2020, as the pandemic shut down businesses across America, we sought written guidance from lenders on how to apply for emergency relief. We asked questions, received instructions in writing, and applied to support legitimate ongoing operations—not a scheme or a shell company.

What followed was a prosecution characterized by pre-indictment asset freezes, disputed claims in court, an unprecedented plea restriction, and sentences handed down to send a message. Below are the documented facts, official court transcripts, and primary exhibits from our case.

IMG_1228.jpg

1. Documented Intent vs. Changing Government Rules

The Reality: In early 2020, rules regarding the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) were in constant flux. On March 30, 2020, South End Capital explicitly advised in writing: "Since the 940 or 941 forms are not yet available for 2020, you should be okay using the 2019 forms, putting your future payroll figures on those forms."

The Project: The application was submitted to fund legitimate operations and pre-production for Ohana, a television drama series in development long before COVID-19. Official records show the script was registered with the Writers Guild of America West (WGAw Reg. #2002508) in May 2019. We never applied for loan forgiveness.

The Outcome: When federal authorities later took the position that projected payroll was improper, they did not treat this as confusion over evolving emergency rules. They treated following a loan originator's written advice as criminal fraud.

Supporting Evidence:

• [View March 30, 2020 Written Lender Email]

• [View May 10, 2019 WGA Script Registration Certificate]

2. Inaccuracies Presented at the Sentencing Hearing

During sentencing, the Assistant U.S. Attorney presented several claims to the court that are directly contradicted by the documentary record:

• The Billboard Claim: The prosecution claimed PPP relief funds were spent on a billboard promoting the project to actor Dwayne Johnson. In reality, the Outfront Media invoice demonstrates the billboard was contracted in July 2021—two months after all our accounts and assets had been seized by federal agents—and was funded by an independent third party.

• The Mortgage Claim: The prosecution asserted that PPP funds were used to pay off the mortgage on our California home. Official records show the mortgage was placed into a standard COVID-19 forbearance plan with Fremont Bank in December 2020, not paid off.

The Production Office: The prosecution dismissed our Kapolei condominium as merely a vacation rental. It was registered and utilized as an active Hawaii production office while we established industry connections in Oahu.

Supporting Evidence:

• [View Official Court Transcript Excerpt – Prosecutorial Statements (p. 26)]

• [View Outfront Media Billboard Invoice (Dated July 20, 2021)]

• [View Fremont Bank Mortgage Forbearance Plan Notice]

3. Pre-Indictment Seizures and the Unprecedented Plea Waiver

Asset Freezes: Why were assets seized nearly a year before any charges were filed? In May 2021, federal authorities placed restraints on our bank accounts, vehicles, and family home—nearly a full year before an indictment was returned in May 2022. Stripped of financial resources, we were unable to retain private counsel and were assigned rotating court-appointed attorneys with no federal criminal defense trial experience.

Coercive Pressure: Faced with financial exhaustion, the threat of additional charges, and statements that Chris’s elderly mother would be indicted, we entered guilty pleas on two counts of the original four counts in the May 2022 indictment.

The Departure Ban: Why did our plea agreement ban us from asking for a downward departure? The government’s plea agreement contained an extraordinary condition: an explicit clause prohibiting us from requesting a downward departure under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. This restriction prevented the judge from considering standard downward variances for nonviolent, first-time offenders who had demonstrated substantial repayment.

Supporting Evidence:

• [View Clemency Petition – Section on Plea Restrictions & Due Process]

4. The Loss of Our Family Home & Foreclosure Auction

Our California family home—purchased in 2017, three years before the pandemic—held over $1 million in equity. This equity alone was sufficient to satisfy the entire loan balance.

Instead of permitting this equity to be applied toward resolving restitution, the property was driven into foreclosure. Firsthand communications from the auction reveal that federal agents were present and actively bidding, driving up the sale to $1,141,000 rather than facilitating an orderly resolution for the family.

Supporting Evidence:

• [View Foreclosure Auction Communications & Bidding Records]

Why were nonviolent parents sentenced for ‘deterrence’ when over $1.1M was recovered?

5. Sentenced for "General Deterrence" & Restitution Discrepancies

Sentencing for Deterrence: The court acknowledged on the record that neither of us posed a threat to the community, had any history of violence or substance abuse, and had made substantial efforts toward repayment. Despite this, the court imposed prison terms—36 months for Chris and 27 months for Erin—explicitly citing "general deterrence" to send a broader message.

"This is not a crime of violence, there is no question of that... I don't think any of you are likely to recommit... But there is also deterrence... deterrence in general."
— Official Sentencing Transcript (pp. 46–47)

The Restitution Credit Failure: During plea proceedings, the court explained that restitution functions as actual loss, illustrating with a bank robbery example where recovered funds are credited directly against the total owed. Yet, despite more than $1.1 million being paid, seized, forfeited, or recovered against the $1.418 million total, the government continues to enforce the full restitution order without proper credit.

Supporting Evidence:

• [View Official Sentencing Transcript – Deterrence Ruling (p. 47)]

• [View Plea Hearing Transcript – Restitution Credit Ruling (pp. 18–19)]

6. Investigative Irregularities & Federal Agency Outreach

Impersonation Concern: The night before our sentencing hearing, a Department of Justice investigator contacted a family friend who had submitted a character letter. The caller claimed to be contacting them directly from the court rather than identifying themselves as an executive branch investigator.

Formal Inquiries: We have submitted formal documentation of these practices to the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility. The FBI Executive Secretariat confirmed that our communications detailing these investigative practices were forwarded to the appropriate field office.

Supporting Evidence:

• [View Written Exchange – Character Letter Verification Call]

• [View FBI Executive Secretariat Response Letter]

Summary of Requested Clemency Relief

We are not asking to erase history. We are asking for a fair, executive review of the documented facts:

• Both defendants were first-time, nonviolent small-business owners with zero criminal history.

• More than $1.1 million was recovered or paid back toward the total loan amount.

• Erin completed her custodial sentence on June 8, 2026. Chris is currently serving a 36-month term.

• Continued separation of a father from his two teenage sons serves no protective public interest.

  Primary Deliverables for Review:

  • [Download the 2-Page Executive Summary PDF]

  • [Download the Complete Clemency Petition & Exhibit Index]