Opinion ID: 3171512
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Cross-Examination on FBI Letter

Text: Antonio sought to cross-examine investor David Gienapp regarding letters the FBI sent him between 2010 and 2011. The first letter stated that FBI investigators had reason to believe Gienapp may have been a victim of an investment fraud scheme. Because the FBI letters described Gienapp as “a victim of a federal crime,” Antonio maintained that the FBI told Gienapp before interviewing him that a federal crime had been committed and that the letters were probative of Gienapp’s pro-government bias. Finding the letters irrelevant to the time period charged in the superseding indictment, 2006 to 2009, the court excluded them. John Bravata asserts that exclusion of the letters constitutes reversible error because the jury “had no other evidence from which to infer that . . . bias was created in the minds of the - 19 - Case Nos. 13-2380, 13-2381, 13-2591, 15-1370, United States v. Bravata government witnesses.” But John Bravata never sought to use the FBI letters at trial, never urged their admittance, and failed to object when the court found them inadmissible. He therefore forfeited this challenge, and we review for plain error. United States v. Arnold, 486 F.3d 177, 193 (6th Cir. 2007) (en banc). In any event, the record shows that defense counsel ably cross-examined the victims on anti-Bravata sentiment and elicited testimony that some investors participated in an email chain called “Let’s Get Bravata.” The jury heard ample testimony on pro-government bias without post-indictment FBI letters.