The Saint Clair CaseA motion to vacate for fraud upon the court
On July 15, 2026, Asa Saint Clair asked the federal court in New York to vacate his conviction for wire fraud as “procured by fraud upon the court.” The motion alleges that although he lost at trial, it was the Government that committed fraud to win the conviction. At every stage of the case, it says, the Government misrepresented the facts, presented altered evidence, withheld evidence, and argued against its own exhibits and witnesses. In the motion’s words, the Government built a “false factual universe” in which his organization was a “sham,” he embezzled its funds, and the cryptocurrency he described was never created. This site follows the motion in order and weighs Saint Clair’s evidence against the Government’s arguments.
Everything here is on the public record. Every statement carries a citation to the transcript, an exhibit or the docket. Tap any document to read it full size.
Saint Clair with Pope Francis at the Vatican, September 27, 2019, the day after the search“This case did not begin with a jury; it began with Petitioner walking toward the Government, doing what an innocent man in his position does: he cooperated.”
When agents searched the office of the World Sports Alliance (WSA) on September 26, 2019, Saint Clair, then its President, was at the Vatican. By his account he was meeting Pope Francis and senior Vatican officials about work on the very cryptocurrency the Government would later call a fraud (Tr. 669; Saint Clair Decl. ¶¶ 2–3). He called the prosecutor from Rome that same day, on the advice of United Nations officials who, in his words recorded by the prosecutor, “told [me] to cooperate” (ECF 150-1 at 32). On September 30, back from Rome, he walked into the U.S. Attorney’s Office voluntarily and without a lawyer. He answered questions, let agents forensically search his phone, gave the prosecutor the password to his cloud drive, and then left. The Government’s own agent agreed he was “absolutely” free to go (Tr. 648–49, 669–70). He disclosed his UN contacts, his cryptocurrency, his pay arrangements, his move to Arizona and his work in Madagascar. The Government arrested him in Los Angeles on October 10, 2019, and, the motion says, “investigated none of the leads he had handed it.”
The Rosetta Stone, and the bail hearing
The motion calls the prosecutor’s handwritten notes of those interviews “the Rosetta Stone of this motion” (PX 09; ECF 150-1 at 31–40). They were written in real time, in her own hand, and they record two things at once: what he disclosed, and the fact that the Government knew it. “A prosecutor cannot innocently tell a court the opposite of what she herself wrote down.”
The first misrepresentation
ECF 34 at 28 · ECF 150-1 at 29–30, 37, 39
- Bail hearing · ECF 34 at 28“At no point did he disclose this residence in Scottsdale, Arizona.”
- Her notes · ECF 150-1 at 37, 39“plans to move to AZ next week”; “plans to live in Scottsdale, AZ.”
- The seized check · ECF 150-1 at 29–30A $50,000 relocation check bearing the Scottsdale address.
ECF 150-1 at 37 · personal details blacked outFrom the bail hearing to the Government’s 2025 response
“The scheme began at the bail hearing with a misrepresentation contradicted by the prosecutor’s own notes and a seized check. It continued through pre-trial …; through trial …; and post-conviction.”
- October 2019The bail hearing“At no point did he disclose this residence in Scottsdale, Arizona.”ECF 34 at 28
- 2021–2022Before trialThree timelines in one filing, and a white paper re-dated to 2020.ECF 73; ECF 73-1
- March 2022At trial“No partnership,” an altered letter, and “he tried to hide it.”Tr. 29, 959–66, 1053
- 2025After convictionOne admission, that no contract says “revenue positive.” Nothing else corrected.ECF 146
What an officer of the court told the tribunal, and what the Government’s own record shows
In the order the motion sets them out. Each row opens the full comparison.
- “At no point did he disclose this residence in Scottsdale, Arizona.”Bail, Oct. 23, 2019 · ECF 34 at 28; continued Nov. 13, 2019 · ECF 10 at 8The prosecutor’s own notes, weeks earlier: “plans to move to AZ next week”; “plans to live in Scottsdale, AZ.” The seized $50,000 relocation check bore the Scottsdale address.PX 09; PX 08; ECF 150-1 at 29–30, 37, 39See the record →
- The defendant “knew full well that WSA had no partnership with the United Nations.”Opening · Tr. 29The signed 2007 UN‑NGO‑IRENE agreement identifies WSA as a partner. The Government’s own exhibit says WSA “concluded a partnership” with UN DESA.ECF 135 at 116–18, 126–27; GX 306, Preamble KSee the record →
- The Rabat Declaration is “simply a statement of an NGO.”Tr. 217The Government’s own exhibit names the Rabat Declaration, UN document E/2007/NGO/1, as WSA’s “constitutive Act.”GX 306 § 1(A); DX 2See the record →
- “The closest [he] got to the UN was … an apartment office across the street.”Closing · Tr. 1087; see Tr. 1033, 1041The Government’s own witnesses placed him inside UN headquarters on WSA business in 2017–2018.Tr. 511–12, 574–75See the record →
- “Last, he tried to hide it from law enforcement.”Closing · Tr. 1053The Government’s only law-enforcement witness swore he came in voluntarily, without a lawyer, answered questions and surrendered his phone.Tr. 648–49, 656, 669–70See the record →
- Three timelines in one filing: no “substantial steps”; nothing “until 2020”; nothing “until after the search.”Pretrial · ECF 73 at 4, 6–7, 11Page 10 of the same filing quotes the coin’s creation on September 18 and finalization on September 23, 2019, before the September 26 search.ECF 73 at 10 n.3; DX 35See the record →
- “[T]he GUMMEE transfers, all that activity, that starts the day after” the search.Closing · Tr. 1055The public Stellar ledger records GUMMEE’s first on-chain transaction on September 18, 2019, at 18:21:34 UTC.PX 851; DX 35See the record →
- “Miranz, not paid. … Netki, not paid.”Closing · Tr. 1092$2,350 to Miranz on August 26, 2019; the $2,350 completion payment on October 1; $5,000 to Netki on October 8.PX 820; PX 810; DX 44See the record →
- His contracts say that unless the companies are “revenue positive … he’s not allowed to take that money.”Closing · Tr. 1094No contract contains the term “revenue positive,” now conceded. The contracts authorize the payments received.ECF 146 at 21; DX 29 § 2(b)See the record →
- “[A] sham-UN affiliate.”Closing · Tr. 1085; ECF 146 at 26An “affiliate” is one that “controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with” another. The UN did not control WSA.17 C.F.R. § 230.405; DX 29 at 2See the record →
“When confronted with this record in § 2255 briefing, the Government corrected nothing. It conceded what it could not deny, recast what it could not concede, and remained silent on the rest.”
What the motion asks the court to do
- Vacate the judgment of conviction as procured by fraud upon the court.
- Hold an evidentiary hearing on the fraud-upon-the-court allegations.
- Dismiss the indictment with prejudice.
- Grant such further relief as the court deems just and proper, including any remedial orders necessary to restore the integrity of the judicial process.
The court denied the motion on July 23, 2026 (ECF 206 at 26). Saint Clair filed a notice of appeal with the Second Circuit on August 6, 2026, and his application for a certificate of appealability on September 4, 2026 (No. 26-2228). The appeal is pending. Read the ruling.