In an attempt to fend off being found in contempt of court, Sann Rodrigues recently asserted his Fifth Amendment right, along with claiming ignorance of the court-ordered asset freeze against.

Claim the SEC:

Neither of these arguments is availing.

The Fifth Amendment defense and arguments against are pretty complex;

It is unclear whether he is claiming that the Fifth Amendment protects him from a finding of contempt for his failure to provide an accurate accounting in compliance with this Court’s June 10, 2015, or that it protects him from providing an amended accounting to purge him from a finding of contempt.

The SEC assert however that ‘
neither of Rodrigues’ claims is (sic) availing
‘.

I won’t go too much into it as a lot of case law is cited and the legal theory gets pretty heavy, suffice to say that the SEC claim Rodrigues has already waived his right to plead the Fifth.

On the claim Rodrigues was ignorant of the asset-freeze, some interesting points are made.

First is the obvious, that ignorance is not a valid defense. Second that despite claims to the contrary, Rodrigues was personally served and contacted by the SEC 
multiple
times regarding the TRO and preliminary injunction.

Rodrigues did not respond to these efforts (which included a subpoena to appear at the preliminary injunction hearing, which was served in person), instead opting to ignore them in favor of a “rampant dissipation of assets”.

One particular juicy revelation by the SEC is that Rodrigues, through his attorney, appears to be lying about the status of his legal representation after the preliminary injunction was granted.

An email dated October 7th from Rodrigues’ attorney, Robert Eckard, to the SEC states:

Covar is irrelevant. He never represented Sann nor communicated with him. I called him and he is non-responsive.

Darren Covar is an attorney connected to DFRF Enterprises (used by Rodrigues to
launder assets
through).

In May 2015,
Covar appeared in a DFRF marketing video
and claimed he ‘
used to be a special agent (who) worked for the government
‘.

Asserting DFRF Enterprises was not a Ponzi scheme, Covar also claimed he was working with ‘
the head of the SEC (and) the former head of the SEC
‘ to ‘
make sure everything is done properly
‘.

Two months later, the
SEC shut down DFRF Enterprises
for being a $15 million dollar Ponzi scheme.

DFRF Enterprises owner is facing
criminal charges
. To date Covar has not been formally charged, nor has any litigation been filed against him for his role in DFRF.

Interestingly enough, the SEC claim Covar represented to them that in early May, around the same time he appeared in the DFRF Enterprises video, he ‘
was assisting Rodrigues with the (TelexFree) case
‘.

Accordingly, the SEC sent Covar a copy of the TRO and preliminary injunction granted against Rodrigues.

Following that up as part of these contempt proceedings, I again reiterate Rodrigues’ current attorney’s claim:

Covar is irrelevant.
He never re

🤖 Quick Answer

What arguments did Sann Rodrigues present to defend against contempt of court charges?
Rodrigues invoked his Fifth Amendment rights and claimed ignorance regarding the court-ordered asset freeze. However, the SEC contested both defenses, arguing they provided no legal protection against contempt findings, whether regarding the failure to provide accurate accounting or subsequent compliance amendments.

Why did the SEC reject Rodrigues' Fifth Amendment defense?
The SEC asserted that Rodrigues' Fifth Amendment claim was ineffective in protecting him from contempt findings. The complexity lay in determining whether the amendment shielded him from sanctions for non-compliance with accounting requirements or from providing corrective documentation to purge the contempt charge.

🔗 Related Articles

- Sloan files “I knew nothing!” Motion to Dismiss
- SEC file $23.5M Wings Network Ponzi scheme lawsuit
- Communications “breakdown” between Rodrigues and lawyer
- Inovatyon Review: Bank of Brazil backs pyramid scheme?
- De La Rosa & Crosby preliminary injunction granted