Chicago US Attorney’s Office Claims AUSAs Are Not Responsible for What They Witness in a Grand Jury
The Chicago US Attorney’s office has responded to Sami Khan’s motion to dismiss his indictment (captioned US v. Ahmed) based on alleged misconduct similar to what occurred in the Broadview 6 (-2) case, asking to delay the July 9 trial and purporting to provide a fulsome explanation for what happened in this case, an alleged COVID fraud conspiracy.
The filing does provide a bunch of dates (which I lay out below). But before it does so, it includes this paragraph, describing how Kelly Guzman, who signed this filing, was not on notice of misconduct until she saw the grand jury transcripts from the Broadview 6 (-2) case.
8. Khan cites examples in Exhibit B to his Motion to Dismiss of what he claims are improper statements by AUSA A to the grand jury during eight of the 14 sessions in this case. AUSA Guzman was present for two sessions with AUSA A—the first appearance and the last appearance before the grand jury before the indictment was issued. The DOJ Trial Attorney was also present during the last session. The government disputes Khan’s claim that AUSA A’s statements, made during the two sessions in which AUSA Guzman was present with AUSA A, put AUSA Guzman on notice of misconduct by AUSA A before the grand jury. At the first indication that there could be any reason to investigate, that is, after she was shown the portion of the transcript in the Broadview 6 case, AUSA Guzman ordered transcripts of all colloquies. [my emphasis]
There’s a problem with that already. In the Broadview case, Matthew Skiba credibly explained that he was too inexperienced to realize how big a problem the alleged vouching was.
So in full candor, Your Honor, I started with this office on July 14th. I had been with the office for less than two months. This was the second time I was before a grand jury. The first time was a simple PSN case.
Ms. Mecklenberg is not here to defend herself. I am not trying to deflect blame, but I was with a 20-years-plus senior veteran.
I remember what you referred to as the vouching incident. I remember thinking at the time that I would never make that statement as a matter of personal style. What I did not know then, and what only became apparent as we were discussing dismissing these charges, is that’s beyond personal style, and that is, at a minimum, arguably misconduct.
But Guzman’s PACER record goes back over 25 years; she’s at least as experienced than Mecklenburg. She can’t invoke inexperience to explain her inaction.
Plus, there’s a bigger confession in this filing.
As described, prosecutors in this case got the Broadview transcripts somewhere between April 29 and May 1.
5. Between on or about April 29, 2026 and on or about May 1, 2026, AUSAs Guzman and MacArthur separately received from a member of the United States Attorney’s Office a portion of a grand jury transcript from United States v. Rabbit, et al., No. 25 CR 693 (referred to herein as the “Broadview 6” case). The portion reflected what has been referred to in the Broadview 6 case as the “vouching” incident.
April 29 is the day DOJ superseded the charges against the remaining Broadview defendants, eliminating the felony and purportedly mooting the sharing of grand jury transcripts. Yet, already by that date, the Chicago US Attorney’s office was sharing the transcript with other prosecutors among themselves.
This makes the decision to redact the transcripts shared with Judge April Perry all the more damning, to say nothing of the failure to inform the Broadview defendants of the alleged misconduct. Their decision to share the transcripts with other AUSAs demonstrates they knew they had a problem, one they chose not to disclose right away.
There’s one more (smaller) problem with this attempt to look proactive. The DOJ filing makes much of the fact that AUSA Diane MacArthur, who joined the Ahmed team on April 3 and has been brought in to clean up the Broadview mess, obtained permission to share the Ahmed grand jury transcripts with defense attorneys and supersede the indictment before the hearing on May 21 where the Broadview case blew up. But neither Guzman — the experienced AUSA claiming she had no duty to respond when witnessing problematic grand jury conduct — nor MacArthur did anything immediately after they received the complete transcripts on May 15, and MacArthur (who was on vacation on May 20) did not do so until after Perry issued an order making it crystal clear the case was going to blow up. They didn’t respond to what they saw in the grand jury transcripts. They responded to April Perry’s order.
They acted proactively to CYA. They did not act proactively to correct a wrong.
And given how MacArthur has been brought into clean up Broadview, I’m wondering why she was brought into Ahmed on April 3, which happened amid debates about a Bill of Particulars that Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman ordered to explain the conduct of the low-level people who are charged with the mastermind, before Broadview started blowing up.
The Chicago US Attorney’s office started acting guilty back in April. But didn’t start telling judges why until late May.
Side note: The report that DOJ is investigating E Jean Carroll, which Andrew Boutros then denied (without denying they were investigating Reid Hoffman, who funded Carroll’s suit), is happening as all this is blowing up. I would not be surprised if those leaks are coming from people who are being thrown under the bus for the Broadview and Ahmed misconduct.
Timeline
April 9: Broadview defendants supplement motion to obtain grand jury transcripts; Judge April Perry orders prosecutors to either respond to request for grand jury transcripts or provide them to her
April 20: DOJ asks for extension in acquiring transcripts
April 23: Broadview prosecutors move to file grand jury transcripts in camera and provides redacted transcripts
April 26: Judge Perry orders DOJ to provide unredacted transcripts at April 29 hearing
April 29: DOJ says they will drop felony charge and claims request for transcripts is mooted; Broadview transcripts shared with Ahmed prosecutors; Guzman asks grand jury coordinator for transcripts from the Ahmed grand jury, “in order to examine the full extent of AUSA A’s statements to the grand jury in colloquies throughout the investigation”
April 30: Grand jury coordinator reaches out to transcription service (which is no longer used by USAO), which in turn reaches out to five court reporters
May 7 to May 15: AUSA Diane MacArthur, who was added to Ahmed on April 3 and brought into Broadview for the cleanup of it, obtains transcripts; the transcript for the date of indictment, June 12, 2025, at which both Guzman and another AUSA were present, presents longest delay because court reporter was on vacation
May 18 to May 20: MacArthur on vacation
May 20: Judge Perry orders all AUSAs involved in redacting the transcripts to appear at a hearing at 11 AM on May 21
MINUTE entry before the Honorable April M. Perry: Hearing to be held 5/21/2026 at 11:00 a.m. in person in Courtroom 1725 on the motion for disclosure of prosecutor’s instructions of the law to the grand jury 143 . Any AUSA who participated in the decision to redact portions of the grand jury transcripts, whether on the trial team or at the supervisory level, is ordered to appear in person at the hearing. Due to the anticipated discussion of grand jury materials and in an effort to avoid tainting the jury venire, the proceedings will be conducted under seal. Mailed notice. (jcc,) (Entered: 05/20/2026)
May 21, Before Broadview hearing where case blows up but after Perry’s order making it clear it was going to blow up: MacArthur receives permission to share transcripts with Ahmed attorneys
12. On Thursday, May 21, 2026, just six days after receiving the last of the transcripts, and before an 11:00 am scheduled court proceeding in the Broadview 6 case, AUSAs Guzman and MacArthur received authorization to produce the full transcripts of the grand jury proceedings in this case to all counsel with appearances on file in this case and to inform counsel that the government planned to re-present the instant case to a different grand jury.
13. During the evening of May 21, 2026, AUSA MacArthur sent an email to counsel in this case requesting a Teams meeting the next morning.
May 22: Teams meeting at which Ahmed prosecutors disclose Mecklenburg allegedly vouched in their case
May 26: Khan moves to dismiss the indictment with prejudice
