Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS (KANSAS CITY DOCKET)

Transcription

1 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS (KANSAS CITY DOCKET) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) No. ) CRAIG CUNNINGHAM ) and ) ) ) Defendants. ) ) INDICTMENT The Grand Jury charges: Introduction At all times material to this indictment: 1. Hitchin Post Steak Company, Inc. (Hitchin Post), was a company incorporated in Kansas on January 8, 1999, with its primary location of operation in Kansas City, Kansas. 2. Hitchin Post operated as a meat and poultry processor with a grant of federal inspection from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) since May 10, As a processor, Hitchin Post received animals already slaughtered, which were processed into the individual parts and shipped to customers throughout the United States. Beginning in approximately May 2008, Hitchin Post operated primarily as a poultry processor. 3. To transport product in interstate commerce, meat and poultry processors

2 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 2 of 10 operating under grants of federal inspection are subject to inspection by the USDA. This inspection includes an actual USDA inspector being present at the processing location each day the company is operating, who inspects for general sanitation, compliance with the plant s processing procedures, compliance with USDA regulations, and correct labeling for the products. 4. When a meat or poultry processor subject to federal inspection operates beyond or outside its normal working hours or days, then it must notify the USDA inspector before the extended processing hours, so the processed product is inspected pursuant to regulations. 5. A product was misbranded if its labeling was false or misleading. 6. A product was adulterated if it consisted, in whole or in part, of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance; or was for any other reason unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome, or otherwise unfit for human food; or was prepared, packed, or held under unsanitary conditions to cause it to be contaminated with filth or rendered injurious to health. 7. Defendant Craig Cunningham was the General Manager of Hitchin Post since 1999 with responsibilities of daily oversight of operations within Hitchin Post. 8. Defendant Jason Cunningham was the Vice President of Hitchin Post since 1999 with responsibilities of daily oversight of the processing within Hitchin Post. Count 1 9. Paragraphs 1-8 are incorporated by reference herein. 10. Beginning in or about March 2008, the exact date being unknown to the Grand Jury, and continuing to in or about December 2008, both dates being 2

3 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 3 of 10 approximate and inclusive, in the District of Kansas and elsewhere, the defendants, CRAIG CUNNINGHAM and knowingly and intentionally conspired and agreed together and with each other, and with other persons known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to commit the following offenses against the United States: a. Sell and transport in commerce, any poultry products capable of use as human food, which were adulterated and misbranded at the time of sale and transportation, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 458(a)(2) and 461(a); b. Doing acts with respect to any poultry products capable of use as human food, while the products were transported in commerce, which was intended to cause and have the effect of causing such products to be adulterated and misbranded, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 458(a)(3) and 461(a); c. Used an official device and mark without the authorization from the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 458(c)(2) and 461(a); and d. Knowingly misrepresenting that any article was inspected and passed, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 458(c)(6) and 461(a). Manner and Means 11. It was part of the conspiracy that the defendants sold and transported in commerce poultry products capable of use as human food, which were misbranded 3

4 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 4 of 10 because the poultry was processed outside the approved hours of inspection. 12. It was further part of the conspiracy that the defendants sold and transported in commerce poultry products capable of use as human food, which were misbranded because they misrepresented the poultry was inspected and passed. 13. It was further part of the conspiracy that the defendants sold and transported in commerce adulterated and misbranded poultry products that were putrid, unhealthful, unwholesome, and unfit for human food. Overt Acts 14. In furtherance of this conspiracy and to effect and accomplish the objects of it, one or more of the defendants or conspirators, both indicted and unindicted, committed, among others, the following overt acts in the District of Kansas and elsewhere: a. On or about March 6, 2008, the defendants processed approximately 10,000 pounds of poultry products outside of approved hours of inspection. b. On or about March 6, 2008, the defendants represented that approximately 10,000 pounds of poultry products was inspected and passed, when it had not been inspected. c. On or about March 7, 2008, the defendants transported in commerce approximately 10,000 pounds of misbranded poultry products from the State of Kansas to the State of California. d. From on or about May 30, 2008, through on or about June 2, 2008, the defendants transported in commerce approximately 1,167 pounds of adulterated split broiler chickens from the State of Kansas to the State of Missouri. 4

5 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 5 of 10 e. In June and July 2008, the defendants transported to a wholesale food distributor in Kansas City, Kansas, approximately 560 pounds of adulterated poultry products. f. In June and July 2008, the defendants transported to a wholesale food distributor in Kansas City, Kansas, approximately 440 pounds of adulterated poultry product. g. On or about August 5, 2008, the defendants sold and offered for transportation in commerce approximately 40,000 pounds of adulterated chicken leg quarters from the State of Kansas to the State of California. h. On or about August 7, 2008, the defendants sold and offered for transportation in commerce approximately 80,000 pounds containing adulterated chicken leg quarters from the State of Kansas to the State of California. i. On or about August 11, 2008, the defendants sold and offered for transportation in commerce approximately 20,000 pounds of adulterated chicken leg quarters from the State of Kansas to the State of California. j. On or about August 12, 2008, the defendants sold and offered for transportation in commerce approximately 20,000 pounds of adulterated chicken leg quarters from the State of Kansas to the State of California. k. On or about August 18 & 19, 2008, the defendants sold and offered for transportation in commerce approximately 14,120 pounds of adulterated chicken leg quarters from the State of Kansas to the State of California. l. On or about August 19, 2008, the defendants offered for transportation in commerce approximately 40,000 pounds of adulterated chicken leg quarters 5

6 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 6 of 10 from the State of Kansas to the State of California. m. From on or about August 19, 2008, through on or about August 22, 2008, the defendants sold and transported in commerce approximately 57,200 pounds of adulterated chicken leg quarters from the State of Kansas to St. Lucia. n. On or about December 2, 2008, the defendants processed approximately 1,280 pounds of poultry products outside of approved hours of inspection. o. On or about December 2, 2008, the defendants represented that approximately 1,280 pounds of poultry products was inspected and passed, when it had not been inspected. p. On or about December 2, 2008, the defendants sold and transported in commerce approximately 1,280 pounds of adulterated poultry products from the State of Kansas to the States of Oklahoma and Minnesota. q. On or about December 8, 2008, the defendants sold and offered for transportation in commerce approximately 48,000 pounds of adulterated whole chicken wings from the State of Kansas to the State of Texas. 15. As additional overt acts, the Grand Jury incorporates by this reference the allegations set forth in Counts 2 through 6 of the Indictment as though fully set forth at this point. 16. This was all in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371. Count Paragraphs 1-16 are incorporated by reference herein. 18. On or about March 6, 2008, in the District of Kansas, the defendant, 6

7 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 7 of 10 without authorization from the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture, used an official mark of inspection upon processed poultry products capable of use as human food, which were sold and transportated from the State of Kansas to the State of California. 19. This was all in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 458(c)(2) and 461(a), and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2. Count Paragraphs 1-16 are incorporated by reference herein. 21. On or about March 6, 2008, in the District of Kansas, the defendant, sold and transported in commerce from the State of Kansas to the State of California, poultry products capable of use as human food, which were processed outside the approved hours of inspection and misrepresented the products were inspected and passed. 22. This was all in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 458(c)(6) and 461(a), and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2. Count Paragraphs 1-16 are incorporated by reference herein. 24. On or about December 2, 2008, in the District of Kansas, the defendants, CRAIG CUNNINGHAM and sold and transported in commerce from the State of Kansas to the States of Oklahoma 7

8 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 8 of 10 and Minnesota, poultry products capable of use as human food, which were adulterated at the time of sale and transportation. 25. This was all in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 458(a)(2) and 461(a), and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2. Count Paragraphs 1-16 are incorporated by reference herein. 27. On or about December 2, 2008, in the District of Kansas, the defendants, CRAIG CUNNINGHAM and without authorization from the Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture, used an official mark of inspection upon processed poultry products capable of use as human food, which were adulterated at the time of sale and transportation from the State of Kansas to the States of Oklahoma and Minnesota. 28. This was all in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 458(c)(2) and 461(a), and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2. Count Paragraphs 1-16 are incorporated by reference herein. 30. On or about December 2, 2008, in the District of Kansas, the defendants, CRAIG CUNNINGHAM and knowingly misrepresented processed poultry products capable of use as human food had been inspected and passed, which had not been inspected and passed, and were adulterated at the time of sale and transportation from the State of Kansas to the States 8

9 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 9 of 10 of Oklahoma and Minnesota. 31. This was all in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 458(c)(6) and 461(a), and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2. A TRUE BILL. Dated: January 25, 2012 s/foreperson FOREPERSON s/scott C. Rask, #15643 for BARRY R. GRISSOM United States Attorney District of Kansas 500 State Avenue, Suite 360 Kansas City, Kansas (913) (913) (fax) Barry.Grissom@usdoj.gov Ks. S. Ct. No (It is requested that trial of the above captioned case be held in Kansas City, Kansas.) 9

10 Case 2:12-cr CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 01/25/12 Page 10 of 10 Penalties: Ct. 1: Cts. 2-3: Cts. 4-6: NMT 5 years imprisonment; NMT $250,000 or 2xgain or 2xloss fine; NMT 3 years supervised release; $100 special assessment NMT 1 year imprisonment; NMT $100,000 or 2xgain or 2xloss fine; NMT 1 year supervised release; $25 special assessment NMT 3 years imprisonment; NMT $250,000 or 2xgain or 2xloss fine; NMT 1 year supervised release; $100 special assessment 10