Shooter In San Bernardino Terrorist Attack Arrested on Federal Conspiracy, Marriage Fraud and False Statement
Enrique Marquez Jr. is on trial for conspiring with Syed Rizwan Farook in providing material support to terrorists in relation to carry out attacks in 2011 and 2012 at Riverside City College and the 91 Freeway. Enrique’s wife, Mariya Chernykh has also been indicted for entering into a sham marriage in November 2014 and illegally signing an immigration document that they lived together at an address in Forum Way, Corona, California. In fact, they did not reside at this address, rather it was Tatianna Farook and Syed Raheel Farook (brother of the terrorist who killed himself in the San Bernardino attacks) who lived there as a married couple.
The allegations of immigration fraud, perjury, and two counts of false statements to federal agents carry combined penalty of 25 years in state prison. The indictment sets out the charges of 18 US Section 1546(a), knowingly making a false oath or statement of material fact by means of a set of overt acts involving a conspiracy under 18 US 3731, which includes obtaining immigration benefits by filing false licenses and certificates of marriage, acting as witnesses on the license for marriage, helping to establish joint banking accounts, filling out affidavits of support and assistance to help prepare and meet for immigration interview to substantiate a fraudulent marriage.
Although the acts of the defendants listed in this particular indictment are connected to material supporting terrorism, by establishing a sham marriage so that Chernykh could remain in the country as the lawful “wife” of Enrique Marquez, it also shows a commitment of the government to pursuing all leads uncovered during the course of the investigation. As a Russian citizen with no legal status in the US, the indictment claims that Marquez received payment in exchange for this sham marriage. Immigration fraud is taken seriously, especially in the context of any connection to terrorist threats. This is an attempt to bring justice to the lives of 14 people murdered in the terrorist attack of San Bernardino in 2015.
The defense strategy in this case may include that the application and false statements were made under duress, or alternatively that the application was forged and therefore the government cannot establish the “knowingly” element of scienter necessary to its burden of proof. Another more pragmatic approach possible to take place is exchange for cooperation, which may facilitate leniency from the court or the AUSA regarding sentencing.
The allegations of immigration fraud, perjury, and two counts of false statements to federal agents carry combined penalty of 25 years in state prison. The indictment sets out the charges of 18 US Section 1546(a), knowingly making a false oath or statement of material fact by means of a set of overt acts involving a conspiracy under 18 US 3731, which includes obtaining immigration benefits by filing false licenses and certificates of marriage, acting as witnesses on the license for marriage, helping to establish joint banking accounts, filling out affidavits of support and assistance to help prepare and meet for immigration interview to substantiate a fraudulent marriage.
Although the acts of the defendants listed in this particular indictment are connected to material supporting terrorism, by establishing a sham marriage so that Chernykh could remain in the country as the lawful “wife” of Enrique Marquez, it also shows a commitment of the government to pursuing all leads uncovered during the course of the investigation. As a Russian citizen with no legal status in the US, the indictment claims that Marquez received payment in exchange for this sham marriage. Immigration fraud is taken seriously, especially in the context of any connection to terrorist threats. This is an attempt to bring justice to the lives of 14 people murdered in the terrorist attack of San Bernardino in 2015.
The defense strategy in this case may include that the application and false statements were made under duress, or alternatively that the application was forged and therefore the government cannot establish the “knowingly” element of scienter necessary to its burden of proof. Another more pragmatic approach possible to take place is exchange for cooperation, which may facilitate leniency from the court or the AUSA regarding sentencing.