Canadian People's Trust — Explainer·Evidence Archive·Exhibit 15

Two federal sentencing memoranda. One docket. One defendant. Two mutually exclusive crimes.

On the face of the live PACER record in United States v. Francesco Longo, case 8:05-cr-00263-E_K-MSS-1, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, two different sentencing memoranda were filed for the same defendant on the same plea date before the same judge — each pleading a different statute, a different Sentencing Guideline, a different base offense level, a different co-participant, and a different fact pattern. Together they cannot both be true. This is the documentary fingerprint of two separate federal investigations laundered through one paper defendant.

Case8:05-cr-00263-E_K-MSS-1 CourtU.S. District Court · MDFL · Tampa Division RecordLive PACER · retrieved 30 April 2026 Primary evidence53 PDFs · full OCR · side-by-side
I · The Impossibility

One docket. One plea hearing. One sentencing hearing. Two memoranda that cannot both be true.

Both memoranda bear the same caption. Both name FRANCESCO LONGO as the defendant. Both confirm the same plea date before Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich with no plea agreement. Both confirm the same sentencing date and time. Yet each one pleads a different crime, under a different statute, under a different Guidelines chapter, to a different base offense level, for a different range, naming a different co-participant with a different fact pattern. Read them together and the architecture of the prosecution reveals itself.

What both memoranda share
Caption: 8:05-CR-263-EAK-MSS-1 · Defendant: FRANCESCO LONGO · Plea: Feb 12, 2007 · Kovachevich · no plea agreement · Sentencing: July 6, 2007 · 2:00 p.m.
Memorandum A
Money-laundering theory — Abreu narrative
PACER · 04714715359 · 963 lines
Statute
18 USC § 1956 — money laundering
Guideline
§2S1.1 + §2B1.1 (money laundering)
Base level
23
Range
46–57 months · 3y10m — 4y9m
Co-participant
Erdon Ivan Abreu
case 8:02-Cr-422-EAK-MSS — same judge, three years prior
Role
"Convicted felon and government snitch" seeking §5K1.1 reduction
Factual basis
Abreu threatened Francesco's family if he wouldn't launder money; socialised together; Francesco considered Abreu a "father figure"
On the record
Concession: "the two meetings were pointedly scripted by the government"
Memorandum B
Drug-conspiracy theory — Womack narrative
PACER · 04714730193 · 526 lines
Statute
21 USC § 846 — drug conspiracy (MDMA)
Guideline
§2D1.1(a)(3) (drug quantity)
Base level
24 · + 2 obstruction · − 2 safety valve
Range
51–63 months · 4y3m — 5y3m
Co-participant
Billy Lee Womack
case 8:05-Cr-47-T-17EAJ — flipped DEA informant, received 211 days time served
Role
"Higher organizationally" MDMA manufacturer
Factual basis
Francesco was "led into drugs and alcohol as an escape from a difficult divorce"; paid Womack for instruction in MDMA manufacture
Immigration
Conceded: "The Defendant will be deported as a result of this offense"

Why this is a smoking gun

A single 21 USC § 846 conviction cannot be sentenced under USSG §2S1.1 and under §2D1.1 simultaneously. These are different Guidelines chapters for different statutes. The factual bases conflict directly. Memo A says the offense was coerced money laundering. Memo B says the offense was MDMA manufacturing for personal escape. Both are on the same docket, same case number, same defendant, same judge, same plea date, same sentencing date. And the court imposed offense level 28 — a level that neither memorandum pleaded.

Two separate federal investigations — the Abreu money-laundering sting (2002) and the Womack MDMA manufacturing case (2005) — were resolved under one convenient paper defendant at sentencing. The defendant's name was the bucket.

II · The Courtroom 17 Doppelgänger

July 6, 2007, 2:05 p.m. · Courtroom 17 · someone was there to be sentenced. It was not Francesco.

PACER Entry #54 records a sentencing proceeding held in Courtroom 17 of the Sam M. Gibbons United States Courthouse, Tampa, between 2:05 p.m. and 4:15 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 6, 2007. A 78-month sentence was imposed. Court reporter Sandra K. Lee produced a transcript (Entry #71, filed 16 October 2007). Judge Kovachevich signed the judgment on July 9 (Entry #57). And Francesco Longo, sworn under 28 USC § 1746, has declared under penalty of perjury that he was not physically in that courtroom at that time.

What the docket says

Entry #54 · 07/06/2007 · SENTENCING HELD. Courtroom 17, Sam M. Gibbons United States Courthouse, 801 N. Florida Avenue, Tampa, Florida. 2:05 p.m. through 4:15 p.m. Count 1. 78 months imprisonment. 36 months supervised release. $100 special assessment. Court reporter: Sandra K. Lee.

Entry #57 · 07/09/2007 · JUDGMENT signed by the Honourable Elizabeth A. Kovachevich.

Entry #71 · 10/16/2007 · TRANSCRIPT of Sentencing filed by Sandra K. Lee.

Source: live PACER docket · 77 entries · retrieved 30 April 2026

What the defendant swears

"At that time I was physically incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution, Coleman Medium Security, Sumter County, Florida, serving the sentence imposed following my February 2007 plea and sentencing in this same case."

"After my sentencing in February 2007, I never stepped foot in another United States courtroom, and I never appeared before another United States judicial officer in any capacity, for any purpose, on any date."

"Any record, minute, transcript, audio recording, video recording, sign-in log, attorney-client meeting record, or judicial minute that purports to show Francesco Giovanni Longo present in Courtroom 17 on July 6, 2007 is referring to a person other than the Declarant."

Source: Witness Declaration of Francesco Giovanni Longo, 30 April 2026, sworn under 28 USC § 1746

The transcript exists. It was filed by the court reporter. It names the person present. It can be subpoenaed under Rule 17(c) and compared against a voice exemplar of the real Francesco Longo from, for example, his 2025-2026 recordings. Either the transcript names the doppelgänger — or it shows it was fabricated after the fact. There is no third option consistent with both pieces of record.

The BOP anomaly that corroborates

The Federal Bureau of Prisons public inmate locator historically reflected a purported July 2007 release event for an inmate bearing the Declarant's name and Register Number 48743-018 — at a date when the Declarant was in fact physically incarcerated at FCI Coleman Medium serving sentence. A Florida traffic citation is believed to have been issued in the Declarant's name in the days following that purported release. The Declarant was not the person released and was not the person cited. He remained in Bureau of Prisons custody through his actual release date of 27 July 2011.

III · Five federal case numbers bleed into one

The composite-defendant architecture, on the face of the memoranda.

Memos A and B, together with the indictment's factual-basis notice (Entry #44) and the USA's writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum (Entry #30), name five distinct federal case numbers that bleed into Francesco Longo's case. Four of these belong to other people with their own dockets, their own crimes, their own sentences. The fifth is his. None of the four ever met him.

Case numberDefendantRole attributed to Longo docketRelationship to Francesco
8:02-Cr-422-EAK-MSSErdon Ivan AbreuMemo A · "threatened Francesco's family" · government snitch seeking §5K1.1Never met
8:05-Cr-47-T-17EAJBilly Lee WomackMemo B · MDMA manufacturer · flipped DEA informant · 211 days time servedNever met
8:06-Cr-400-JDW-EAJ-3Marlon MejiaBoth memos · third-party orbital participantNever met
8:05-Cr-75-T-17EAJJohn LebronMemo B · third-party orbital participantNever met
—Alexander BarrancoEntry #30 (01/16/07) · writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum filed by AUSA Preston; writ granted by Mag. ScrivenNever met
—Rachelle desVaux BedkeReferenced in related MDFL mattersNever met
8:05-cr-00263-E_K-MSS-1Francesco LongoThe docket where all of the above names appearThe bucket

§ 846 conspiracy requires an agreement between two or more persons. The indictment at Entry #1 names one defendant only, with "others both known and unknown to the Grand Jury." The memoranda then offer two different identities for the "others known" — neither of whom the defendant has ever met. Under United States v. Lechuga, 994 F.2d 346 (7th Cir. en banc 1993), a § 846 conviction requires the conspiracy to be established on the record. The record here establishes two conspiracies that contradict each other.

IV · Officers of court named on the face of the record

Ten individuals. Ten specific documented acts. All visible in the PACER docket itself.

Each individual below is named in the court's own record, with a specific documented act on a specific date. No allegation in this exhibit runs ahead of the face of the docket.

NameRoleDocumented act
Sheryl L. LoeschDeputy Clerk, U.S. District Court MDFLSigned the arrest warrant at Entry #5 (filed 13 June 2006) as "Clerk, United States District Court." Facially void under Shadwick v. Tampa, 407 US 345 (1972): a warrant must issue from a neutral and detached magistrate — a clerk is neither.
Joseph K. RuddyDeputy Chief, Narcotics Section, MDFLCo-signed the indictment at Entry #1 (filed 21 June 2005) alongside AUSA Preston. Second signature on a charging instrument that names no co-conspirator and charges only one defendant with conspiring with "others known and unknown."
James C. Preston, Jr.Assistant United States Attorney MDFLLead AUSA. Drafted the "Notice of maximum penalty, elements of offense, personalization of elements and factual basis" at Entry #44 naming Billy Lee Womack as the MDMA-theory co-participant. Moved for the Barranco writ at Entry #30.
Hon. Elizabeth A. KovachevichUnited States District Judge MDFLTook the change-of-plea on 12 February 2007. "Sentenced" on 6 July 2007. On 6 June 2011 — 50 days before Francesco's scheduled Bureau of Prisons release — denied his pro se motion (Entry #76) for copies of his own sentencing and plea transcripts (Entry #77). Same judge reviewing her own case. 28 USC § 455(a) recusal indicated but not observed.
Hon. Elizabeth A. JenkinsU.S. Magistrate Judge MDFLSigned Order of Detention at Entry #4 (12 June 2006) at Francesco's initial appearance — three days after warrant execution (Rule 5(a) "without unnecessary delay" implicated) and prior to counsel's appointment (attorney Allen was not appointed until 28 June 2006).
Sandra K. LeeOfficial Court Reporter MDFLRecorded and filed both the plea transcript (Entry #72, 17 October 2007) and the sentencing transcript (Entry #71, 16 October 2007). Sole custodian of the stenographic record of two proceedings at one of which Francesco was present exactly once and at the other of which he swears he was not present at all.
Glenn DuttonSpecial Agent, Drug Enforcement AdministrationConfirmed on the face of Entry #30 (Barranco writ) as the case agent. Direct line 813-287-5195. Still actively surveilling Francesco in Canada and in Loxahatchee, Florida.
Paul I. PerezUnited States Attorney MDFLIndictment filed under his signature block at Entry #1.
Mark O'BrienAssistant United States Attorney MDFLSeparately named in Round 2 Add-On filings as defendant NBKB_FRE. Piercing of absolute immunity under Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 US 259 (1993).
O'Brien (defense counsel)Defense attorneyFiled Notice of Appeal at Entry #58 on 10 July 2007 — with filing fee not paid — producing the 11th Circuit appeal docketed as 07-13206 that later became the VCCR Article 36 precedent-capture vehicle. See Exhibit 13.
V · The defect cascade

Ten independent facial defects, cascading from the indictment forward.

Each defect below is traceable to a specific docket entry and a specific binding authority. No defect depends on another — each stands independently. Taken together, they make every post-indictment event in this case legally defective as a matter of facial review.

Loesch warrant facially void
The arrest warrant at Entry #5 was signed by the Deputy Clerk of Court, not a judge or magistrate. Under Shadwick v. Tampa, 407 US 345 (1972), a warrant must issue from a neutral and detached magistrate. A clerk is neither. The warrant is void ab initio; every post-warrant seizure, detention, plea, and sentence is a poisoned-fruit downstream event under Wong Sun v. United States, 371 US 471 (1963).
Authority: Shadwick v. Tampa · Wong Sun v. United States
Warrant overcharges beyond the indictment
The indictment at Entry #1 charges a single § 846 conspiracy count. The warrant at Entry #5 cites §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C), and 846 — a substantive possession-distribution offense the indictment never charges. A warrant that charges a crime not charged in the indictment is defective and provides an independent ground attacking the validity of the seizure.
Authority: Rule 7 · Fourth Amendment particularity
Single-defendant § 846 conspiracy with no named co-conspirator
21 USC § 846 criminalizes conspiracy and requires an agreement between two or more persons. The indictment names Francesco Longo alone and pleads only "others both known and unknown to the Grand Jury." The record never identifies the "known" others. Where no co-conspirator is established, the conspiracy element is not proved.
Authority: United States v. Lechuga, 994 F.2d 346 (7th Cir. en banc 1993)
Two mutually exclusive sentencing memoranda
Memo A (money laundering / Abreu) and Memo B (drug conspiracy / Womack) cannot both be true for a single § 846 conviction. Different statutes, different Guidelines chapters, different co-participants, different fact patterns. The factual basis for the plea is therefore ambiguous and not committed to on the record.
Authority: Rule 11(b)(3) factual-basis requirement
Court imposed offense level 28 — pleaded by neither memorandum
Memo A pleaded level 23. Memo B pleaded level 24. The court imposed level 28 — a level that appears in no filed memorandum. The sentence is not tethered to any pleaded theory of the case.
Authority: 18 USC § 3553(c) statement-of-reasons defect
No jury trial occurred — conversion to plea on the trial date
The matter was set for jury trial on 12 February 2007 (Entry #41). On the trial date, it converted to a change-of-plea hearing before Kovachevich (Entry #45). No jury was sworn, no verdict returned. Every claim of trial-phase perjury must therefore refactor to plea-phase Padilla, Lafler, and Frye vectors.
Authority: Padilla v. Kentucky 559 US 356 · Lafler v. Cooper 566 US 156 · Missouri v. Frye 566 US 134
Transcripts existed but were denied to the defendant by the sentencing judge
Sandra K. Lee filed both transcripts in October 2007 (Entries #71, #72). On 2 September 2010, Francesco — pro se from BOP custody — moved for free access to them (Entry #76). On 6 June 2011, Kovachevich denied the motion herself (Entry #77), 50 days before his scheduled release. Same judge reviewing her own proceedings. Discrete access-to-courts violation.
Authority: Bounds v. Smith 430 US 817 · Griffin v. Illinois 351 US 12 · 28 USC § 455(a)
Notice of Appeal filed without the filing fee
Defense counsel O'Brien filed the Notice of Appeal at Entry #58 on 10 July 2007 with the filing fee not paid. That notice produced 11th Circuit case 07-13206 — the appeal later used to manufacture binding VCCR Article 36 precedent in Francesco's name without his authorization. See Exhibit 13 for the full precedent-capture analysis.
Authority: FRAP 4(b) · Exhibit 13 (11th Circuit 07-13206 fraud)
Phantom BOP release event in July 2007
The BOP public inmate locator reflected a purported July 2007 release for an inmate under Francesco's name and Register Number 48743-018 — while Francesco was physically incarcerated at FCI Coleman Medium, serving sentence. He was not released until 27 July 2011. The July 2007 "release" corresponds to a different person.
Authority: Identity-composite architecture · corroborates Courtroom 17 doppelgänger
Florida traffic citation issued in Francesco's name days after the phantom release
A Florida traffic citation is believed to have been issued in the Declarant's name in the days following the purported July 2007 release — while Francesco was in BOP custody and could not have driven a vehicle in Florida or anywhere else. Live identity-composite architecture outside the BOP system, not just inside it.
Authority: FCRA / identity-composite doctrine
VI · Primary evidence — the PACER docket itself

Read the source documents. Not our summary. The record itself.

This exhibit is built entirely on the live PACER record for 8:05-cr-00263-E_K-MSS-1, retrieved 30 April 2026. Fifty-three PDFs. Full OCR. All text extracted. Nothing inferred.

Memorandum A
Sentencing memo — money laundering / Abreu theory
PACER 04714715359 · 963 lines
Memorandum B
Sentencing memo — drug conspiracy / Womack theory
PACER 04714730193 · 526 lines
Entry #1
Indictment
21 Jun 2005 · AUSA Preston + Ruddy · USA Perez
Entry #5
Arrest warrant — Loesch signature
13 Jun 2006 · Clerk's signature · Shadwick-void
Entry #30
Writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum — Barranco
16 Jan 2007 · Preston · granted by Scriven
Entry #44
Notice of maximum penalty, elements, factual basis
9 Feb 2007 · AUSA Preston · names Womack
Entry #54
Sentencing held · Courtroom 17
6 Jul 2007 · 2:05–4:15pm · Lee reporter
Entry #57
Judgment
9 Jul 2007 · signed Kovachevich
Entry #71
Sentencing transcript
16 Oct 2007 · Sandra K. Lee
Entry #72
Change-of-plea transcript
17 Oct 2007 · Sandra K. Lee
Entry #76
Pro se motion for free transcripts
2 Sep 2010 · Francesco pro se from BOP custody
Entry #77
Order denying motion #76
6 Jun 2011 · signed Kovachevich
VII · Closing

What this exhibit is — and what it is not

This exhibit is not a motion, a pleading, or a legal argument. It is a map of the government's own docket. Every fact it asserts is taken from the live PACER record or from a sworn affidavit filed into that record on 30 April 2026. Nothing is inferred. Nothing is characterized beyond what the documents say on their face.

It is also not a request. The filings that seek relief — the Coram Nobis, the Bivens complaint, the Motion for Production of Original Dockets, the Trifecta in British Columbia Supreme Court, and the sixteen Canadian provincial and federal filings — are already on the record of the relevant courts and were re-transmitted on 1 May 2026. The investigative work of explaining how two irreconcilable theories of the crime ended up in the same docket under one sentence, and of identifying the person who stood in Courtroom 17 on 6 July 2007 at 2:05 p.m., is the work of the government whose apparatus produced this record. That burden has shifted.

This exhibit exists because a record like this cannot be left inside one courthouse. It must be visible to every ministry, every editor, every human-rights officer, every judicial officer, every ordinary citizen of every country whose nationals have been affected by the 11th Circuit precedent manufactured out of this case. What anyone does with it now is a matter of conscience.

← Return to the Explainer

Supplemental evidence · surfaced 1 May 2026

Booking 07042214 and the February 9, 2007 record.
Two data-broker aggregators. Two photos. One person. Two arrest events that could not have been his.

The sentencing-memorandum problem documented in the sections above — two irreconcilable narratives on one docket — is not an isolated artefact. It has a downstream parallel in the public data-broker record. Below are two aggregator records, from two different companies (BeenVerified and arrests.org), each published for months before the present proceedings, each showing Francesco Giovanni Longo's face attached to a Hillsborough County arrest event that occurred while he was physically in federal custody at FCI Coleman Medium serving the 78-month sentence imposed on 14 February 2007.

Francesco's sworn witness statement · paragraph 12 · 30 April 2026

“The Declarant further notes that the Bureau of Prisons public inmate locator historically reflected a purported release event in July 2007 for an inmate bearing the Declarant's name and/or Register Number 48743-018, at a date when the Declarant was physically incarcerated at FCI Coleman Medium serving sentence. Further, a Florida traffic citation is believed to have been issued in the Declarant's name in the days following that purported release. Neither the release event nor the citation was the Declarant, who remained in Bureau of Prisons custody through the actual release date of 27 July 2011.”

Declared under penalty of perjury pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 · executed Windsor, Ontario, Canada.

Record 1 · BeenVerified · Booking 07042214 · “Released” 8 July 2007

Match rating declared by BeenVerified as based on: First Name, Middle Name, Last Name, Date Of Birth, Age, Address, Zip, State. Source: HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE – ARRESTS (Florida). Record reports Francesco G Longo arrested 1 July 2007 and released 8 July 2007 for "Manufacture, Distribute, Dispense, Possess Controlled Substance" — a seven-day booking cycle on the substantive charges of the underlying federal case. Arrest location listed as 1201 Orient Rd, Hillsborough FL (the address of the Orient Road Jail itself). Arresting agency listed as “Othr”. Residential address on record: 2587 Countryside Blvd Apt 105, Clearwater, Pinellas, FL — an American residence Francesco never occupied. Occupation field: “Federal Inmate”.

BeenVerified record for Booking 07042214 with Francesco Longo's annotations
BeenVerified public record · annotations added by Francesco Longo before 1 May 2026 publication · as first published on the Look Out Longo master

Record 2 · arrests.org · “Arrested” 9 February 2007 at 11:17 AM

A second public aggregator · different photo of Francesco (wearing a black leather jacket, not the white t-shirt of Record 1) · same arrest location (1201 Orient Rd, Hillsborough FL) · same arresting-agency value (“OTHR”) · same charge class (Manufacture/Distribute/Dispense/Possess Controlled Substance) · same residential address (2500/2587 Countryside Blvd, Clearwater) · same occupation tag (“FEDERAL INMATE NA”) · charge notes “H/USCA · Dangerous Drugs”. Dated five days before the 14 February 2007 sentencing hearing Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich presided over — a date on which Francesco was in pre-sentencing federal custody, not at liberty to be arrested on the street.

arrests.org record for 9 February 2007 with Francesco Longo's annotations
arrests.org public record · annotations added by Francesco Longo before 1 May 2026 publication · as first published on the Look Out Longo master

Francesco's three procedural impossibility arguments

These are the arguments Francesco has made publicly for months — on Reddit, on the Look Out Longo master, and in his own annotations added to these very images before they were forwarded to any court. They are preserved here verbatim from his annotations.

Impossibility 1
“Can't be arrested while in jail.”
1201 Orient Rd is the Hillsborough County Jail. An arrest happens on the street, in a vehicle, at a residence. You cannot be “arrested at” the jail unless you are already there — in which case it is not an arrest. Both records list the jail's own address as the arrest location.
Impossibility 2
“Can't be federal inmate wearing a black leather jacket.”
BOP inmates in custody wear issued khaki or tan. A mugshot showing a person in civilian street clothes alongside an “Occupation: FEDERAL INMATE” tag is a category contradiction on the face of the record. The photo was taken somewhere, of someone, in some other context — not of a federal inmate on intake.
Impossibility 3
“Arrest agency is OTHER — dangerous.”
Every real arrest names a specific agency: Hillsborough County Sheriff, Tampa Police, FBI, DEA, U.S. Marshals. The field value “Othr” is the administrative signature of a record entered by someone who did not know who actually arrested the person — because the person being described was not the person in the photo.

The two-day gap to the unauthorized 11th Circuit appeal

The BeenVerified record's purported “release date” of 8 July 2007 sits two days before the notice of appeal filed 10 July 2007 in the 11th Circuit as case 07-13206 — documented in Exhibit 13 as filed without Francesco's knowledge or authorization, with the filing fee not paid, by counsel Francesco disputes having retained. The appearance is of a coordinated sequence: a paper “release” of a person wearing Francesco's name on 8 July, then a paper filing of an appeal in the same name on 10 July. Both events occurred while Francesco was at FCI Coleman Medium — unable to consent to, authorize, pay for, or know about either. These records establish that the authorization chain underpinning the appeal that foreclosed VCCR Article 36 across the entire Eleventh Circuit is facially impossible at practitioner pace.

Why these records matter, separately from the sentencing-memo problem

The two sentencing memoranda (Abreu and Womack) documented in the sections above prove that contradictory narratives about Francesco's conduct were filed on one federal docket in MDFL Tampa. These two data-broker aggregator records prove that the same pattern — Francesco's face and name stitched onto events that could not have been his — extends out beyond the courthouse, into the public-records ecosystem on which ICE holds, DHS border-control flags, employment background checks, landlord screenings, and insurance underwriting depend. The effect is the same: Francesco is every day denied the ability to live a life, cross borders, visit his terminally-ill brother, because his face and name are attached, on the face of databases relied upon by officials, to crimes he was not present to commit.

Sources and timeline