I’m writing regarding a shocking legal development in the ongoing United States v. Cherwitz, et al. case, where recent federal and civil court filings have exposed allegations of perjury, evidence fabrication, and potential attorney misconduct.
This case, originally centered on forced labor allegations against OneTaste, has now spiraled into a legal firestorm, raising serious questions about the integrity of the government’s case and the conduct of key legal players.
Breaking Developments
Explosive new evidence emerged, revealing: Autymn Blanck (Ayries’ sister) mailed crucial evidence to the FBI at the request of Special Agent Elliot McGinnis, allegedly to keep it from discovery in the civil case
A damning email from Autymn states: “What [you] don’t have [you] don’t have to give over,” suggesting intentional withholding of evidence.
Attorney Randy Lopez (counsel for Autymn) was complicit in these efforts, coordinating with the FBI while his client was under subpoena.
A Legal Earthquake—Attorneys Flee the Case
As the legal stakes skyrocketed, lawyers began withdrawing from representation in rapid succession:
March 18 (Within 1 Hour): Randy Lopez, Autymn’s attorney, withdrew from the case, now implicated in what could be attorney misconduct and a clear conflict of interest.
March 17 (Within 9 Hours): Reed Smith LLP, pro bono counsel for Ayries Blanck, also abruptly withdrew from the case.
Why This Story Matters
The federal government’s criminal case against OneTaste is now on shaky ground—with their main witness discredited and key evidence invalidated.
The civil case in Los Angeles is now moving forward, armed with new evidence of legal misconduct that could trigger federal and state-level investigations into perjury, obstruction of justice, and evidence tampering.
The fallout from these revelations could have far-reaching consequences, not just for this case but for broader issues surrounding prosecutorial integrity and judicial accountability.