BREAKING NEWS: Andy Bowdoin Hires New Attorney
UPDATED: 11:40 A.M. EDT (U.S.A.) AdSurfDaily President Andy Bowdoin has a new paid attorney: Charles A. Murray of Bonita Springs, Fla.
Murray filed an appearance notice today in the civil-forfeiture cased filed in August against money and other assets tied to ASD.
The appearance notice says that Murray will represent Bowdoin and two corporate entities: AdSurfDaily Inc. and Bowdoin/Harris Enterprises Inc.
This may mean an end to Bowdoin’s pro se pleadings in the case. Bowdoin began to act as his own attorney in February. Judge Rosemary Collyer informed him, through his prior counsel, that the corporate entities could not proceed pro se.
Michael Fayad, one of Bowdoin’s original attorneys, filed a motion today to correct an appearance notice from August that erroneously listed Bowdoin and his firms as “Defendants,” rather than “Claimants.”
Murray says in his filing that he is taking over for Fayad’s firm, Akerman Senterfitt. Akerman Senterfitt filed a motion last week, asking the court to resign as Bowdoin’s counsel, saying its representation of him amid the circumstances was unreasonably difficult.
Bowdoin did not consult with the firm before proceeding as a pro se litigant, Akerman Senterfitt said.
In one of Bowdoin’s pro se pleadings, he acknowledged that ASD was operating illegally at the time of the August seizure of tens of millions of dollars. He advised the court, however, that he had been denied “fair notice” that his conduct was illegal.
Prosecutors responded by saying ignorance of the law is no excuse and that the government had no duty to inform Bowdoin that fraud is illegal.
Another Bowdoin pro se filing seeks to reverse his January decision — while working with paid counsel — to submit to the forfeiture and not raise the issue again. Collyer advised Bowdoin that he had not raised points of law to supplement his argument, in essence telling him that the motion alone might not be enough for her to grant his motion to reopen the forfeiture litigation.
Using her discretion, Collyer had to construe a meaning for Bowdoin’s pro se motion — a somewhat common occurence when pro se litigants are filing papers. Pro se pleadings often are vague, sometimes making baffling leaps of logic and tortured arguments.
In late February, AdViewGlobal (AVG), a surf firm with close ties to ASD, introduced Pro Advocate Group to members. Pro Advocate Group says it can help people practice law without a license.
Karl Dahlstrom is associated with Pro Advocate Group. Dahlstrom was sentenced to 78 months in federal prison in the 1990s for securities fraud. Bowdoin’s pro se pleadings began at the same time AVG was introducing Pro Advocate Group to members.
Is this attorney associated with Dahlstrom? Noting on the web about him other than ads needing a secretary.
Hello Rich,
Charles A. Murray is a member of the District of Columbia bar.
Patrick
Patrick, I’m confused, what does Mr. Dahlstrom have to do with Andy’s hiring a new attorney? Not clear. Thanks. mm
Hi Marci,
I’m not sure Dahlstrom has anything to do with the hiring of Andy’s new attorney.
The Dahlstrom connection to the ASD case is through AVG, which has close ties to ASD. Andy started filing pro se pleadings at the same time AVG introduced Pro Advocate Group to members. Dahlstrom is associated with Pro Advocate Group.
Regards,
Patrick
The good news is that Andy can now be served for the RICO lawsuit. Busby and Garner are another story. Guess they are both too shy about meeting new people.
Hi, Marci;
Not everyone is aware that Pro Advocate Group/Karl Dahlstrom provide services of several types. For example, PA Group/Dahlstrom were identified on an AVG conference call as the provider of the Private Membership Association now being used by AVG.
Another service provided by PA Group is support for people who wish to act pro se with regard to legal matters. While not explicitly stated anywhere that I’ve seen, it appears likely that PA Group is the source of the documents recently filed pro se by Andy Bowdoin.
Bet Akerman Senterfitt are happy chaps today. Now he has another attorney who can advise him to please the 5th. Is he allowed to in this case?
It will be interesting to see what happens if Andy Bowdoin is served and his chums are not.
HE can plead the 5th Amendment, but not in the way I think you mean. As he is under suspicion in a criminal matter, he can of course choose not to answer questions in this case that might bear on the theoretical criminal case. As some of the filings have pointed out, Andy is not a defendant in the instant case, he is a a claiment, which is slightly different. He has an interest in the case, because it’s his money that was taken, but he only has a financial stake. He cannot be jailed in this case if he looses, he’s just out $100 million and change, a few cars, few houses, few boats and trailers and the ASD office equipment. If he stays with a real lawyer, there is no way he will testify in the civil case and since he cannot realistically defend himself, the civil case is a done deal. Read that again, because he faces a criminal action Andy cannot defend the civil case, or at least not without putting himself at serious risk of going to prison. And since he cannot defend it, and no one else will, that case is all but over, we’re just waiting on the paperwork.
What is going to be interesting is the criminal trial. I’m not going to be too surprised by anything that happens in courtrooms in that, but I am curious to see how many people get indicted.
Of course, all bets are off if Bob Guenther shows up in drag and tries to start a fight with the guy in the courthouse who checks him for weapons,,,,
Gregg,
Correct me if I am wrong — Andy can indeed take the fifth even as a claimant in a civil case. However, I thought that if he does plead the fifth in the civil matter, the fact that he did plead the fifth in the civil matter IS admissible as evidence in the eventual criminal case (although I don’t think he would have to answer in the criminal case WHY he pleaded the fifth in the civil case), and that is why his new atty won’t let him testify in the civil case.
Hold on. We dont even know if his new attorney is going to let him testify or not.
And Are you saying that the fact that he pleaded the 5th can be used as evidence, but the REASON for it cant? (Well it was a long sentence. lol)
Hard to say, but all may not be well with Andy’s choice of an attorney.
This one’s a few years old (2005), and there was no response from Murray:
http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/280/RipOff0280075.htm
This one is current events, from last month:
https://ecf.wvnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2007cv0026-3
Reading legal documents is like sticking needles in my eyes, but if you look at footnote 1 on page 2, Murray did a big whoopsie by not being registered with the WV courts to represent the defendant. Also, there’s an interesting footnote, number 3, at the bottom of page 7. It doesn’t ID the attorney by name, so I am guessing this is in reference to Murray, but can’t be sure…
Jerry
Umm, kinda-sorta….
Anyone can “take the 5th” whenever you are questioned, you don’t need to be a party to an action etc… the important point is, IF you answer, your answer can and will be used against you, if it incriminates you. If you took the 5th in a civil case, the prosecution might try to get that entered into evidence in the criminal case, but the defense would object and should be able to stop it. But wait, there are other ways to get the fact that you took the 5th into evidence, you just have to do it indirectly. One way might be to get another witness to mention it in response to a question, sort of off hand. They can’t ask straight out, but if it comes up, well, the judge may strike it or may not, but the jury heard it, and they can’t unscrew the memory….
The fact that you took the 5th cannot (in theory) be used against you, but juries aren’t machines, they make inferences from it.
My point, such as it was, is that it would be incredibly risky to let Andy take the stand in the civil case. And since he most likely won’t, there’s no defense made, the law is on the government’s side and the facts are pretty clear. Without some explanation why things aren’t what they seem, an explanation that no one but Andy could conceivably make, the government wins by default. No biggie, they had this case wrapped up from the beginning, but Andy can’t win without testifying, and doesn’t have much chance even if he does. He’s already admitted he broke the law, and as the AUSA so fittingly pointed out, his only defense is no one told him it was illegal to lie to people to get them to give you money, and since no one warned him, he should get to keep the money. Sounds like a story from a 5 year old caught with his hands in the cookie jar to me.
I gotta go for a bit, but I’ll check back later and maybe write something a little more coherent….
Patrick and all: There are two of us signing on as Marci; I didn’t write the note shown below, and wouldn’t sign a note I did write “mm.” I don’t want to get to be like Bob G. and have to put a code word so that the posts are recognized as the “real” me, but I’m open for suggestions since there seem to be two of us with the same name. Or doesn’t it matter? Maybe it just feels weird to me………
Marci
April 9, 2009 at 8:41 am | Permalink
Patrick, I’m confused, what does Mr. Dahlstrom have to do with Andy’s hiring a new attorney? Not clear. Thanks. mm
Marci,
You could start every post with “Andy Bowdoin is a crook and ASD is a Ponzi and Carl Dahlstrom has never won a case in his life” or something like that…..
Hi, Marci et al. Yes I’m another Marci. I hardly ever send in a comment, but I understand how you’d like to distinguish us. If someone will tell me how to change the moniker “Marci” I’d be happy to come up with something else so it’s clear who’s writing. And I do almost always sign off as “mm”
Marcia,
Stay as “Marcia.” :-)
And use “mm” as your sign-off, if you care to.
Patrick
Hi Marcia,
It wasn’t that you said anything controversial, but at times a couple of people send emails to me outside of Patrick’s news magazine blog, and I hate for anyone to explain something in detail to me in answer to a question or comment that was actually yours. Heaven knows I didn’t intend to compare you to The Three Faces of Bob (i.e. Bob G., Robert L., and “Marie,” his female persona).
Take care, Marci
At this point, I don’t really care what happens to Andy B., or where they put him.
We’re one of the thousands whose money is sitting at the US Attorney’s office – a significant amount.
Our money was never deposited in to the bank until after the Feds moved in.
I’m assuming that it’s being frittered away by various legal entities.
All the more irritating is that there is no communication from the US Attorney’s office – not even a thank you.
The case needs to see the light of day. It’s no Modoff deal, but thousands of people have apparently been ripped-off to the tune of 100 MILLION.
Hi Larry,
At this point all of the money that is in the government’s possession is Andy Bowdoin’s money, not the money of the ASD members (of course, Andy illegally obtained that money from the members). It sounds like you had a check submitted to ASD that was not deposited by ASD. Unfortunately, once ASD took possession of the check (and if you mailed it, that occured as soon as you put it in the mail), it belonged to Andy, not you. The uncashed checks could not be returned directly to the people that wrote the checks, since doing so would treat those people preferentially relative to earlier victims whose checks were deposited into ASD, and the law calls for equality amongst victims. That is why the so-called uncashed checks were deposited by the government into the holding account. The money is not being frittered away, but the government cannot distribute any of the funds back to the ASD victims until all of the civil court actions are adjudicated, and all of the forensic accounting is complete, and likely not before all of the relevant assets are “clawed back” from the “winners” in the ASD Ponzi. In other words, if you are a victim, you will eventually get some fraction of your losses back, but it will take a fair amount of time. While it might seem like the ASD case is dragging on, relative to other similar Ponzi’s, this one isn’t really moving slowly. See for example the receivership process for restitution in the CEP case…..
As far as communications, actually there have been quite a few. All of the court documents are public record, and Patrick has posted or reported on most of them. If you read them (and this blog), you’ll be up to speed. The web site for the US Attorney for the DC district has a page for ASD (http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/dc/Victim_Witness_Assistance/adsurfdaily.html) that it keeps up to date. There really isn’t anything new from the government’s perspective since January — ASD is a Ponzi scehme, the government has at least some (if not most) of Andy’s assets, and the government will disburse the funds derived from those assets to the victims once the various processes are complete. The government cannot predict at this time how long things will take — the Arby’s Indians, some of the ASD Ponzi Winners and Promoters, and Bowdoin himself continue to (legally) file nuisance motions with the court, delaying the inevitable restitution and allowing the winners to squirel away, move offshore, or spend the money they received from their victims (and thereby reducing the amount of restitution for the victims). Pretty high morals on their part, don’t you think? No worse than their original morals when they knew they were stealing from you in the first place…… This is very different than the Madoff case, where Madoff cooperated (more or less), which will hasten restitution.
Andy B. should be locked up and never see the light of day. He’s caused thousands of people great suffering and upset. He knowingly cheated people out of their money. If he were an honest man at all he’d quit the fighting and return everyone’s money. One good thing…he’ll get his in the end. Remember, he’s closer to his maker than most the rest of us with his old age.
Dear Patrick,
Is there any news about ASD and any chance we will ever get out money back. Thank you. William
Hello William,
You can find various stories on ASD and references to ASD here:
https://patrickpretty.com/tag/adsurfdaily/
The forfeiture cases have been decided in the government’s favor, but Andy Bowdoin is appealing.
The Gov’t into site is here:
http://www.justice.gov/usao/dc/Victim_Witness_Assistance/adsurfdaily.html
Regards,
Patrick