PatrickPretty.com

Category: Uncategorized

  • BREAKING NEWS: Judge Denies ASD Pleadings En Masse

    UPDATED 4:50 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) A federal judge has issued an order denying 31 pro se filers standing in the ASD case.

    Judge Rosemary Collyer denied the filings in a four-page order. Three pages of the document included the names of the individual filers, and a specific order to each one denying their motions to “Intervene and Petition[s] to Return Wrongfully Confiscated Funds.”

    Denied were:

    1. Stan Ketchum
    2. Lucia M. Ruggeroni
    3. Barbara J. Bowles
    4. Robert Bowles
    5. Dawn Starling
    6. Eva Cater
    7. Sara Lehman
    8. Christopher Blake Scott
    9. Harold L. Shaffer
    10. Daniel N. Reams
    11. James Richards
    12. John Deminico
    13. Thomas M. Shearer, Jr.
    14. Earl R. Dehart, Jr.
    15. Peter McFray
    16. Stephen O’Brien
    17. Julie Ann Larson
    18. Christine Keyworth
    19. Joseph L. Dunn
    20. Caesar Nunez
    21. Laurie Ann Solliday
    22. Tucker Norton
    23. Tobias Norton
    24. Steven F. Norton
    25. Sandra Norton
    26. Richard H. Frary
    27. Linda Frary
    28. Judith Arnold
    29. Richard Moll
    30. James Wessels
    31. Maureen Wessels

    Larson filed a claim for $250,000 in ASD ad-packs, as opposed to a sum of money. The judge denied the claim without comment.

    Collyer now has denied all 41 pro se claims that began to appear at the courthouse Aug. 24. She denied the first batch of 10 Aug. 31.

    Read the judge’s mass denial of pro se pleadings today.

  • MUSINGS: It’s Possible ASD NEVER Operated Legally

    EDITOR’S NOTE: Many observers hold the view that ASD broke the law the first time it paid an “old” member with funds from a “new” member in the classic Ponzi setup. It’s hard to argue with that point of view, given the failure of hundreds and hundreds of autosurfs, all of which used a Ponzi model and were pushed by serial Ponzi promoters.

    Regardless, the Ponzi discussion is only one element of the ASD case, which was brought as a wire-fraud and money-laundering prosecution amid assertions that ASD was selling unregistered securities and operating a Ponzi scheme.

    This column seeks to promote discussion about whether ASD ever operated legally.

    As pro se motions from individual members criticizing the government’s actions in the AdSurfDaily forfeiture case continued to pile up last week, prosecutors filed a brief that says filers “must establish an interest in a property that existed before the crime occurred.”

    Can the pro se filers do it? Can they demonstrate that their investment in ASD — what they claim was a purchase of  “ad packages” to be displayed in ASD’s rotator — occurred before the company morphed into what the government calls a criminal enterprise?

    We think not.

    We’d like to applaud the filers’ participation in the judicial process, but we cannot. The filings are disingenuous. They were made from a template circulated among at least one ASD downline group. And they make claims contrary to the public record of the case — a record that has been published in multiple places.

    Among other things, the filings claim:

    • The U.S. Government has failed to produce any EVIDENCE of alleged wrongdoing.
    • The U.S. Government has failed to produce any WITNESSES of alleged wrongdoing.
    • The U.S. Government has failed to produce any VICTIMS of alleged wrongdoing.

    All of these claims are disingenuous to the extreme and can be defeated by one simple fact: A trial date has not even been set in the case. Regardless, the pro se filers are telling a federal judge that the prosecution “has failed” to do all of these things, as though the judge does not have a clue about a case over which she is presiding and scheduling in consultation with the parties.

    These filings are an insult to the judge. Moreover, they are an insult to the rank-and-file members of ASD. The members have been subjected to months and months of tall tales told by members of the Pro-ASD Surf’s Up forum. Now they’re being subjected to a litany of disingenuous filings by individual ASD promoters.

    ASD had asked last year for an opportunity to present its witnesses at an evidentiary hearing to argue against the Ponzi allegations. The prosecution did not object to the hearing, and the judge granted ASD’s request. She later ruled that ASD had not demonstrated it was a legal business and not a Ponzi scheme at the hearing, explaining that ASD’s testimony was at odds with itself and contradicted by ASD’s “come on” statements on its own website. (Emphasis added below.)

    “The lay testimony of [ASD Member] Mr. Grayson belies the expert testimony of [ASD Expert Witness] Mr. Nehra,” the judge said. “Mr. Nehra repeatedly asserted that ASD does not ‘guarantee’ rebates under the Terms of Service, see Terms of Service at 2 (Ad Packages and Credits) (“ASD does not guarantee any earnings and/or rebates”), but his testimony cannot be relied upon because (1) it is contradicted by come-on statements on the ASD website and Mr. Grayson’s testimony and (2) it relied solely on the written words contained in the Terms of Service without independent investigation or review of ASD’s business records to ascertain how ASD operates in fact before opining.”

    But let’s return to the issue as to whether filers can demonstrate that they ever were members of a legal enterprise.

    There is evidence that an ad for ASD in February 2007 — only a few months after ASD’s launch — promised “shelter” from the Federal Trade Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Every dollar that flowed into ASD from that ad was polluted by fantastic lies. The people who sponsored the ad were representatives of the ASD organization.

    “Shelter” from the FTC and SEC? And “shelter” provided by an “advertising” company no less? Go to your local newspaper, radio, television or billboard provider. Ask if they ever provided “shelter” from the FTC or SEC to any of their advertising clients.

    Moreover, there is evidence that members were advised their ASD deposits were insured by the FDIC. The suggestion was that one could not lose with ASD because members’ individual ASD accounts — ad-pack numbers on a screen — were insured against loss by the FDIC.

    Meanwhile, there is evidence that debit cards used by ASD were the same debit cards used by what the Drug Enforcement Administration described as a major drug operation in Medellin, Colombia. Yes, that Medellin.

    Records suggest that the man who provided the debit cards to the Medellin operation is the same man who provided the debit cards to ASD and that the man or his intermediary participated in an ASD function in November 2006, just days after ASD began to build its web operation.

    Meanwhile, there is evidence that ASD members were not getting paid shortly after the company’s launch, that at least $1 million came up missing from the enterprise at the purported hands of “Russian” hackers and that resources were depleted by scripting errors.

    At the same time, the record suggests that ASD President Andy Bowdoin was involved in a failed surf known as DailyProSurf prior to the October 2006 launch of ASD. This leads to the intriguing possibility that ASD was in the hole before it even started and that the initial ASD iteration was used to pay back DailyProSurf members for losses they sustained.

    Even if that was not the case, there is evidence that ASD morphed into ASD Cash Generator and did not tell new members that their money was being used to pay members of ASD’s first or previous iterations.

    Some of this evidence dates back to January 2006 and, in August 2006, two months before the launch of ASD, Bowdoin registered the name DailyProSurf in Florida. It is a matter of public record.

    Bowdoin also donated money to the National Republican Congressional Committee in early 2007, even as ASD members were not being paid and the patriarch was consulting with “leaders” in Atlanta to come up with a turnaround plan. It is a virtual certainty that Bowdoin’s campaign donations came from Ponzi proceeds.

    Also, public filings in Florida show that the building ASD was using — the former flower shop owned by his wife in Quincy — used the address of 11 S. Calhoun in the 1990s and 13 S. Calhoun during this decade.

    Good luck trying to prove you ever were a member of a legal enterprise. It is possible that ASD never operated legally — not even before it made what prosecutors described as Ponzi payouts.

  • BREAKING NEWS: Pro Se Filer Says Government Owes Her ‘Approximately $250,000 In [ASD] Ad Packages’

    More pro se motions to intervene in the AdSurfDaily civil forfeiture case have streamed into U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

    Some of today’s docketed motions were mailed in September — after Judge Rosemary Collyer’s Aug. 31 denial of motions filed by the first 10 pro se litigants.

    Today’s docketed filers include Julie Anne Larson of Sarasota, Fla. Larson says the government owes her “approximately $250,000 in [ASD] Ad Packages.” Her petition was dated Sept. 1, one day after Collyer ruled against the initial 10 filers, saying they had no standing in the case.

    No signature appears on the the perjury-verification line in the document. Larson’s purported signature appears on the Certificate of Service and is dated Sept. 1.

    It is believed Larson is the first pro se litigant to file specifically for ASD ad packages and not an actual sum of money.

    Since Aug. 24, pro se litigants have filed an unofficial total of 31 motions to “Intervene and Petition[s] To Return Wrongfully Confiscated Funds.” The motions have used a litigation blueprint circulated by at least one ASD downline.

    All of the motions were filed after prosecutors had announced that ASD President Andy Bowdoin had acknowledged ASD was operating illegally at the time of the seizure of tens of millions of dollars from his bank accounts last year.

    Bowdoin also signed a proffer letter in the case, prosecutors said in April.

    Bowdoin’s attorney, Charles A. Murray, announced in court filings Aug. 4 that Bowdoin was negotiating with federal prosecutors.

    By Aug. 24, pro se pleadings from ASD members began to pile up at the courthouse. The filings accuse the government of “reckless action” and “reckless disregard of the law by my Government to ‘protect’ its citizens.”

    Other docketed filers today include Stephen O’Brien, Christine Keyworth, Joseph L. Dunn Jr., Caesar Nunez and Laurie Ann Solliday.

    On Friday, in response to the spate of pro se filings, prosecutors filed a supplemental brief in the case that said ASD members “must establish an interest in a property that existed before the crime occurred.”

    The government filings might have been a bid to put would-be intervenors on notice that prosecutors have evidence of crimes that occurred within ASD long ago, perhaps before some or all of the pro se litigants even joined the purported “advertising”
    business.

    Later Friday, links were established between some members of ASD and the AdVentures4U autosurf, which announced a suspension of payouts Aug. 28. ASD members also promoted Noobing, an autosurf currently offline.

    Noobing’s parent company was ordered by a federal judge last week to repatriate money to the United States as a fraud investigation by the Federal Trade Commission proceeds.

    Today, the domains for AdViewGlobal, another autosurf promoted by ASD members, would not resolve to their servers in Panama.

    Read Larson’s motion.

  • AdViewGlobal Domains Offline

    UPDATED 8:09 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.)

    Two domains for the AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf will not resolve to a server.

    The domains are:

    • adviewglobal.com
    • startavga.com

    Why the domains will not resolve is unclear. The domains normally resolve to a server in Panama.

    As reported previously, a third domain associated with AVG — advglobal.com — also won’t resolve. This domain appears to have resolved to the United States at one time and appears to have been suspended for spam and abuse.

    AVG suspended cashouts June 25. In August, it said it had reported a theft of $2.7 million to state and federal authorities. AVG’s announcement about the purported theft occurred one day after AdSurfDaily President Andy Bowdoin announced in court filings that he was negotiating with federal prosecutors.

    AVG and ASD have close family, promoter and membership ties.

    UPDATE 11:55 A.M. The AVG domains still are offline. Their IP cluster in Panama is in the same range as the server that powers BizAdSplash (BAS), yet another controversial surf firm. The BAS domains are resolving.

    UPDATE 8:09 P.M. The adviewglobal.com domain and the startavga.com domain now are resolving to a server, although the members’ login page and the “Join” page are throwing a database error.

    The advglobal.com domain is not resolving to a server.

  • UPDATE: Sham ‘Attorney General’ In ‘Indian’ Case Sought $1.7 TRILLION From SEC; Wikipedia Says He Was Jailed In Nevada For ‘Attempted Murder,’ Other Charges

    EDITOR’S NOTE: This is an update to supplement a story about bizarre securities litigation that has occurred recently. (Updated 9:10 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.)

    Think the $250 million judgment sought against a public servant by a sham “sovereign” Utah “Indian” tribe to which AdSurfDaily mainstay Curtis Richmond belonged was bizarre and extreme?

    It turns out to have been a drop in the bucket compared to the $1.7 trillion sought by the bogus “attorney general” of an unrecognized North Dakota tribe. Michael Howard Reed, who is not an attorney but purported to hold the title of “attorney general,” sought the award after the Securities and Exchange Commission sued purported tribal members for running a $29 million Ponzi scheme from Nevada.

    The sought-after amount of $1.7 trillion would have exceeded the total of federal income tax paid by individual U.S. filers last year by about $575 billion.

    A federal judge was not pleased by the gamesmanship in the securities-fraud case against Gold Quest International, which purported to be registered in Panama but was operating the alleged Ponzi scheme from Las Vegas while claiming immunity from U.S. law.

    U.S. District Judge Kent J. Dawson struck a series of pleadings by Reed from the record.

    Meanwhile, Dawson jailed John Jenkins, one of the defendants implicated in the Ponzi scheme, for contempt.

    Dawson also dispatched the U.S. Marshals Service to arrest David Greene, also known as “Lord David Greene,” in part for violating orders to repatriate money offshore to the United States.

    All of this took place only weeks before the U.S. Secret Service seized tens of millions of dollars from Florida-based ASD, itself accused of operating a Ponzi scheme and selling unregistered securities.

    Wikipedia says Reed was jailed in Nevada on charges of attempted murder, although no details were provided in the entry. (UPDATE Jan. 21, 2010: This Wikipedia entry appears to have been disputed, with the reference to Reed and the purported attempted-murder charge removed.)

    Richmond entered the ASD fray in November. By early February, he was filing pro se motions suggesting ASD members intended to pursue claims of $120 million against the prosecutors, a judge and a court clerk.

    By late February, ASD President Andy Bowdoin himself was filing pro se motions, acknowledging ASD had been operating illegally but claiming he’d been denied “fair notice” his conduct was illegal.

    Bowdoin’s actions coincided with an announcement by the AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf that it was shifting to an “association” structure.” Such structures sometimes are associated with tax schemes.

    AVG introduced members to Pro Advocate Group, which is associated with Karl Dahlstrom. Dahlstrom was convicted in a securities scheme in the 1990s and sentenced to 78 months in federal prison.

    The Utah “Indian” tribe to which Richmond belonged was ruled a “complete sham” by a federal judge last year. Meantime, the North Dakota tribe to which the GQI defendants purportedly belonged is not recognized by the federal government. There is substantial securities litigation against GQI in Canada, as well.

    See story on $1.7 trillion filing in the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

  • EDITORIAL: ‘Meanwhile, Andy Bowdoin Was Negotiating’

    Perhaps you’ve read that the AdVentures4U (ADV4U) autosurf suspended payouts on or about Aug. 28. The surf, which purports to be a professional communications firm, butchered its announcement message to such a degree that professional Ponzi promoters began to email their lists to explain what they thought ADV4U was saying.

    Perhaps the only thing not ambiguous was a plea to members not to contact the offshore payment processors. The processors had the ability to trap the money and cripple operations, meaning ADV4U would not be able to dictate the haircut members were about to receive and that all financial decisions would be placed in the hands of the processors.

    Trapping the money also meant that ADV4U also would not be able to get its hands on its own cash. Money needed to pay the bills could be trapped. So could money needed to carry out the master plan, irrespective of the fact members cannot say for certain what the master plan is. They can repeat GIGO only. Garbage comes in, and garbage goes out. Somehow it takes on a veneer of high truth.

    Third-party accounts from “insiders” or people who know other people “in the loop” are never high truth. All you need to do to test this theory is read the Pro-ASD Surf’s Up forum.

    Surf’s Up told you an insider with impeccable credentials knew for a fact that the government admitted behind closed doors that ASD was not a Ponzi scheme. The government then went out and mowed down ASD at an evidentiary hearing in which the prosecution did not call a single witness.

    So much for “insider” news.

    Not to be outdone, though, posters at Surf’s Up then wove the untrue tale that ASD was denied due process, that the government’s failure to call a witness at a hearing ASD specifically requested to present its evidence meant that it had no evidence. Over the months the untrue tale snowballed. It finally grew into a fantastically untrue tale in which the preposterous claim was made that the only reason Andy Bowdoin was not in jail and that Bernard Madoff was in jail is that the government had no evidence against Bowdoin. Zero. None.

    This claim was made despite the fact that Andy Bowdoin had acknowledged in his own court filings that ASD was operating illegally, had given statements acknowledging the government’s material allegations all were true and even had signed a proffer letter in the case.

    A few of Bowdoin’s most committed apologists then began to spin the fantastic tale that the rebirth of ASD might be only days away, that prosecutors had screwed up so royally that a federal judge issued an order commanding them to put up or shut up by Aug. 28.

    This claim was made despite the fact Bowdoin’s own attorney announced publicly that Bowdoin was negotiating with prosecutors. The prosecution hadn’t been ordered to do anything. In fact, Andy Bowdoin had been on the receiving end of an order to instruct the court in no uncertain terms how he intended to proceed.

    Still not to be undone, some ASD members spun the fantastic tale that:

    • The U.S. Government has failed to produce any EVIDENCE of alleged wrongdoing.
    • The U.S. Government has failed to produce any WITNESSES of alleged wrongdoing.
    • The U.S. Government has failed to produce any VICTIMS of alleged wrongdoing.
    • The action was based solely on the OPINIONS of the U. S. Government agents.

    Interesting choice of words — “has failed.” What’s most interesting of all is that a trial date has not even been set in the case. Why not? Because Andy Bowdoin submitted to the forfeiture in January, more than two weeks prior to the scheduling conference in the case. The scheduling conference was canceled because Bowdoin submitted to the forfeiture, meaning the case nearly was litigated to conclusion because Bowdoin had given up his claims to tens of millions of dollars seized in a wire-fraud, money-laundering and Ponzi scheme case in which it was alleged that ASD was selling unregistered securities.

    And he submitted to the forfeiture after signing a proffer letter and after telling the government that its material allegations were all true.

    It therefore follows that ASD members also were selling unregistered securities and, perhaps, becoming unwitting participants in a criminal enterprise. The case was brought as a conspiracy. About the only unknown right now is the true depths of criminality within the organization.

    The government plainly has acknowledged that there are thousands of victims. It announced a program to provide some degree of restitution after it had gathered all of the assets of the ASD enterprise, which very likely was hiding money in the individual accounts of co-conspirators as a hedge against the possibility that ASD was going to get caught.

    Ever see these words?

    “Don’t call it an investment. We can get in trouble for that.”

    Those are the words that demonstrate the conspiracy. They show consciousness of guilt, especially when uttered by veteran players. The newbies don’t understand it’s a wink-nod conspiracy. If they discover later that they’ve been drafted into a conspiracy of silence and accept wink-nod as their duty to the enterprise, then they, too, are co-conspirators.

    Various rebukes by the co-conspirators to the unknowing that they purchased “advertising” and that “rebates aren’t guaranteed” also are evidence of the conspiracy. What it really means is, “Don’t tell. All of us, including YOU, could get in trouble.”

    Which brings us back to ADV4U.

    It announced yesterday that payouts due yesterday to plenty of members would not arrive because somebody had blabbed to one of the offshore processors and the account was restricted.

    There were stinging rebukes posted in various online venues by various ADV4U members to the blabbers.

    Meanwhile, members said the compensation they had received from ADV4U via other offshore processors had amounted to only about 20 percent of their exposure to loss. They had been assured that they would be made whole and placed in profit — sort of. No one really knows what ADV4U is saying because the message is so mangled and because the purported owner’s words did not comport with what members were being told by customer service.

    Which brings us back to ASD.

    One of ASD’s purported customer-service reps also purportedly works for ADV4U. That, in itself, makes ADV4U downright dangerous.

    Meanwhile, the name of one of the 25 recent pro se filers in the ASD case who claimed “The U.S. Government has failed to produce any EVIDENCE of alleged wrongdoing” popped up in a Skype chat last night about the ADV4U debacle. If it was, in fact, the ASD filer, it means she also has money in ADV4U and did not want to see it go missing.

    If one looks at the transcript of the Skype chat, there is virtually no discussion about how disappointed members are about the prospect of losing their “advertising” outlet. Most of the discussion was about money and retrenchment plans of the same sort both ASD and AdViewGlobal had announced.

    Some members were angry that other members had the unmitigated gall actually to contact AlertPay and subject the entirety of the ADV4U membership group to a haircut. Only a handful of people know what is real and what is fiction in this incredibly toxic, incredibly tangled web.

    Meanwhile, Andy Bowdoin was negotiating with federal prosecutors.

  • ATTACK UNDERWAY: Ponzi Advocate ‘joe’ Says ‘joe Leaves When joe Wants To Leave’ And That Blog Will Be ‘Scrambling To Put Out Fires’

    UPDATED 8:44 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) The attack described below abated for a short time, and then started anew, with “joe” back posting from his usual IP. He has posted from two IP’s today, using the identities “Mr. Wonderful”; “Quicjk”; and “Almighty Joseph (the risen),” along with multiple email addresses, including one that uses the word “boo.”

    This behavior, which we believe is designed to intimidate and to extract a result through harassment, is extreme. The behavior has not ceased — not even after the “fair warning” described in the post below.

    “joe” says he will continue his course of conduct until we permit him to post on his terms. His most recent nonpublic posts include another vulgarity directed at a reader and more vulgarity directed this Blog. “joe” insists it’s OK to do what he’s doing.

    “I feel some satisfaction that you seem to be intimidated by me,” joe says. “You can deny all you want but it’s true even though [sexual reference/poster’s name deleted] is right, I’m harmless. Now if you’re a good boy and post this unedited we can consider this my final retirement. I don’t really want to keep coming on here but I just wasn’t going to be unceremoniously tossed like a bad penny and you know what they say about bad pennies.”

    What follows below is our earlier post, bringing this matter to the attention of readers.

    Dear Readers,

    The PatrickPretty.com Blog is under attack.

    We find it necessary to make a record and to inform you about what is taking place behind the scenes. In the past, we have made similar posts to inform you about matters that we cannot dismiss as garden-variety harassment directed at this Blog and perceive as threats to our ability to publish.

    As many of you know, a poster who advocates for Ponzi schemes and calls himself “joe” was blocked from posting here Sept. 1. We made this decision based on “joe’s” inability to exercise even minimal restraint when posting.

    “joe” had previously announced two separate “retirements” from posting here, dismissing this Blog’s coverage of autosurfs and Ponzi schemes as meaningless. “joe” subsequently came out of retirement twice and began to post anew, and then went into what he described as semiretirement, saying he’d post anew as the situation warranted.

    While “joe” was in his semiretirement phase, he continued to post abusively before his access to public posting was blocked. “joe” did not react favorably to our decision to block him from posting here. In fact, “joe,” who says he was a POW in Vietnam, began to direct anger and hostility to this Blog outside the view of readers, and directed short, vulgarity-laced rants at specific readers who post here.

    In one of his blocked posts, he explained that he had directed the vulgarities only to test the system. So, in plain fact, what we were left with was a person who licenses himself to rant against this Blog and its readers, claiming his most recent submissions were tests, not communications to be taken seriously.

    “Testing 1-2-3” would have worked, if any testing was necessary at all. It was not, of course. This Blog has a right to conduct operations free from harassment by “joe” after he has been asked to leave.

    “joe” ramped it up yesterday, suggesting he would get the result he seeks — reinstatement of his posting privileges — or else.

    “joe leaves when joe wants to leave,” he said.”You’ll be scrambling to put out fires. I suggest you let ME retire . . .”

    He also noted that, “It’s amazing how many people in a short distance from my house haven’t got security on their computers. I drove around with my laptop and was able to get online in a few places. There are also a few internet cafes around me. What I’m saying is get ready for the return of joe and then you can block all of these people from your site.”

    The “fires” joe referenced now have started. He is attacking from a separate location, calling himself “Almighty Joseph (the risen).”

    “joe” is attempting to post a link for TradingGold4Cash, the purported program associated with the AdVentures4U autosurf, and has attempted nine additional posts in rapid succession, creating new identities for some of the posts.

    We will take appropriate action to prevent “joe” from interfering with the operation of this Blog.

  • BREAKING NEWS: Prosecution Files Supplemental Brief In Response To Pro Se Pleadings In ASD Case; Says Petitioners ‘Must Establish An Interest In A Property That Existed BEFORE The Crime Occurred’

    Federal prosecutors in the AdSurfDaily forfeiture case have filed a supplemental brief in response to a spate of pro se motions filed by members of ASD that says the members “must establish an interest in a property that existed before the crime occurred.”

    Today’s brief by the prosecution may be a bid to put would-be intervenors on notice that the government has evidence of crimes that occurred within ASD long ago, perhaps before some or all of the pro se litigants even joined the purported “advertising” business.

    An unofficial total of 25 pro se motions have flooded the docket of U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer since Aug. 24, including  one yesterday and one so far today. The most recent pro se filers include Earl R. DeHart Jr., who says the government owes him $2,135.65 for its actions against ASD, and Peter McFray, who says the government owes him $1,700.

    All of the pro se filers have used a litigation blueprint that was circulated among members of one or more ASD downline groups.

    Collyer ruled against the first 10 pro se petitioners Aug. 31, saying they had no standing in the case. Since that time, 15 additional pro se pleadings that appear to have been in transit when Collyer denied the first 10 have arrived at the courthouse.

    Prosecutors’ brief today appears to have been a bid to provide Collyer with even more ammunition to reject the claims.

    Read the prosecution’s brief.

    The pro se filers all have found fault with the prosecutors’ actions against ASD.

  • Silent Coup? Regulators Confront False Nation-States In Burgeoning Battle Against Large-Scale Ponzi Schemes

    Have the brick-and-mortar media largely missed an important political, legal and financial story — one that features nation-states being declared within U.S. borders and satellite, U.S.-style democracies being declared on paper overseas in a bid to skirt securities laws and financial regulations and make Ponzi schemes “legal?”

    It seems so. There has been spot coverage in local newspapers, but no major, sustained coverage on a national scale — not even when bogus “Supreme Courts” were being founded in Utah doughnut shops, bogus “attorneys general” were being appointed in North Dakota and entities that did not submit to the authority of the U.S. government were attempting to force the U.S. Marshals Service to serve fraudulent court documents calling for the arrest of legitimate federal judges.

    A disturbing trend is emerging — and it is not easy to peel back layers of the onion despite the fact enormous sums of money are involved.

    In the weeks prior to the seizure of at least $79 million last year from Florida-based AdSurfDaily Inc. and related autosurf companies in a wire-fraud and Ponzi scheme probe, the Securities and Exchange Commission shut down a Las Vegas-based operation that thumbed its nose at U.S. law by falsely claiming it derived its Nevada powers from a sovereign “Indian” tribe based in North Dakota.

    Regulators claimed a fraud of at least $27 million was under way in the Nevada case.

    Gold-Quest International, which purported to be registered in Panama but was conducting operations from Las Vegas, was conducting a Ponzi scheme in the United States and Canada that promised a yearly return of 87 percent, the SEC said.

    “Gold-Quest and its owners claim they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States or Canada because they are members of the Little Shell Nation Indian tribe, purportedly headquartered in North Dakota,” the SEC said in May 2008, about three months prior to the seizure of ASD’s assets.

    “However,” the SEC continued, “the Little Shell Nation is not in fact recognized as a sovereign tribe or nation.”

    The Nevada litigation was bizarre, and featured the presence of a nonlawyer who had been appointed “attorney general” of the tribe, and a non-notary public who had “notarized” documents used by the tribe but had no legitimate credential to do so.

    “You are in an imaginary world where you belong to an unrecognized Indian group,” a federal judge advised Robert Neilson Baker, the nonnotary notary.

    It only got stranger from there.

    Despite the fact one of the uttered defenses in the case was that the tribe was immune to U.S. law and thus was permitted to sell unregistered securities, one of the defendants left the court room to feed a parking meter, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

    Why even bother to plug a meter if your aim is to return to the court room to explain why the law does not apply to you?

    A common thread in recent securities litigation is that the U.S. government has no authority to act over anyone and that the government is guilty of interference with commerce even if the commerce is illegal.

    In November 2008, California resident Curtis Richmond attempted to intervene in the AdSurfDaily case, but his initial efforts to have court submissions docketed were unsuccessful. Richmond ultimately succeeded in having pro se submissions from his Utah-registered religious entity — Pacific Ministry of Giving International — entered into the record, but the filings did not tell the entire story.

    It turned out that Richmond, too, was associated with an “Indian” tribe — one a federal judge had declared a “complete sham” in a separate case  — and Richmond had purported to be a sovereign being who answered only to Jesus Christ.

    Richmond’s tribe was known as Wampanoag Nation, Tribe of Grayhead, Wolf Band. It had harassed public officials in Utah by filing enormous fraudulent judgments against them, including a judgment of $250 million against a county prosecutor. Richmond himself tried to force U.S. District Judge Stephen Friot to recuse himself from the Utah case, claiming the judge owed him $30 million and could not make a fair decision.

    Friot ruled that Richmond and other members of the bogus tribe had engaged in racketeering against the public officials, ordering them to pay more than $108,000 in damages and costs to the injured parties.

    Richmond appealed the decision in the Utah case, claiming poverty. Months later he filed court documents in the ASD case that declared Pacific Ministry of Giving International had $41,000 at stake in the autosurf.

  • BREAKING NEWS: Judge Orders Offshore Assets Of Firm Associated With Noobing Autosurf Repatriated; Broadens Authority Of Receiver To Pursue Recovery

    In a ruling that may send shockwaves throughout the offshore autosurf “industry,” a federal judge has ordered the parent company of the Noobing autosurf to repatriate to the United States all assets and documents held on foreign soil.

    U.S. District Judge Julie A. Robinson also cleared the way for any safe-deposit boxes to be opened and inspected. Meanwhile, the judge gave Larry Cook, the receiver in the case against Affiliate Strategies Inc., Brett Blackman and other defendants, broad powers to exercise authority over individual and corporate assets of the defendants.

    At the same time, Robinson ordered assets not to be concealed or dissipated and records not to be destroyed.

    The defendants acknowledged no wrongdoing, but agreed to the order in a stipulation with the Federal Trade Commission and the attorneys general of three states. The order appears to apply to Noobing, which is registered both in the United States and the Caribbean island of Nevis, but is not named a defendant in the case.

    Noobing launched last year and was promoted by members of AdSurfDaily Inc., a surf firm from which the U.S. government seized tens of millions of dollars last year in a wire-fraud, money-laundering and Ponzi scheme probe.

    “[W]ithin 5 business days following the service of this Order, each Corporate Defendant and Individual Defendant shall (emphasis added):

    “A. Provide the Commission and the Receiver with a full accounting of all funds, documents, and assets outside of the United States which are (1) titled in the name, individually or jointly, of any Corporate Defendant or Individual Defendant; or (2) held by any person or entity for the benefit of any Corporate Defendant or Individual Defendant; or (3) under the direct or indirect control, whether jointly or singly, of any Corporate Defendant or Individual Defendant;

    “B. Transfer to the territory of the United States and deliver to the Receiver all funds, documents, and assets located in foreign countries which are (1) titled in the name, individually or jointly, of any Corporate Defendant or Individual Defendant; or (2) held by any person or entity for the benefit of any Corporate Defendant or Individual Defendant; or (3) under the direct or indirect control, whether jointly or singly;

    “C. Provide the Commission access to all records or accounts or assets of any Corporate Defendant or Individual Defendant held by financial institutions located outside the territorial United States by signing the Consent to Release of Financial Records attached to this Order as Attachment C.

    In an extraordinary warning titled “NONINTERFERENCE WITH REPATRIATION,” the judge ordered the defendants to walk the straight-and-narrow when repatriating offshore assets.

    She specifically banned “[s]ending any statement, letter, facsimile transmission, e-mail or wire transmission, or telephoning or engaging in any other act, directly or indirectly, which results in a determination by a foreign trustee or other entity that a ‘duress’ event has occurred under the terms of a foreign trust agreement, until all Assets have been fully repatriated . . .”

    And the judge took it one step farther, specifically ordering the defendants not to advise “any trustee, protector or other agent of any foreign trust or other related entities of either the existence of this Order, or of the fact that repatriation is required pursuant to a court order, until all Assets have been fully repatriated . . .”

    Robinson empowered Cook to assume full “control of the Receivership Defendants by removing, as the Receiver deems necessary or advisable, any director, officer, independent contractor, employee, or agent of any of the Receivership Defendants, including any Individual Defendant, from control of, management of, or participation in, the affairs of the Receivership Defendants.”

    Cook also was empowered to use his discretion to separate alleged perpetrators from alleged victims.

    The receiver “shall have full power to divert mail and to sue for, collect, receive, take in possession, hold, and manage all assets and documents of the Receivership Defendants and other persons or entities whose interests are now under the direction, possession, custody, or control of, the Receivership Defendants,” Robinson said.

    In her order for assets not to be dissipated and records not to be destroyed, Robinson defined documents as “equal in scope and synonymous in meaning to the usage of the term in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(a), and includes, but is not limited to, writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, audio and video recordings, computer records, and any other data compilations from which information can be obtained.”

    Read the judge’s order.

  • Ten More Motions To Intervene Appear On Docket

    UPDATED 4:57 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) Ten more pro se motions to intervene in the federal forfeiture case against AdSurfDaily Inc. have just appeared on the docket of U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer.

    With the motions docketed yesterday, the grand total filed in the past two days now stands at 12. Previously 10 motions were filed, bringing the overall grand total to 22. All of the motions appear to use the same litigation blueprint.

    Collyer denied the first 10 motions in a two-paragraph ruling. She has not ruled on the most recent 12 motions, which appear to have been in transit when she ruled against the initial 10.

    Today’s docketed filers include Barbara J. Bowles; Robert Bowles; Dawn Starling; Eva Cater; Sara Lehman; Christopher Blake Scott; Harold L. Shaffer; Daniel N. Reams; James Richards; and John Deminico.

    4:57 P.M. EDT UPDATE: An 11th motion was docketed late this afternoon. The filer was Thomas M. Shearer. As of this update, the grand total of motions docketed today stands at 11. The overall grand total now is 23. (This figure includes pro se filings since Aug. 24 and does not take into account earlier pro se filings by ASD President Andy Bowdoin, Curtis Richmond and others. The unofficial total of earlier pro se filings is 16.)

    The unofficial grand total of all pro se filings is 39.