Blog

  • LETTER TO READERS: Senior Citizens, The Culture Of Ponzi Schemes — And America’s Longing For A Return To The Age Of ‘Blue Light’ Specials, The Age Of Innocence

    Dear Readers,

    From time to time I publish a post in letter form. This usually happens when a post in story, editorial or essay form does not seem appropriate. This is one of those times.

    Honestly, just how strange could things get in Ponzi Land?

    Ponzi Land, which relatively few people outside of law enforcement even knew existed a year ago,  suddenly and notoriously is populated by senior citizens — and not only as victims, but also as perpetrators.  So much of it seems upside down, a world that challenges assumptions.

    Are we entering a sort of awkward cross between a Lewis Carroll-like world and an Orwellian world, a world in which illogic passes for logic and, because news travels so quickly on the Internet and because negatives get spun so furiously as positives these days, bizarre crime gets positioned or explained away as a new form of nobility?

    Let’s take a look at today’s news on Ponzi schemes.

    Before we begin, did you notice the phrasing in the sentence above — today’s news on Ponzi schemes? Ponzi schemes are breaking out like Blue Light Specials broke out at the Kmart of my youth. Men and women whose hair is blue or tinting toward blue are running Ponzis — instead of doing recon in the aisles and waiting for the famous voice to intone, “Attention Kmart shoppers.

    It used to be that you made money by not spending it or shopping patiently and even furiously for the best possible deal, perhaps especially if you were a senior.

    Allegations now have emerged that Julia Ann Schmidt, the 68-year-old alleged Ponzi schemer from Texas, posed as an investment adviser using the name of Fortis Investments, a famous European brand with U.S. reach.

    Schmidt allegedly said she was working for a man named  “Jack Layne” — and when investors became skeptical, she hired a man to pretend to be “Jack Layne Jr.,” saying “Jack Layne” had died.

    The case is new, and few facts have emerged. But the allegations read as though Schmidt knew she was about to get caught, and called a meeting of investors, telling them that she was rolling over their investments into an insurance annuity. She allegedly brought the man pretending to be “Jack Layne Jr.” to the meeting, telling investors their money was safe because “Jack Layne Jr.” was handling “all the investor accounts through a local Waco law firm.”

    To add a false air of nobility to the alleged scheme, senior-citizen Schmidt put on a show for investors, prosecutors said.

    “In order to falsely lend credibility to the annuity transfer, [Schmidt] completed an application for her and her husband for the transfer of a non-existent sum of $500,000 from Fortis Investments to Life Insurance Company of the Southwest,” prosecutors said.

    For good measure, Schmidt “provided the false address for ‘Jack Layne’ and Fortis Investments where the annuity contracts and authorizations were to be mailed,” prosecutors said.

    The investment firm’s address proved to be a vacant parcel of land.

    So, if we’re reading this correctly, the alleged Schmidt plot involved:

    • A Ponzi scheme Schmidt pulled off by posing as an investment adviser for a prominent company that did not have a clue who she was.
    • Schmidt’s knowledge that her story and the scheme were collapsing.
    • An attempt by Schmidt to create plausible deniability by introducing “Jack Layne Jr.” and explaining that “Jack Layne” had died.
    • An attempt by Schmidt to sanitize the fraud and calm fears by explaining that “Jack Layne Jr.” was working with a “law firm.”
    • A subplot in which Schmidt further hoped to calm fears by creating nobility where none existed, saying investment accounts were being rolled over into an insurance annuity.
    • A false demonstration of nobility in which Schmidt pretended she was rolling over $500,000 into an insurance annuity.
    • Schmidt’s use of U.S. mail  in furtherance of a bizarre scheme to create nobility where none existed.

    Kmart, which dialed down Blue Light specials in the 1990s but still brings them back from time to time, needs to make them a fixture in stores again.

    Right away.

    Here is more news involving alleged senior Ponzi schemers or proven senior Ponzi schemers:

    In Buffalo, N.Y., Richard Piccoli, 83 — yes, 83 — was sentenced to 20 years in prison for recruiting Catholics and senior citizens into a Ponzi scheme he’d been operating since 1975. He’d managed to fleece investors out of as much as $25 million, leading to “devastating” consequences for the victims, prosecutors said.

    One of his victims said Piccoli had tried to turn the world upside down, putting on an air of nobility and youthful vigor when he was selling the scheme, but expecting the dignity and respect normally accorded a frail, 83-year-old man after the scheme was exposed.

    “He wanted to reverse his age when he wanted us as victims,” a woman told WGRZ-TV. “And now, he’s like, saying just the opposite: ‘Oh, I’m too old to be punished.’ So, you know, he worked his age in his own favor.”

    Piccoli ultimately cooperated with investigators — in no small part because the evidence was overwhelming. Authorities had cataloged ads he had placed in Catholic newspapers and publications. The ads, which promised a payout, specifically targeted seniors and people of faith.

    An undercover agent from the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, which had worked with the IRS to target Piccoli in a sting, posed as a man seeking to invest money for his aging mother.

    Piccoli, always looking for senior-citizen marks even in his 80s and trading for decades on the noble names of Catholic priests and churches, was happy to oblige.

    The churches were getting a 3 percent return on investments in safe institutions. Piccoli told them he could get 7 percent and provided a guarantee, reportedly even saying the investments were tax-free. This was music to the ears of churches and parishioners who’d watched a consolidation of Catholic entities across the United States that had resulted in the closure of schools and churches, owing to a lack of resources.

    “During one taped conversation, Piccoli promised the investigator ‘we can make a hell of a profit,’ and boasted that his list of clients included at least 50 priests,” The Buffalo News reported.

    Piccoli’s attorney asked for a sentence of six years. A federal judge said such a light sentence would not reflect the severity of a crime that involved tens of millions of dollars and as many as 500 victims over the years, and sent Piccoli to prison for 20 years — effectively a life sentence.

    In the end, justice was served, including justice for a 79-year-old man Piccoli had fleeced. The man said he suffered a heart attack after news of Piccoli’s arrest broke last winter. Authorities, acting swiftly after Piccoli’s name had been brought to their attention and an investigation began, recognized almost instantly that he had been operating a Ponzi scheme for decades.

    They froze the crime in its tracks, trapping $6 million that still remained. Piccoli had gathered at least $500,000 in November 2008 alone, and at least $16 million since 2007, depositing the money and writing checks to earlier investors as money came in from new investors. He promised a payout of between 7.1 percent and 8.3 percent, but had been insolvent for years — and owed unsuspecting clients up to $25 million.

    Piccoli’s attorney — doing what attorneys are paid to do — pointed out that Piccoli had cooperated after getting caught, a sort of last shot at nobility. The attorney criticized neither the judge who sentenced his elderly client to 20 years nor the prosecutors who brought the case.

    Judith Zabalaoui, 71, was accused in February of swindling Greater New Orleans investors out of more than $3.2 million in an elaborate Ponzi fraud in which she set up fake companies, pretended to have employees and called her mailboxes at UPS stores “suites” to trick clients into thinking they were dealing with real firms. In August, she was sentenced to eight years in prison.

    Zabalaoui became emotional in the courtroom at her sentencing, explaining that she had committed crimes because she wanted her family to live well and had a predisposition for over-protecting her loved ones.

    Her victims cried — not for her, but for themselves.

    Elsewhere, in reports about the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme published yesterday, Madoff was said to have sponsored cocaine parties at his securities company.

    Madoff, 71, was sentenced in June to 150 years in prison. His Ponzi wiped out personal, charitable and corporate fortunes. An attorney with whom Madoff granted a prison interview — the same attorney now is suing Madoff and others — said Madoff  “spends time” in prison with a Mafia crime boss and a convicted spy. The attorney claimed Madoff enjoys pizza cooked by a child molester.

    Madoff told the FBI he had acted alone in the $65 billion swindle. No one believes that, not the FBI, not the attorney who is suing him.

    Bernard Madoff was not the sort of customer who performed recon in the aisles at Kmart and spent extra time in the store, hoping to be there when the famous Blue Light flashed.

    Regardless, Kmart can’t bring back the Blue Light Special for Americans of average or noble means fast enough. America needs the Blue Light Special, if for no other reason than to signal that Lewis Carroll and George Orwell wrote fiction, that the world is not upside down, that the Age of Innocence has returned.

    Let’s just hope it’s not the Age of Innocence described in Edith Wharton’s Pulitzer Prize-winning novel — and that an age of innocence truly once existed and is worth going back to to seek a cure for what ails us now.

    Patrick

    P.S. You’ve noticed, of course, that it has become increasingly fashionable to claim nobility and to blame the government if you get named in a Ponzi prosecution or a prosecution that alleges fraud in general. We have been reporting on the fraud allegations against Affiliate Strategies Inc. (ASI), the umbrella company under which the Noobing autosurf set up shop. Noobing targeted deaf people.

    On Sept. 4, an unnamed party issued a news release with this bold headline:

    “FTC on Rampage! Are they really out to help the Consumers or out to raise money?”

    Among the assertions in the news release, which apparently was a third-party bid to position ASI and other companies as noble enterprises, was this:

    “During our investigation of the tactics used by the FTC we wanted to see how the process was done to protect the consumer and the procedures they had to follow to prove that consumers were being harmed. To our amazement the FTC does not have to follow the law of the Constitution, and there is no Due process given to those that they claim are harming the public.”

    The claim was made despite the fact the civil prosecution against ASI is occurring in a federal court under the watchful eye of a federal judge to ensure fairness for all parties — alleged perpetrators and alleged victims.

    Federal investigators were described in the news release as “The “NEW AGED MAFIA.” The FTC was described as extorting “money from companies all across the country” in a bid to raise money “for the states that join them in the law suits.”

    In late August, the court-appointed receiver in the case against ASI said an affiliated company named a defendant in the prosecution charged a 70-year-old Philadelphia man on Social Security $995 for the names and addresses of three entities that possibly could help him secure a grant to repair his deteriorating home.

    One of the addresses proved to be the address of the Philadelphia Regional Office of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, which had been misidentified as a benevolent organization known as “World Changers,” according to court filings.

    The companies named defendants in the FTC lawsuit were insolvent “and had less than one day’s operating cash requirements in their bank accounts,” according to the receiver.

    “The Receiver’s work over the past three weeks suggests the Defendants’ operations were insolvent on the date [July 24] the [Temporary Restraining Order] was entered and that for at least all of 2009, Defendants operated only by signing up new victims faster than the old victims could obtain refunds,” the receiver said.

  • BULLETIN: Richard S. Piccoli, 83, Sentenced To 20 Years In Prison For Ponzi And Affinity-Fraud Scheme

    In a case that features some of the same elements of the alleged AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme — a senior citizen as the operator, appeals to religion, the sale of unregistered securities, commingling of funds, seized assets and advertising materials that promised a payout — an 83-year-old New York man today effectively was sentenced to life in prison.

    Richard S. Piccoli, the Buffalo-area man who operated the Gen-See Capital Corp. Ponzi scheme that targeted Catholic priests, parishioners and senior citizens, received 20 years. He pleaded guilty in June to a single count of mail fraud and a single count of tax fraud. Gen-See pleaded guilty to a single count of mail fraud.

    Many more counts could have been filed.

    Piccoli cooperated in the probe when caught, “to give up other assets whose value has not yet been determined, such as life insurance policies, property and stocks,” prosecutors said in June, after Piccoli’s guilty plea.

    U.S. District Judge William M. Skretny said he understood the sentence meant Piccoli likely would die in prison.

    “It’s time after all these years to pay the price,” the judge said, according to The Buffalo News.

    Federal prosecutors and the SEC said the scheme had operated for more than 30 years, draining investors of their life savings, college savings and retirement savings.

    “Our seniors and clergy are absolutely pleased with Gen-See’s Re-Investment Program,” Piccoli said, according to marketing materials gathered by investigators as evidence in the case.

    Piccoli’s ads said, “[S]erving Seniors and Retirees Since 1975.”

    Authorities became wise to Piccoli, and he became the target of a sting operation by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the IRS. He was arrested in January. Losses suffered by victims may total $25 million.

    Like the ASD case, investigators located resources before the scheme collapsed entirely, seized assets and announced plans to provide a restitution program. Approximately $6 million has been located, and investigators continue to seek other assets that can be pooled to compensate victims.

    Investigators said Piccoli simply dumped money into a checking account, issued bogus certificates to investors and paid redemptions with new money that entered the system. Customers thought they were investing in a mortgage company.

    “[B]ank records show that Gen-See’s only business activity is depositing checks written by new investors or existing investors depositing more funds, and the payment of checks to investors using funds received from other investors,” prosecutors said.

    Piccoli’s attorneys, citing their client’s age, asked the judge for a downward departure from sentencing guidelines that could have led to a sentence of 24.5 years, saying a six-year sentence was long enough for an old man.

    Prosecutors, however, argued for enhanced sentencing because the case included more than 250 victims, at least 100 of whom were put in danger of insolvency.

    Read story in The Buffalo News.

    Read the SEC complaint.

    Piccoli was 82 when arrested in January. Investigators said he advertised in Catholic newspapers

  • LAWSUIT: Madoff Had Prebust Cocaine Parties; ‘Spends Time’ In Prison With Mafia Crime Boss, Convicted Spy; Eats Pizza Cooked By Child Molester; Cell Mate Is Convicted Drug Dealer

    Bernard Madoff
    Bernard Madoff

    Bernard Madoff has made friends in prison and “spends time” with Carmine Persico, a reputed former Colombo crime family boss, and Jonathan Pollard, convicted of spying for Israel in a case that strained America’s relationship with Israel in the 1980s.

    Madoff’s cell mate is a convicted drug dealer, and Madoff eats pizza cooked by a convicted child molester, according to a lawsuit filed yesterday.

    The complaint was filed by California attorney Joseph Cotchett. Cochett sued on behalf of clients, and interviewed Madoff July 28 at the Butner Federal Correctional Complex in North Carolina.

    Jay Wexler is the lead plaintiff. Madoff family members and friends are named defendants in the 264-page complaint, along with firms such as JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of New York Mellon,  KPMG, the accounting firm, and other companies.

    Cotchett said the interview lasted more than four hours. Some of the details in the lawsuit paint a picture of reckless and nonfinancial criminal behavior inside Madoff’s securities business, in what appears to be a bid to point out that key business partners of Madoff ignored red flags and continued to do business with the now-infamous Ponzi swindler.

    Madoff had a “dark side,” Cotchett said.

    “Starting in 1975, Madoff began sending a long-time employee and office messenger to obtain drugs for himself and the company who worked with another individual who became a supplier to BMIS,” the lawsuit claims.

    “These two men were described as street tough men from Harlem ‘who were not to be messed with.’ Their job was to get drugs and bring them to the office for use at BMIS. The employees in the office were well known and everyone knew, including some special investors,” the lawsuit continued.

    “Drug use in the office was described as rampant and likened the office to the ‘North Pole’ in reference to the cocaine use. Eventually the main employee supplier was fired for his drug abuse when cocaine and other undisclosed drugs were found in his desk in 2003. Madoff worried that it might bring in drug prosecutors who might uncover the big scam,” the lawsuit claimed.

    Wild parties were held at the office, the lawsuit claimed. Entertainment featured “topless entertainers wearing only ‘G-string’ underwear serving as waitresses, and a culture of sexual deviance existed in the office,” the lawsuit claimed. “The employees had late night affairs in exciting places — such as their boss’ sofa ‘with whomever they could find.’ Employees described it as a wild, fast-talking, drug-using office culture.”

    Key insiders knew the end was near in 2008, despite Madoff’s insistence that he acted alone in the fraud, Cotchett contended in the lawsuit.

    A panic among some insiders ensued prior to Madoff telling the FBI that the enterprise was a colossal fraud in December 2008, Cotchett said.

    “In the final months of 2008, several of Madoff’s closest friends, family and supporters allegedly learned about the dire situation at BMIS and became afraid for their own fortunes and began formulating a plan for withdrawing their own monies from BMIS at the expense of other investors,” the lawsuit claimed.

    Read the Joseph Cotchett lawsuit against Bernard Madoff.

  • BREAKING NEWS: Money-Services Business To Pay $18 Million To Settle FTC Claim It Facilitated International Fraud

    David C. Vladeck, FTC
    David C. Vladeck, FTC

    So, you want to offer a money-services business to U.S. customers and not take international fraud seriously?

    Be prepared to pony up $18 million to settle fraud claims when they start rolling in.

    In a stunning announcement today, the Federal Trade Commission said “at least 79 percent of all MoneyGram transfers of $1,000 or more from the United States to Canada over a four-month period in 2007 were fraud-induced.”

    MoneyGram International Inc. is the second-largest money-transfer service in the United States. The Minnesota-based company has agreed to pay $18 million in “consumer redress” to settle claims it turned a blind eye to fraud and permitted “fraudulent telemarketers to bilk U.S. consumers out of tens of millions of dollars,” the FTC said.

    Using pointed language, an FTC official said MoneyGram simply could not say no to fees it earned from scammers, including scammers its agents employed.

    “Money transfer services have a responsibility to make sure their systems don’t become conduits to rip people off,” said David C. Vladeck, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “In this case, MoneyGram not only ducked this responsibility, but also looked the other way while its agents took part in the scams.”

    Con artists knew a good thing when they saw it, the FTC said.

    “MoneyGram operates through a worldwide network of approximately 180,000 agent locations in 190 countries and territories,” the FTC said. “Con artists prefer to use money transfer services because they can pick up transferred money immediately, the payments are often untraceable, and victimized consumers have no chargeback rights or other recourse.”

    In 2007, 72 percent of all complaints received by the FTC involving Canadian-based fraud reported using money transfer services to make payments, the agency said.

    And it was not a small sampling of complaints, the FTC stressed.

    “Based on the more than 20,600 fraud complaints MoneyGram itself received, U.S. consumers lost more than $44 million to cross-border money-transfer frauds between 2004 and 2008 alone,” the FTC said. “When combined with losses reported by U.S. consumers on money transfers within the United States, that number grows to $84 million.”

    At least 65 MoneyGram agents have been charged by Canadian or U.S. authorities or are under investigation in the United States for fraud, the FTC said.

    MoneyGram made excuses as complaints piled up, the agency said.

    “MoneyGram ignored warnings from law enforcement officials and even its own employees that widespread fraud was being conducted over its network, claiming that proposals to deal with the problem were too costly and were not the company’s responsibility,” the FTC said.

    “The company even discouraged its employees from enforcing its own fraud prevention policies or taking action against suspicious or corrupt agents,” the FTC said. “Some employees who raised concerns were disciplined or fired.”

    Read the FTC complaint against MoneyGram.

    Read the stipulated settlement in which MoneyGram does not acknowledge wrongdoing but agrees to pay $18 million to settle the case and to implement a comprehensive anti-fraud and agent-monitoring program.

  • BREAKING NEWS: Judge Says New Attorney May Appear In DC Court For ASD President Andy Bowdoin

    UPDATED 3:52 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) A federal judge has issued an order that permits Michael R.N. McDonnel, a Florida attorney, to appear in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of AdSurfDaily President Andy Bowdoin.

    U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer issued the order this afternoon in response to a request by Charles A. Murray, another Bowdoin attorney.

    “Michael R.N. McDonnell is hereby permitted to practice and appear before this Court on behalf of claimant Thomas A. Bowdoin in this matter,” Collyer wrote, in a minute order.

    Murray asked for the order last week, in the aftermath of dramatic filings by the prosecution that claimed Bowdoin was trying to lie his way back into the civil-forfeiture case and that Murray was engaging in “fantasy.”

    Prosecutors claimed Murray had filed documents at odds with affidavits filed by Bowdoin Sept. 14 and 15. On Sept. 25, prosecutors made a veiled reference to the AdViewGlobal autosurf, saying, “Maybe Bowdoin thought that before the government brought its charges he (like some of his family members) could move to another country and profit from a knock-off autosurf program that Bowdoin funded and helped to start.”

    On Sept. 28, prosecutors filed a U.S. Secret Service transcript of a recording Bowdoin had made earlier in the month, calling the transcript evidence that “this con man cannot manage to keep his stories straight.”

    Bowdoin has maintained in court filings that money seized in the Secret Service investigation into ASD belonged to him. In the transcript, Bowdoin said the money belonged to ASD members, putting him at odds with his own court filings.

    Murray, too, had filed motions at odds with Bowdoin’s claims, prosecutors asserted.

    “Mr. Murray’s apparent suggestion that Bowdoin made a mistake because he was ‘hoodwinked’ by his prior defense counsel is belied by Bowdoin’s own affidavits,” prosecutors said.

    Murray, though, says Bowdoin believes in his innocence.

  • EDITORIAL: The Real Meaning Of ‘Treason’

    Stewart David Nozette was arrested by the FBI yesterday for attempted espionage. Though Nozette was not formally charged with the Constitutional crime of treason — the only crime specifically described in the Constitution — the crime of espionage is viewed by the public as an act of treason against the United States because selling secrets can be viewed as a form of “levying War” against the country or giving “Aid and Comfort” to an enemy.

    Officials said Nozette accepted $11,000 in cash — with the inference more would follow — and used manila envelopes to pack up secrets. He asked for payment and delivered the secrets to, of all places, a U.S. Post Office.

    Nozette wanted his payments to be kept below $10,000 to keep the prying eyes of government away, prosecutors said. In the first two transactions, Nozette allegedly sold out his country for the price of a used car.

    Nozette thought he had been recruited by the Mossad, Israel’s spy agency. In reality, he had been targeted in an FBI sting because the government had gotten the idea he just might be willing to sell out the United States to a foreign government or entity for a fee. Prosecutors said he had left the United States in January with two computer thumb drives. Inspectors could not find the drives when he returned.

    The government of Israel was not involved in wrongdoing, authorities said.

    A thumb drive was left at the Post Office in September by Nozette, when he thought he was doing business with the Mossad, prosecutors said.

    Prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s office led by Acting U.S. Attorney Channing Phillips in the District of Columbia are assisting in the case, which will be heard in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The same court is the venue from which the the civil-forfeiture case against tens of millions of dollars seized from AdSurfDaily Inc. in an international Ponzi scheme probe is being prosecuted.

    The Nozette case demonstrates that grave matters of national security come to the attention of prosecutors in Phillips’ office and judges in the district. Sometimes the matters include elements of international intrigue, as the Nozette case again demonstrates.

    Judge Rosemary Collyer, the judge in the ASD case, presided over an extremely complex case involving former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, once National Security Adviser to President Richard M. Nixon. The case dated back to the early 1970s and involved the complicated issue of “sovereign immunity.”

    How complex were the legal issues in the case? Collyer’s own words provide a glimpse:

    “This lawsuit challenges covert actions allegedly directed by high-level United States officials in connection with an attempted coup in Chile in 1970 designed to prevent the election of Dr. Salvadore Allende as Chile’s first Socialist President,” Collyer wrote in 2004.

    “General René Schneider, then Commander-in-Chief of the Chilean Army, opposed military intervention in the electoral process,” she continued. “As a result, the United States allegedly plotted with Chilean nationals to neutralize him. General Schneider was shot during a failed kidnap[p]ing attempt on October 22, 1970, and died from his wounds a few days later. Two of General Schneider’s children and his Personal Representative, suing on behalf of his estate, seek to hold the United States and Henry A. Kissinger, former Assistant for National Security Affairs to President Richard M. Nixon, responsible for the General’s death.”

    In a ruling dismissing the case, Collyer said Kissinger could not be held responsible for the death, even if the assertions against Kissinger and the U.S. government were true.

    “The plaintiffs’ claims present a non-justiciable political question on foreign policy
    decisions undertaken by the Executive Branch in 1970,” Collyer said. “[T]he Court finds that Dr. Kissinger was properly certified as acting within the scope of his employment vis-a-vis the relevant events. The United States will be substituted for him as the sole defendant. With this substitution, the amended complaint is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.”

    Whether or not one agrees with the ruling, one must agree that Collyer was tasked with the responsibility to reduce extremely complex issues of both law and U.S. foreign policy to their essence — and view them in the framework of Constitutionality. No critic interested in fair or logical debate would dismiss her as an intellectual lightweight.

    Words Mean Things

    The reason for this column is to point out a couple of things: First, that the responsibility of federal prosecutors is to advocate in the interests of the people of the United States. Some of the same people criticizing the ASD prosecutors in excessive fashion — and even extreme fashion — perhaps will be less vocal or not vocal at all in their criticism of Phillips’ office for its role in the prosecution of Nozette.

    It is, after all, an espionage prosecution, and the American public does not take kindly to acts that speak of treason, whether it’s the treason spelled out in the Constitution or the treason inferred from the act of selling government secrets for a fee.

    And this brings us to the use of extreme language by some supporters of ASD — language directed at both the prosecution and Judge Collyer.

    Collyer, a sitting federal judge appointed by a President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate — and a federal judge who presides over issues of national security and the affairs of state, as the Nixon/Kissinger case demonstrates — was described by an ASD member as “brain dead or taking a payoff” if she ruled against ASD.

    No such comment can be viewed as reasonable.

    Other examples of extreme language directed at Collyer can be found in this court filing by ASD mainstay Curtis Richmond. The filing uses words such as “treason” and phrases such as “Willfully Violated Her Judicial Oath” thus being “Guilty of Perjury of Oath, a Felony.”

    Richmond asserted that Collyer perhaps was guilty of as many as 60 felonies.

    No such language can be viewed as reasonable.

    Prosecutors haven’t fared much better. Dozens of pro se litigants using a pro se template practically screamed their assertions that prosecutors had “failed” to do this and “failed” to do that on matters pertaining to the production of “EVIDENCE” and “WITNESSES” and “VICTIMS” and that the ASD “action was based solely on the OPINIONS of the U. S. Government agents.”

    How reasonable is it to scream in court filings?  The judicial process is designed deliberately to ensure decorum precisely to guarantee that no side gets shouted down and that issues are decided in an atmosphere of dignity.

    Moreover, the record of the ASD case plainly shows that the prosecutors have produced evidence, prior even to introducing evidence at the evidentiary hearing last fall. Eight government exhibits of evidence were included in the August 2008 filing of the complaint. It’s all in the public record — and was in the public record long before the pro se litigants shouted that no “EVIDENCE”  had been produced.

    With respect to the screamed claim that the government relied exclusively on the “OPINIONS” of its agents, the record also plainly shows that even the ASD side agrees with some of those opinions. Here are just two purported “opinions” that both the ASD side and the government side agree on:

    • That ASD advertised that rebates “will” be paid until members received back 125 percent of their “advertising” spend.
    • That the government seized the money from Andy Bowdoin and that the money belonged to Andy Bowdoin, not ASD members.

    Bowdoin officially has held that position since August 2008, just days after the seizure. It is a theme in his court filings. Recently, though, he told ASD members in a conference call that the seized money belonged to them. The claim put him at odds with his own arguments in court, which the prosecution now claims is evidence of his willingness to lie to members he claims to be serving, while also lying to a federal judge.

    With respect to the shouted claim by the pro se litigants that the government “has failed” to produce any “VICTIMS” or “WITNESSES,” the claim is disingenuous to its core. A trial date has not even been scheduled in the case. The evidentiary hearing was exactly that — a hearing, not a trial. The hearing was held at ASD’s request. Collyer granted it in “the interests of justice.” Prosecutors were not required to try their case at the hearing. Nor were they duty-bound to produce their witnesses. It was ASD’s hearing.

    Nozette’s arrest yesterday quickly became an international story. The story will play out in some of the same venues the ASD case is playing out. It will be argued by highly skilled, highly trained prosecutors.  A highly skilled, highly trained federal judge appointed by the President of the United States and approved by the U.S. Senate will preside over the proceeding “in the interests of justice” for all parties, including Nozette.

    There will no reckless claims of judicial treason or of violating a judicial oath or of operating a “Kangaroo Court” — as has been the claim in the ASD case, against both Judge Collyer and her supervising judge, Royce Lamberth.

    The Nozette case is, after all, an espionage case, one in which the public outside the courtroom will discuss the real meaning of the word treason — something some of the ASD supporters should have been doing all along.

    The ASD case is, was and always has been about national security. If you doubt it, ask yourself if you really know who your autosurfing neighbor is — and then ask yourself if you can guarantee that all ASD members were pure as the driven snow and not interested at all in using a vehicle provided by Andy Bowdoin for criminal purposes.

  • BREAKING NEWS: FBI Arrests Maryland Man With ‘Star Wars’ Knowledge On Espionage Charges; Spy Case Will Be Co-Prosecuted By Office In Charge Of Alleged ASD Ponzi

    The FBI has arrested a Maryland man in a sting and charged him with attempting to pass U.S. defense and space secrets to Israel.

    Stewart David Nozette, 52, of Chevy Chase, Md., accepted $11,000 in payments from the FBI, believing the payments had come from the Mossad, Israel’s spy agency. The payments actually came from the FBI as part of the sting, and Israel was not involved, authorities said.

    Nozette once worked for the White House. He is among a group of scientists credited with discovering water on the moon in a project known as “Clementine,” and also has vast experience in weapons systems, including the Strategic Defense Initiative, where he worked in the Office of Survivability, Lethality, and Key Technologies, according to his resume.

    The Strategic Defense Initiative, which came into being under President Reagan, was known as “Star Wars.”

    “Those who would put our nation’s defense secrets up for sale can expect to be vigorously prosecuted,” said Channing D. Phillips, Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. “This case reflects our firm resolve to hold accountable any individual who betrays the public trust by compromising our national security for his or her own personal gain.”

    Phillips is the boss of the prosecutors handling the AdSurfDaily Ponzi prosecution. His office will co-prosecute Nozette, along with the Counterespionage Section of the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

    The prosecution will occur in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the same venue in which the civil-forfeiture case against ASD’s assets is being heard. The identity of the judge assigned to hear the case was not immediately clear.

    U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer, the judge in the ASD case, is one of the judges in the district.

    Nozette, who was charged with attempted espionage, faces a maximum sentence of life in prison, if convicted. The case is a reminder of the grave matters of national security that come to the attention of prosecutors in Phillips’ office, with Washington, D.C., being the center of government in the United States.

    “The conduct alleged in this complaint is serious and should serve as a warning to anyone who would consider compromising our nation’s secrets for profit,” said David Kris, assistant Attorney General for National Security.

    “The FBI is committed to protecting the nation’s classified information and pursuing those who attempt to profit from its release or sale,” said Joseph Persichini Jr., assistant director for the FBI’s Washington Field Office.

    On Sept. 3, prosecutors said, “Nozette was contacted via telephone by an individual purporting to be an Israeli intelligence officer, but who was in fact an undercover employee of the FBI.”

    “During that call, Nozette agreed to meet with the [undercover agent] later that day at a hotel in Washington D.C. According to the affidavit, Nozette met with the [undercover agent] that day and discussed his willingness to work for Israeli intelligence,” prosecutors continued.

    “Nozette allegedly informed the [undercover agent] that he had, in the past, held top security clearances and had access to U.S. satellite information,” prosecutors said. “Nozette also allegedly said that he would be willing to answer questions about this information in exchange for money.”

    An undercover agent “explained to Nozette that the Israeli intelligence agency, or ‘Mossad,’ would arrange for a communication system so that Nozette could pass information to the Mossad in a post office box,” prosecutors said. “Nozette agreed to provide regular, continuing information to the [undercover agent] and asked for an Israeli passport.”

    On Sept. 4, Nozette and the undercover agent met again in the same hotel, prosecutors said.

    During the meeting, Nozette told the agent that, although he no longer had legal access to any classified information at a U.S. government facility, “he could, nonetheless, recall the classified information to which he had been granted access, indicating that it was all still in his head,” prosecutors said.

    Nozette inquired about getting paid, saying “he preferred to receive cash amounts ‘under ten thousand’ [dollars] so he didn’t have to report it,” prosecutors said.

    At the conclusion of the Sept. 4 meeting,  Nozette said to the undercover agent, “Well I should tell you my first need is that they should figure out how to pay me . . . they don’t expect me to do this for free,” prosecutors said.

    Undercover FBI agents left $2,000 in cash in a letter in a designated post office box for Nozette on Sept. 10, prosecutors said.

    “In the letter, the FBI asked Nozette to answer a list of questions concerning U.S. satellite information,” prosecutors said. “The serial numbers of the bills were recorded. Nozette retrieved the questions and the money from the post office the same day.”

    On Sept. 16, agents captured Nozette on videotape as he left “a manila envelope in the designated post office box in the District of Columbia. The next day, FBI agents retrieved the sealed manila envelope that Nozette had dropped off and found, among other things, a one-page document containing answers to the questions posed by the undercover agents and an encrypted computer thumb drive.

    “One of answers provided by Nozette contained information classified as Secret, which concerned capabilities of a prototype overhead collection system,” prosecutors said. “In addition, Nozette allegedly offered to reveal additional classified information that directly concerned nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, and other major weapons systems.”

    On Sept. 17,  undercover FBI agents left a second letter in the post office box for Nozette.

    “In the letter, the FBI asked Nozette to answer another list of questions concerning U.S. satellite information,” prosecutors said. “The FBI also left a cash payment of $9,000 in the post office box.”

    Nozette retrieved the questions and the cash from the post office box later that same day, prosecutors said.

    On Oct 1, undercover agents videotaped Nozette “leaving a manila envelope in the post office box,” prosecutors said. “Later that day, FBI agents retrieved the manila envelope left by Nozette and found a second set of answers from him. The answers contained information classified as both Top Secret and Secret that concerned U.S. satellites, early warning systems, means of defense or retaliation against large-scale attack, communications intelligence information, and major elements of defense strategy.”

  • 68-Year-Old Texas Woman Charged In Alleged Ponzi

    A 68-year-old Texas woman has been charged with running a $500,000 Ponzi scheme.

    Julia Ann Schmidt was indicted in Waco. She now joins a roster of other senior citizens recently implicated in alleged Ponzi schemes or convicted of crimes in which a Ponzi was the modus operandi.

    Federal prosecutors said today that Schmidt posed as an agent for Fortis Investments.

    Between April 2007 and May 2009, Schmidt “solicited money from clients promising to generate an approximate 30% return on their investments,” prosecutors said. “Schmidt informed clients that portions of their investments would involve the Texas Ranger Museum, Hillcrest Hospital and the Waco Riverwalk Project.”

    Unsuspecting investors were fleeced out of more than $500,000, prosecutors said. The FBI is handing the probe. Investors who believe they were scammed by Schmidt are asked to call the Waco office at 254-772-1627, according to Acting U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy.

    Some Recent Ponzi Schemes Featuring Seniors

    Topping the list of seniors implicated in Ponzi schemes, age-wise, is Richard Piccoli, the alleged operator of the Gen-See Ponzi in the Buffalo, N.Y., area. Piccoli is 82.

    Arthur Nadel, implicated in Florida amid allegations more than $300 million in investor funds went missing in a Ponzi scheme, is 76.

    Andy Bowdoin, who presided over the alleged $100 million AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme in Quincy, Fla., is 74.

    Bernard Madoff, convicted in an alleged $65 billion Ponzi, is 71. In June, Madoff was sentenced to 150 years in prison.

    Ronald Keith Owens, 73, was sentenced in January to 60 years in prison for operating a “prime bank” Ponzi scheme that allegedly was set up in the Bahamas and elsewhere.

    James Blackman Roberts, 71, of Heber Springs, Ark., was sentenced in January to 15 years in prison for running a $43.5 million Ponzi scheme.

    Larry Atkins, 65, was convicted of swindling investors of $3 million in a North Dakota Ponzi scheme. In February, he was sentenced to eight years in prison.

    Judith Zabalaoui, 71, was accused in February of swindling Greater New Orleans clients out of more than $3.2 million in an elaborate Ponzi fraud. In August, she was sentenced to eight years in prison.

    Zabalaoui established a bogus entity known as Paragon Co., which actually was a mailbox Zabalaoui rented at a UPS store in Montrose, Colo., prosecutors said.

    Part of the scheme was to call the mailbox a “suite,” prosecutors said.

    Zabalaoui also set up a fake company known as Omni Clearing, this time using a UPS store in Dover, Del. Prosecutors said she invented “fictitious people,” claiming they were employees, fabricated emails using the names of fictitious employees, and she set up a phone, fax and email systems to help perpetrate the fraud.

    She collected millions in the the scheme by promising “safe” and “guaranteed” returns ranging from 13 percent to 26 percent, prosecutors said.

    Read a prosecution filing on Zabalaoui.

  • UPDATE: No Vana Blue Shares Have Traded Hands Since Oct. 8; No Praebius Communications Trades Since Oct. 9

    UPDATED 4:30 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) No shares of Vana Blue were reported traded today. No trades have occurred since Oct. 8, a period encompassing seven full trading days. Some shares of Praebius did trade today, so its string of no trading since Oct. 9 ended.

    Here, below, our earlier post . . .

    Two Pinksheet penny stocks whose names became associated with the so-called autosurf “industry” have not recorded any trading of shares for days.

    No shares of Vana Blue have traded hands since Oct. 8, a period that includes six full trading days and part of a seventh. No Praebius Communications shares have traded hands since Oct. 9.

    In news releases, Vana Blue identified itself as the owner of eWalletPlus, a payment processor later linked to the AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf.

    Vana Blue, which used mailing services in Phoenix and Las Vegas as its address, is a registered corporation in Nevada. Its website now resolves to a server that beams ads.

    The company has claimed to own a company that variously has been described as TMS Corp. and TMS Association, which purportedly developed eWalletPlus. In January, Vana Blue also claimed to own a company that variously has been described as Karveck Corp. or Karveck International, a purported advertising and media company.

    In February, Vana Blue reported that Karveck had posted $1.8 million in revenue in January — the month AVG was in prelaunch.

    In an August news release, Vana Blue said it “has canceled all agreements with Karveck Int’l and has no affiliation with [the] company or its affiliates.”

    The company claimed to own Karveck International in February 2009, declaring it a “newly acquired asset” that had produced $1.8 million in revenue in January. Karveck was described as a company that “specializes in internet advertising and promotion in a search engine and ad clicking type environment.”

    Vana Blue’s August news release, however, said the deal once described as completed never was finalized and that the cancellation came as a result of “further due diligence.”

    AVG, an autosurfing company with close ties to AdSurfDaily Inc., suspended member cashouts in June. The U.S. Secret Service seized tens of millions of dollars from ASD President Andy Bowdoin in August 2008, amid allegations of wire fraud, money-laundering and operating an international Ponzi scheme.

    On Sept. 30 and Oct. 1 of last year, an evidentiary hearing in the ASD forfeiture case was held in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The hearing centered on the Ponzi allegations, ASD’s “rebate” program and issues of income streams and solvency.

    In August, prosecutors said ASD was insolvent.

    “According to its own records, ASD sold ad packages worth approximately $39 million during the Miami rally, worth over $29 million from the Tampa convention, and worth over $27 million from the Chicago rally,” prosecutors said. “Even without including ad ‘sales’ that occurred over the Internet and the bonuses offered to rally participants, ASD would need assets of more than $118 million to pay these individuals their 125% return,” prosecutors said.

    At the evidentiary hearing, ASD introduced an unaudited balance sheet that showed it had posted approximately $100.88 million in revenue in the first seven months of 2008. Prosecutors countered by saying ASD had promised to pay out more money than it had taken in, producing evidence showing ASD “will” pay rebates until members received 125 percent of what they had paid for “advertising.”

    U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer did not make a ruling from the bench at the conclusion of the hearing, instructing attorneys from both sides to prepare additional briefs and noting she would take the testimony and evidence introduced by both sides at the hearing under advisement.

    During the period in which Collyer was deliberating the Ponzi and solvency issues, ASD announced on its Breaking News website that it expected a $200 million capital infusion from Praebius. Some ASD members raced to forums and websites covering the ASD case to share the news about the purported Praebius venture.

    Some ASD members, however, questioned the news. ASD then removed its announcement about Praebius from the Breaking News website.

    Shares of Vana Blue traded hands during 11 straight trading days between Sept. 10 and Sept. 24. After Sept. 24, shares traded hands in six of the 10 trading days through Oct. 8. No trades have posted since Oct. 8.

  • EDITORIAL: Another Major Thread Goes ‘Poof’ At Surf’s Up

    UPDATED 9:39 P.M. EDT (U.S.A.) A thread at the Pro-AdSurfDaily Surf’s Up forum went missing this morning after a days-long debate in which federal prosecutors were called “goons” and a member repeatedly insisted that a government attorney had acknowledged that ASD was not a Ponzi scheme.

    The thread was titled “William Cowden Resigned.”

    Various Surf’s Up posters have claimed for a more than a year that ASD prosecutor William Cowden, now in private practice, had said ASD was not a Ponzi scheme. The claim was made prior even to an evidentiary hearing held on Sept. 30 and Oct. 1 of last year, and has been made repeatedly since then.

    On Oct. 10, 2008, nine days after the evidentiary hearing had concluded, for example, ASD mainstay Robert Fava circulated an email in which the claim was made. Fava’s email contained an analysis of the evidentiary hearing and post-hearing filings by attorneys from both sides by an ASD member named “Ken.”

    “Everything really hinges on the fact that it was not a Ponzi and the AG has already admitted to the fact that it WAS NOT A PONZI,” Fava’s email quoted “Ken” as saying. Another section of the email noted that Judge Rosemary Collyer would have to be “brain dead or taking a payoff” if she ruled against ASD.

    The claim appears to be part of a disinformation campaign to keep hope alive that the government does not believe in its own case and that the Ponzi elements could unravel at any moment, thus voiding the prosecution’s claim that ASD had engaged in wire-fraud and money laundering.

    Some Surf’s Up members have asserted that, if the government can’t prove a Ponzi, then it cannot prove other crimes occurred inside ASD.

    At the same time, some Surf’s Up posters have claimed prosecutors are guilty of an Unconstitutional money-grab and denying ASD due process. The claims have been made repeatedly, even though a federal judge reviewed search-warrant applications before approving them and issued warrants to “arrest” ASD’s assets — and even though ASD has argued its case in the forfeiture proceeding in court — a court open to the public and a court in which ASD members themselves attended the proceeding.

    Despite the claim against Cowden, nothing in the record of the case suggests he ever said ASD was not a Ponzi scheme. In fact, the hearing on the Ponzi issues was held without objection from Cowden.

    Then-prosecutor Cowden even cross-examined ASD’s expert witness — MLM attorney Gerald Nehra — who asserted ASD was not a Ponzi scheme.

    Cowden cross-examined Nehra on Nehra’s opinion ASD was not a Ponzi scheme and on the subject of ASD’s “rebate” program. Cowden demonstrated in the courtroom — with Nehra on the witness stand — that ASD had said rebates “will” be paid until a customer received 125 percent of his or her ad spend — in other words, 25 percent more than the customer had paid ASD for “advertising.”

    “Now,” Cowden asked Nehra, who was on the witness stand, “have you ever seen in the ASD rebate program the representation that [ASD] makes that rebates will (emphasis added) be paid up to a hundred and twenty-five percent, correct?”

    “We have discussed that in the — ” Nehra answered.

    “Is that correct?” Cowden asked, returning to his question about whether ASD had said rebates “will” be paid.

    “Yes,” Nehra reponded, “I have seen that.”

    “Mr. Nehra, yes or no answer, that’s what it says, rebates will be paid up to a hundred and twenty-five percent?” Cowden asked again, in a bid to solidify the answer for the record.

    “It does say that, counselor,” Nehra answered.

    “One hundred twenty-five percent is more money than you put in, right?” Cowden asked.

    “Yes,” Nehra answered.

    Months after the evidentiary hearing concluded, dozens of ASD pro se litigants filed templated court documents that accused the government of not producing “any EVIDENCE of alleged wrongdoing.”

    The government, however, introduced evidence at the evidentiary hearing, including evidence upon which Nehra had been cross-examined by Cowden. The government also introduced video evidence and written evidence. The first government filing of evidence occurred on Aug. 5, 2008, and included eight separate exhibits.

    Had Cowden or the government told a federal judge or ASD’s attorneys that ASD was not a Ponzi scheme — before the hearing or after — one of the key prongs of the government’s strategy in the case would have collapsed. There would have been no reason for Cowden to cross-examine Nehra on the Ponzi elements. Bowdoin’s attorneys would have had Cowden for lunch.

    It does not seem even to have occurred to the ASD members making the claim about Cowden that, in the early hours after the hearing concluded, they also snickered about Cowden returning again and again to the subject of ASD paying a rebate of 125 percent. One of the key issues of the 125 percent promise was how ASD was funding the payouts. The prosecution always has argued that the payouts were made in classic Ponzi fashion, with money taken from new members to pay earlier members.

    By snickering about Cowden’s consistent return to the 125 percent theme, the ASD members were disproving their own argument that Cowden had said ASD was not a Ponzi scheme.

    Not only did the Ponzi theory not collapse, the government used information gleaned from the testimony at the evidentiary hearing in a second forfeiture complaint filed against ASD’s assets. The second complaint was filed more than two months after the Surf’s Up posters first asserted that Cowden had said ASD was not a Ponzi scheme — and Cowden signed the December complaint, arguing again that ASD had operated as a Ponzi.

    “ASD operated as a ‘Ponzi’ operation whereby it took money from investors — it termed its investors ‘members’ and ‘advertisers’ — by promising its investors that it would pay to those investors 125% of their out-of-pocket investment,” argued Cowden in December, along with former U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor and Assistant U.S. Attorney Vasu B. Muthyala.

    The court filing was verified by Roy Dotson, a special agent for the U.S. Secret Service.

    Cowden, Taylor and Dotson — at various times — became the subjects of a certified-mail campaign by ASD members to discredit them. They also became the subjects of a letter-writing campaign to Sen. Patrick Leahy in which the senders asked the U.S. Senate to investigate not an alleged $100 million Ponzi scheme, but the public servants who stopped the scheme before it could mushroom globally.

    In the fall of 2008, Surf’s Up hinted that a secret weapon against the government soon would come into play. In October, ASD Members International (ASDMI) was formed. ASDMI’s founders consisted of Surf’s Up members.

    “Professor” Patrick Moriarty was listed in Missouri records as the registered agent of the organization, which had registered as a nonprofit. Surf’s Up Mod Barb McIntyre was listed as Secretary.

    ASDMI solicited money from ASD members to do battle with the government. The organization made the odd claim that it would litigate against the government even if the government was behaving legally.

    If civil litigation did not work, ASDMI suggested, it would see about having the prosecutors charged with crimes.

    Patrick Moriarty, a co-founder of ASDMI, instructed ASD visitors to his personal website to make checks and money orders for $50 payable to “P.M.G.Int.,” which stands for Pacific Ministry of Giving International, Curtis Richmond’s Utah-based entity.

    Moriarty instructed participants in a mail campaign against the prosecutors and Secret Service to mail the checks and money orders to him in Missouri. The $50 fee would be used to defray the costs of notarization, “several certified mailings, typing, paper and other necessary administrative costs.”

    ASDMI itself charged a $20 fee for its own version of presumptive litigation against the government.

    Richmond, who said in court filings that Pacific Ministry of Giving International had lost $41,000 as a result of the government seizure of ASD’s funds, is associated with a Utah “Indian” tribe a federal judge in a separate case ruled a “complete sham.” At least two people who used the services of a sham “arbitration” panel connected to the tribe to litigate against the Internal Revenue Service or other creditors were convicted of federal crimes such as tax evasion and mail fraud and sentenced to prison.

    Moriarty was a key participant in a certified-mail campaign involving the ASD prosecutors, asking ASD members to make checks and money orders payable to Richmond’s Pacific Ministry of Giving International, which is registered in Utah as a “Corporation – Sole” under “Religious Organizations.”

    In March 2009, Moriarty was indicted in Missouri for alleged tax crimes that occurred between 2002 and 2006. In February 2009 — at Surf’s Up — he was positioned as the leader of a letter-writing campaign to Leahy

    “Over 50 individual and notarized DEMAND[S] FOR LEGAL EVIDENCE were sent to Jeffrey Taylor, US Attorney; William Cowden, Assistant US Attorney; and Roy Dotson, Special Agent, US Secret Service,” Moriarty said in a letter to Leahy, D.-Vermont. “Not once did any of these three Government Servants respond.”

    Leahy is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

    “Innocent Americans have suffered and continue to suffer because of these incredulous and despicable acts” by prosecutors, Moriarty said.

    Screen shot: Snapshot of section from Government Exhibit 3, which has been in the public record since Aug. 8, 2008. The exhibit reproduces the AdSurfDaily Terms of Service as the document existed on July 24, 2008, in the opening weeks of a U.S. Secret Service investigation into the company's business affairs. The exhibit shows that ASD advertised that advertisers "will be paid rabates until they receive 125 percent of their ad purchases" and that "Your ad purchase will expire when you receive a 125% rebate of your advertising cost."
    Screen shot: Snapshot of section from Government Exhibit 3, which has been in the public record since Aug. 5, 2008. The exhibit reproduces the AdSurfDaily Terms of Service as the document existed on July 24, 2008, in the opening weeks of a U.S. Secret Service investigation into the company's business affairs. The exhibit shows ASD advertised that advertisers "will be paid rebates until they receive 125% of their ad purchases" and that "Your ad purchase will expire when you receive a 125% rebate of your advertising cost."

    Despite the August 2008 forfeiture complaint in which the U.S. Secret Service and federal prosecutors first made the Ponzi claim — and despite the fact ASD asked for a hearing to demonstrate it was not a Ponzi and that the prosecution did not object to the hearing — and despite the fact Cowden cross-examined Nehra on the Ponzi issues and that Nehra acknowledged on the stand that ASD said rebates “will” be paid up to 125 percent — some Surf’s Up members continue to argue that Cowden said ASD was not a Ponzi scheme.

    Perhaps most striking of all is that the government, including Cowden, reasserted the Ponzi argument in the December complaint (filed 10 months ago tomorrow) — and some Surf’s Up members still are arguing that Cowden had said ASD was not a Ponzi scheme.

    All of the court information contained in this post is in the public record of the case.

    Judge Rosemary Collyer’s ruling that ASD had not demonstrated at the evidentiary hearing that it was a lawful business and not a Ponzi scheme — coincidentally, 11 months old tomorrow — is in the public record. The August 2008 filing in which the government reproduced the ASD Terms of Service showing the surf had said rebates “will” be paid up to 125 percent is in the public record. So are the initial eight exhibits of government evidence against ASD.

    ASD was permitted to continue to sell advertising after the seizure of its assets, but chose not to do so. It is not illegal to sell advertising online. One of the key issues of the ASD case is how the company funded rebates — which generally are not illegal — but can become illegal if a company is skirting securities laws by purporting to be an “advertising” company when it actually is an unregistered issuer of securities sold as investment contracts.

    But the securities allegation is just one of allegations against ASD. Prosecutors said the company was engaging in wire fraud and money-laundering. Meanwhile, private litigants have accused the company of racketeering.

    ASD President Andy Bowdoin has never responded to the racketeering complaint, which was filed in Florida November 2008, in the immediate aftermath of Collyer’s ruling against the firm. The initial racketeering lawsuit was dismissed by the plaintiffs in Florida and refiled in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in January 2009, in the immediate aftermath of Bowdoin’s decision to submit to the government forfeiture.

    Attorneys for the racketeering plaintiffs — consisting of three ASD members who seek class-action certification in the lawsuit against Bowdoin — referenced the AdViewGlobal (AVG) autosurf in a June filing, saying the surf was the next iteration of ASD and employed individuals who worked for ASD.

    On Sept. 25, the government made a veiled reference to AVG in court filings.

    Both ASD and AVG potentially face a ton of trouble in the coming weeks and months — but more than a year after the evidentiary hearing was held, some Surf’s Up posters continue to argue that the government itself, despite all the evidence to the contrary, had said ASD was not a Ponzi scheme.

    At the same time, posts and entire threads continue to go “poof” at Surf’s Up, perhaps especially when other posters argue that the government just might have a legitimate point of view.

  • NEWS AND NOTES: Arrests Made In Ponzi And Affinity Fraud Scheme That Targeted 21 Michigan Churches; Pennsylvania Man Accused Of Targeting Credit Unions In Ponzi Scheme

    Two Maryland men were charged and arrested, amid allegations they fleeced 21 Michigan churches out of $660,000 in a Ponzi and affinity fraud scheme in which pastors were duped into giving a leasing company access to church bank accounts.

    Authorities said the men perhaps targeted more than 160 churches in 13 states and the District of Columbia. Investigations in multiple jurisdictions are under way.

    Meanwhile, a Pennsylvania man has been charged with bilking credit unions in three counties out of $2 million in a Ponzi scheme involving certificates of deposit.

    In the Michigan case, Michael J. Morris and William T. Perkins were charged Oct. 5, but remained at large. They were arrested Oct. 9, and arraigned in Wayne County, Mich.

    Morris and Perkins were charged with multiple felonies, including one count of Conducting a Criminal Enterprise (Racketeering); one count of Conspiracy to Commit False Pretenses Over $20,000; four counts of False Pretenses Over $20,000; and four counts of Fraudulently Obtaining a Signature.

    Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox said Morris and Perkins were representatives of Television Broadcasting Online and Urban Interfaith Network.

    The scheme involved obtaining money from leasing companies and making churches responsible for repayment of the funds through brazen deceit, Cox said in a statement.

    Morris and Perkins “approached Michigan churches and offered to provide electronic kiosks free of charge for use in religious education, community events and fundraising,” prosecutors said. “The pastors were told that a ‘national sponsor’ would cover all costs in exchange for advertising that would run on the machines.”

    Churches then were “convinced to sign leases, described as a formality, on each kiosk,” prosecutors said. “In reality, the churches unknowingly became responsible for the full purchase price of the kiosk.”

    Although the kiosks were worth about $2,000, the scammers inflated the price to $27,000 and sold the agreements they’d fleeced the churches into signing to a leasing company, prosecutors said.

    Despite the fact Morris and Perkins promised the churches a “national sponsor,” no such sponsor existed, prosecutors said. The fraud morphed into a Ponzi scheme when the duo took some of the proceeds and applied them to initial payments due on the machines, pocketing the rest, prosecutors said.

    “When the defendants later stopped making payments, the leasing companies, following the terms of the leasing contracts, demanded payment directly from the churches,” prosecutors said. “In some cases, the contracts allowed leasing companies to take funds directly from church bank accounts, leaving churches in economic distress.”

    Targeted churches included:

    1. Charity Lutheran Church (Detroit)
    2. Emmanuel Institutional Church of God in Christ (Detroit)
    3. Epiphany Lutheran Church (Highland Park)
    4. Faith Redemption Center Church of God in Christ (Detroit)
    5. Great Faith Ministries International (Detroit)
    6. Greater Mount Zion Baptist Church (Detroit)
    7. Greater Northwest COGIC (Detroit)
    8. Jesus Tabernacle of Deliverance Church (Detroit)
    9. Nazareth Evangelical Lutheran Congregation (Detroit)
    10. New Mount Hermon Baptist Church (Detroit)
    11. New Resurrection Church of God (Detroit)
    12. Samaritan MBC (Detroit)
    13. The Spirit and Truth Christian Ministries (Detroit)
    14. El-Shaddai MBC Church (Ferndale)
    15. Pentecostal Temple Church – God (Inkster)
    16. All Nation Church of God in Christ (Port Huron)
    17. New Jerusalem Full Gospel Baptist Church (Flint)
    18. Greater Coleman Temple Church of God in Christ (Saginaw)
    19. Grace Fellowship Church of God in Christ (Ypsilanti)
    20. Mount Olive Church of God in Christ (Ypsilanti)
    21. Whitehead Memorial Church of God in Christ (Ypsilanti)

    Cox said the crime was disgraceful.

    “In this difficult economy, families depend more and more on good works provided by local churches, ” Cox said. “By essentially pilfering the bank accounts of these ministries the defendants didn’t just violate the sanctity of the church, they stole form the entire community.”

    Pennsylvania Case

    Eugene D. Miley, 58, of Beaver, defrauded credit unions in Armstrong, Westmoreland and Luzerne counties out of $2 million in a Ponzi scheme, said Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett.

    Miley served as a financial broker for clients, “offering to locate and purchase high-interest-rate certificates of deposit (CDs) for those institutions,” prosecutors said.

    “Instead of purchasing CDs, Miley allegedly diverted the funds for his own personal use, depending on new credit union purchases to pay-off older fictitious ‘investments,’” prosecutors said.

    It was all smoke and mirrors, Corbett said.

    “Miley claimed to be helping his clients earn a good return on their investments, but this was simply an illusion,” Corbett said. “As with other Ponzi schemes, the money received from new clients was used to pay-off older investors, or siphoned off for personal use, until the flow of new money stopped — causing the operation to collapse and leaving victims with nothing more than empty promises.”

    Miley, prosecutors said, sold $2,080,000 in fictitious CDs between 2006 and 2008, including $1,387,000 to Moonlight Credit Union in Worthington, Armstrong County; $594,000 to VANtage Trust Credit Union in Wilkes-Barre, Luzerne County; and $99,000 to Stanwood Area Credit Union, in New Stanton, Westmoreland County.

    eugenemileycutlineThe scheme centered on Miley’s ability to trade on trust, Corbett said, noting that Miley had longtime business relationships with each of the credit unions.

    Investigators determined that Miley was not licensed to operate as a financial investment company, financial adviser or financial products dealer in Pennsylvania.

    He was charged with multiple felonies, including one count of securities fraud; one count of selling unregistered securities; and three counts each of theft by deception and theft by failure to make required disposition of funds.

    Although Miley posted bail, which had been set at $50,000, he was placed on electronic monitoring and ordered not to leave Pennsylvania.