Is there such a thing as "Guilt by Association" Below are three different cases ... you decide.Guilt By Association? One example (older case) would be the Bernie Madoff Case
Friends, Family Members & Business Associates of Bernie Madoff
You know that Bernie Madoff has plead his guilt to the court in the securities fraud case against him, as well as perjury; however, the investigators who are delving into this long-term Ponzi scam are allegedly, having to investigate his business associates, some of his family members, and his tax accountant too. There is so much missing money…that many observers automatically assume that the money has been hidden among those that he has personal relationships with; whether that is true or not, remains to be seen.
It leaves the impression of guilt by association, though this is unfortunate, because many of them may not have had any idea about the fraud that was taking place. I personally doubt whether he advertised the fact of what he was doing, to his friends and family; it isn’t something most people would be proud of. I am thinking about his wife in particular; did she know where the money in their lives came from? She is also allegedly, being investigated; and, unless she had direct involvement in the day-to-day business operations…how would she know what he did while he was at work?
Still, if the money in their accounts is found to be accumulated from the fraud; the government could confiscate it couldn’t they? His own family members could end up being “victims” of his actions, just as well as, those who lost so much financially! Bernie will be sentenced for his crimes in June. What the additional investigation finds, will also determine what happens to the others that are being investigated by their association with Bernie Madoff. Bernie may have plead guilty, but, if this investigation negatively impacts his friends and family…you have to wonder if he will actually feel any guilt!
In this kind of a case, the cloud of suspicion could literally destroy many more lives than those that have already been destroyed. If Bernie Madoff could admit his guilt in court…why can’t he just be honest and tell the investigators where the money is? Maybe if some of the money could be found…maybe some of the people who were ripped off could get some of their money back. If he is keeping that missing money information to himself…it could destroy those that he supposedly cares about, such as his wife, children, business associates and such. Let the guilty be found out…and the innocent be proven so; still, what if the money is found in their accounts without their having knowledge of the scam?
So many lives have been destroyed by this security fraud…this Ponzi scam this abuse of trust, it is sickening. People have lost so much of their money that they counted on to survive. It makes a person intensely frustrated and angry that Mr. Madoff will be sitting in a prison cell…getting three meals a day and all of his basic needs will be met; while his “victims” future is still up in the air. The levels of trust and responsibility that we put in our leaders is immense and needs honored by meeting those levels of trust and responbility and exceeding it! This damages everyone’s ability to trust those in authority, who’s decisions affect our lives…has it affected how you trust people?
____2. and Another case ... watch @ link provided
You know that Bernie Madoff has plead his guilt to the court in the securities fraud case against him, as well as perjury; however, the investigators who are delving into this long-term Ponzi scam are allegedly, having to investigate his business associates, some of his family members, and his tax accountant too. There is so much missing money…that many observers automatically assume that the money has been hidden among those that he has personal relationships with; whether that is true or not, remains to be seen.
It leaves the impression of guilt by association, though this is unfortunate, because many of them may not have had any idea about the fraud that was taking place. I personally doubt whether he advertised the fact of what he was doing, to his friends and family; it isn’t something most people would be proud of. I am thinking about his wife in particular; did she know where the money in their lives came from? She is also allegedly, being investigated; and, unless she had direct involvement in the day-to-day business operations…how would she know what he did while he was at work?
Still, if the money in their accounts is found to be accumulated from the fraud; the government could confiscate it couldn’t they? His own family members could end up being “victims” of his actions, just as well as, those who lost so much financially! Bernie will be sentenced for his crimes in June. What the additional investigation finds, will also determine what happens to the others that are being investigated by their association with Bernie Madoff. Bernie may have plead guilty, but, if this investigation negatively impacts his friends and family…you have to wonder if he will actually feel any guilt!
In this kind of a case, the cloud of suspicion could literally destroy many more lives than those that have already been destroyed. If Bernie Madoff could admit his guilt in court…why can’t he just be honest and tell the investigators where the money is? Maybe if some of the money could be found…maybe some of the people who were ripped off could get some of their money back. If he is keeping that missing money information to himself…it could destroy those that he supposedly cares about, such as his wife, children, business associates and such. Let the guilty be found out…and the innocent be proven so; still, what if the money is found in their accounts without their having knowledge of the scam?
So many lives have been destroyed by this security fraud…this Ponzi scam this abuse of trust, it is sickening. People have lost so much of their money that they counted on to survive. It makes a person intensely frustrated and angry that Mr. Madoff will be sitting in a prison cell…getting three meals a day and all of his basic needs will be met; while his “victims” future is still up in the air. The levels of trust and responsibility that we put in our leaders is immense and needs honored by meeting those levels of trust and responbility and exceeding it! This damages everyone’s ability to trust those in authority, who’s decisions affect our lives…has it affected how you trust people?
____2. and Another case ... watch @ link provided
http://www.wmur.com/r/26128709/detail.html
CONCORD, N.H. -- One of the founders of Financial Resources Mortgage testified Tuesday about his role in what prosecutors called the largest Ponzi scheme in state history.
Donald Dodge appeared with his attorney, Mark Howard, at the State House, where he was questioned by attorneys from the secretary of state's office. Howard told the panel Dodge was testifying voluntarily and would not invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Investors said they lost millions of dollars when FRM closed abruptly in 2009. Dodge has pleaded guilty to wire fraud and faces up to 10 years in prison.
Dodge admitted that he was involved in the creation of FRM and allowed co-founder Scott Farah to use his credit to help finance setting up the company. But he said he was in the dark about the scheme until the end, and he described himself as the victim of a con man.
"I wanted to leave this world," Dodge said. "I did not want to ever see my wife or anyone I care about."
Dodge said he was the owner of FRM at the beginning, but he eventually sold the majority of his stock to Farah. Dodge ran CL&M, a loan -servicing company that was tied to FRM. He told state regulators that up until the final 10 days of the company, Farah was always able to pay investors involved in the fragile pyramid Farah kept intact for 15 years.
"Any time I would express any concern, within seconds, he would show me what was on the books," Dodge said. "He came up and saw me at least 10 times a day, and at least one of those times he would bring me a list of what was coming in."
That list included an investor in Dubai claiming to have $300 million to invest and a man named Paul Anderson who also wanted to invest $300 million. But that money never materialized, Dodge said. Dodge's wife invested heavily with Farah to the tune of $75,000.
"I gave him everything that I had, every penny I had, and I gave him my wife's money and my office manager, and I thought it was the best thing I ever heard of, and I thought I was doing an excellent job," he said.
Half a dozen victims of the FRM scheme were in the hearing room. Investor Al McIlvene said he believes Dodge was fooled, but he said he believes Dodge became a criminal when he used $20 million of lenders' money without their permission to bail Farah out in the end.
"Why he felt it was his discretionary money that belonged to CL&M and just loan it to Scott -- what was his reasoning? His justification?" McIlvene said. "That's, in my opinion, an unforgivable decision on his part."
Dodge said he made a mistake by lending the money.
"It is now clear that setting up this line of credit was a breach of my fiduciary responsibility as a custodian over other people's monies," he said.
Dodge went on to admit he hid the arrangement from lenders.
Farah is scheduled to testify before the panel on Wednesday
______ and most recently
December 29, 2010
3. JPMorgan sued by Ponzi schemer Petters' receiver
JPMorgan Chase & Co and several other defendants were sued by the receiver for Minnesota businessman Tom Petters, who accused them of missing clues that would have alerted them to the convicted Ponzi schemer's $3.65 billion fraud.
The receiver, Douglas Kelley, said the defendants received more than $300 million from Petters' scheme.
Kelley said this sum included more than $240 million from the sale of camera maker Polaroid Holding Co by JPMorgan's private equity affiliate One Equity Partners LP to Petters' company, Petters Group Worldwide Inc.
"The windfall that JPMorgan would earn on the transaction gave JPMorgan an incentive to ignore red flags that would have revealed the massive Ponzi scheme that Petters used to fund the Polaroid purchase," Kelley wrote in a complaint filed Wednesday in a Minnesota federal court.
Other defendants in the case include several former executives at Polaroid who were also directors at One Equity.
Kelley is seeking to recover money the defendants got from the Polaroid sale, plus assets the bank seized from Petters' accounts when the Ponzi scheme unraveled. He said Petters had held "numerous" accounts at JPMorgan from 2001 to 2008.
JPMorgan did not immediately return requests for comment.
Petters was sentenced in April to 50 years in prison after a federal jury convicted him on 20 criminal counts including wire fraud, mail fraud and money laundering.
The Ponzi scheme is one of the largest ever uncovered.
Petters, 53, is serving his term in a federal prison in Leavenworth, Kansas, and is not expected to be released until April 2052, Federal Bureau of Prison records show.
The case is Kelley v. JPMorgan Chase & Co et al, U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, No. 10-04999.
source
