Showing posts with label greed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label greed. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

The Case All About Greed--Update

In July I told you about the bullet-proof vest/defense contractor David H. Brooks (pic, left and below) on trial for scamming shareholders and looting his business to fund a lifestyle of pure greed. 

The New York Post is reporting that Brooks has been found guilty on all 17 counts in his federal criminal trial. 

Brooks, as you will recall is famous for throwing his daughter a $10 million dollar Rainbow Room Bat Mitzvah featuring Aerosmith and the rapper 50Cent.  Jurors were reportedly shocked that he stole millions from his compayn for plastic surgery and prostitutes.  If you look closely at the pic, above, you can see his jewel encrusted American Flag belt buckle purportedly costing $100k!  All about greed.

At the link you can read the original Bad Lawyer post.

Sunday, August 8, 2010

"Unvarnished Greed"

Every once in a while I come across a story that grabs me and shakes me to my very core.

Obviously, I relate and to some extent see a reflectin of my own struggle to be honest about who I am and what I did.  Also, how do I see the world? 

The account of the prospective sentencing of former investment banker and broker, Rhonda Breard, in Seattle is one of those stories.  In a poignant Seattle Times profile, reporter, Mike Carter gets at the issues that are at the heart of our material world.  Carter's story in excerpt, follows:

"Disgraced Kirkland investment broker Rhonda Breard (pic) says that unvarnished greed and 'wanting to be like every rich person she ever met' led her to embezzle millions from her clients, and she believes she should go to prison — but not for as long as the government wants.

Breard is scheduled to be sentenced next Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Seattle on a single count of mail fraud. Federal sentencing guidelines suggest she be locked up for between roughly 8 and 10 years. The crime carries a maximum penalty of 20 years.

However, Breard, 48, in sentencing documents filed with the court this week, says her voluntary and extensive cooperation with prosecutors, financial regulators and ING Financial Partners, which had licensed her, support a sentence of 5 years and 8 months. It would allow her to get out of prison before her two youngest children, ages 9 and 11, turn 18, 'and she will be able to be a mother to them thereafter,' according to the documents.  'This is good for everyone,'  wrote Breard's attorney, Ronald Friedman.

Federal prosecutors, citing Breard's exceptional cooperation, are pushing for an eight-year sentence.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Carl Blackstone, who heads the office's Complex Crimes Division, noted that Breard only cooperated after she'd been found out and that the thefts had gone on for a decade.  The documents filed by U.S. prosecutors and Breard also provide updated numbers of victims and the amount of money Breard stole from them: 43 of her roughly 100 investors lost $11.4 million, nearly $2 million more than previously reported. They also say that Breard began taking money as early as 2000, four years earlier than previously thought.

In federal court, the prosecution and defense can file a sentencing memorandum with factors they want the court to consider during sentencing.

According to court documents, Breard used the money to travel and live lavishly. Breard owned three luxury homes, including a $2.6 million home on Lake Washington, and 27 cars, boats, trucks and recreational vehicles.  The government recovered $250,000 in cash and checks, and has seized the cars and houses. The homes, however, were heavily mortgaged, prosecutors said.

Breard was manager and chief executive officer of Breard & Associates Wealth Management, a boutique brokerage on the Kirkland waterfront that catered to well-heeled clients. She advertised her services — and her success — through a series of infomercials titled, 'Help me Rhonda.'

Last February she abruptly shuttered the offices and, according to her lawyers, went home and attempted suicide by cutting her wrists after an ING audit turned up a secret set of files detailing the scheme. Breard had hidden the thefts by sending out forged statements, according to charging documents. Some investors lost their life savings, the documents note.  Several investors sued ING, and the Dutch financial giant has settled with 16 victims and is negotiating with others, according to the government's documents.

Blackstone has asked U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman to postpone a restitution hearing until those negotiations are complete [.  . . ]

[Mrs. Breard] approached the U.S. Attorney's Office early in the investigation and underwent detailed debriefings by prosecutors, the FBI and state financial regulators. She turned over a box of handwritten documents detailing her victims and the amounts taken over the past several years, Friedman wrote. 'While some may say cynically, 'Sure she cooperated, she was about to be raised on a stake' — there are many individuals who commit both lesser and greater frauds, who do not cooperate, do not take responsibility, and who do not assist our system of justice to the extent possible in making amends,'  Friedman wrote.

In a draft of a letter she intends to send to her victims after sentencing, Breard apologizes and says she had reasons for what she did, 'just not good ones.  Whether you call it selfishness, materialism, wanting to appear more successful than I was ... It was wrong. Wrong from day one. Wrong from beginning to end,' she wrote."
_________________________
I honestly believe that I was not motivated to be like rich people that I knew.  Frankly, I never really cared about material wealth, but I did want to appear competent and that required some compromise with the material world.  I should have concerned myself with what my family's actual needs were.  My family's actual needs had little to do with material wants and desires.

I want to say something about the label of "disgraced," attached to Mrs. Breard.  Mrs. Breard hurt people financially, and she is a disgraced investment advisor and broker.  She certainly injured many people.  But in her current circumstance Mrs. Breard seems to be doing what should be done--she is in her own language "unvarnished" in her acceptance of responsibility.   What would her prosecutors rather she do, or say?

Thursday, July 29, 2010

The Case, All About Greed


Reporter, A.G. Sulzberger at New York Times relates the story all about greed. 

David H. Brooks, the guy in the pic with the $100,000 jeweled American flag belt buckle is on trial in federal court in Central Islip, New York for fraud arising out of his running a military contractor that supplies questionable body armor to American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

This case is not all that different from Bernie Madoff, Scott Sayler (the Tomato King), or Scott Rothstein's--all about greed. 

This is the pathology of money and needless things overriding morality and common sense.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Honest Services Law Limited by US Supreme Court

A lot of the infamous corporate greed heads: Jeffrey Skilling (pic), Conrad Black and many others--of the 1980s and 1990s, were prosecuted under what is uniformly called in the press as the "Honest Services" law.  This federal statute is a flawed bit of draftsmanship that the US Supreme Court has now limited to specific criminal activities like bribery and kickbacks.  Jeffrey Skilling's conviction under this law has now been vacated although Skilling remains convicted of other federal criminal acts and the case was remanded for further consideration and sentencing. 

Readers of Bad Lawyer know that I am no fan of these greedy, materialistic bastards--these so-called smartest guys in the room. These guys gamed the US financial system and ruined the financial lives of so many ordinary Americans who had pensions and investments lost in the chaos of the collapse of these house of cards. But I do not understand, as a matter of justice, how a person can be aggressively prosecuted with every particle of probative dirt piled on a guy, under the guise of proving a violation of what turns out to be a vague and invalid law, charge, indictment.  How is the taint of that prosecution not prejudicial as it relates to all the other charges.  If I say, Joe Flabeetz is a dirty rotten thieving bastard and he violated such-and-such vague prohibition against dirty rotten thieving bastards, how are the legitimate charges that Flabeetz took money from the petty cash drawer not prejudicially affected by the vague and invalid prohibition.  When we do this as a justice system aren't we in effect saying:  "never mind?"  Sounds like a violation of fundamental notions of fairness to me.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Bad Doctor--Dr. Robert Stokes

Mlive.com reports that the notorious D. Robert Stokes is to be featured in the new season of American Greeed on CNBC.  Stokes (pic) lived in the palatial mansion (pic, below) in East Grand Rapids overlooking beautiful Reeds Lake.  The house has been compared to the fictional Xanadu owned by publishing magnate in Citizen Kane based on the real life William Randolph Hearst, and the Hearst Castle.  How did Stokes get his money?  The old fashion way, unnecessary operations performed on his patients who are scarred for life, the disgusting reuse of medical equipment including sutures, and exploiting the system as completely as possible!  

Stokes is now doing 10 years in a federal prison in California.  Nice house. 

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Lawyer Laundry Operations in Ohio


According to the Associated Press, two Columbus, Ohio-area lawyers will enter guilty pleas to money laundering charges as the outcome of a major drug smuggling ring that engaaged in transporting drugs from Arizona into Ohio.  I'm sure there will be updates to this tale of attorneys gone criminal, but the time being here's the link to the initial story on these two crooks.  Charles W. McGowan, 41, and Kyle Hunter, 40, are expected to enter their guilty pleas to charges of laundering money for "the Donald Dailey Jr. Drug Ring" on Jan. 6.  They are looking at serious prison time. 

Explanation:  these are lawyers who got involved with Donald Dailey, Jr. who was making so much money from importing drugs into Ohio that he had to find a way to convert his ill-gotten gains into usable cash.  These attorneys provided that process through their IOLTA accounts or sham businesses.  In either event the attorneys became active participants in the drug-running schemes.

 A month or so ago someone sent me a link to the story of a Akron-area attorney, Frank Pignatelli with a similar situation.  Cleveland.com reports that Pignatelli who was doing the same thing as McGowan and Hunter was sentenced to 16 months.  I didn't use the item, then; but a pattern seems to be emerging makin git comment worthy--the recession seems to have Ohio lawyers scrambling for green.

Monday, October 19, 2009

Attorney Fees-Greed Heads-Part One

A number of years ago a lawyer friend of mine told a another lawyer to consult me about a child sex abuse case, an area of law I pioneered in Our State. This young lawyer, who I will call K asked me to meet with her, I did and I shared my insights into representing victims of child sex abuse. I provided K with the names of expert witnesses and I made other suggestions. That was the end of my dealings with her.

Years later I was approached by a young man, John, who provided me with convincing evidence that his step father had raped him for a period of years throughout his childhood. John had turned 18, nine months earlier (this is significant because it meant time was running to take legal action)—John was represented in a civil claim against his step father by attorney K. K had informed John that if she could not work out a settlement with John’s step father on John’s claim she would not file a lawsuit on John’s behalf. K obtained an offer of $45,000 payable in installments over ten years. John rejected the proposed settlement which also contained other unacceptable terms and conditions. He discharged K, and hired me.

John’s rights were about to expire, as I’ve said before Our State has a highly restrictive statute of limitations. John had to bring his lawsuit within 1 year of his 18th birthday. After John retained me I prepared a lawsuit and delivered it to step father's counsel with an indication that the lawsuit would be filed in two weeks. Within the two week period that I set out as a time frame I settled John’s lawsuit for $150,000 payable immediately.

After the case settled and the money received, John authorized me to pay K an attorney fee of $2,500; despite the fact that Our State law entitled her to nothing, since her contract with John was "contingent" on her reaching a settlement or other agreed outcome on his behalf.

Nearly two years to the date of this transaction, K sued me. K did not sue John, the former client that had a contract with K—no, K sued me.

Here’s the rub, K wanted to intimidate me, so instead of using traditional “service” of process methods like asking the court clerk to mail the lawsuit to me, she pulled shit like trying to serve me personally and multiple mailings none of which went to my actual mailing address—the result was that the Judge assigned to the case began to proceed against me under the impression that K’s complaint had actually been served on me as provided by law. Ultimately, the Judge entered a “default judgment” against me. Despite my efforts to file an answer, Judge B, refused to vacate the default judgment and over the course of six months held three separate “trials” on the question of damages. One of these trials was held on Christmas Eve of last year—Merry Christmas.

Judge B, is a menopausal nut—but, Judge B does respect the law. Despite Judge B’s enmity for me (Judge B and I have history going back to a pretty nasty dispute decades earlier involving neighbors who were trying to kill one another, when Judge B was a private practitioner), Judge B could not figure out how K was entitled to payment of anything . Judge B repeatedly demanded that K, or her associate produce one citation to authority (case law, statutory law, anything) entitling K to payment of attorney fees versus the lawyer who earned the fees in subsequent successful representation of a former client. Even for Judge B, this was a forehead slapper, D’oh! Judge B ultimately entered judgment for me.

Today, after delay and delay and delay, I received K’s appeal brief. Yes, K appealed. I just read K’s brief, it is pathetic. Since this is Year Two of K’s attempt to collect attorney fees from me I thought perhaps there was some change in the law (a pending court case that would have precedental import) coming down the pipe that would provide authority for the proposition that she was somehow entitled to payment of fees. Nah. K’s brief consists of the following arguments: “I got default judgment how come I didn’t get any money!”

Aaaarrrrrrggggghghhhhhhhhh!!