Fraud: Conspiracy to Commit Mortgage Fraud

Re: Conspiracy to Commit Mortgage Fraud

First of all - there is no way anything about the Koch's will ever be mentioned in anything. I've repeatedly stated that despite my innocence I will probably be spending a long time in prison. I can honestly sit here and tell you that a) I did not know anything about these transactions was illegal, b) had I known that anything in the mortgage documents was false I would not have signed it, and c) my life has already been ruined because of this mess.

A final clarification - I never said I knew anything about a primary residence. Greg simply indicated things that needed to happen in order for these transactions to be legal (salary increase, living in each home for a period of time, etc) and I did each of the things I was told I needed to do. I did not receive a dime from these transactions.

Anyway - it's pretty pointless to continue to convince you people of anything since I'm not going to share all of the details anyway. I just learned that the trial date has been moved (yet again) to August, so I guess I'll have more time to fine tune my defense strategy.

This is me deleting my account...

Re: Conspiracy to Commit Mortgage Fraud

I pointed out before that you should not post details about your case, lest a prosecutor find your thread. The more you say, the more likely it is that your statements will be useful for the prosecutor. And yet you keep posting.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

I told him I was skeptical and didn’t want to get involved in something that I felt might not be legal. This is when he told me that his mortgage company was the safest mortgage company in the country and that there was absolutely NO possibility of anything illegal happening in his company. You see several years before he had started his mortgage company, while Greg was in college, he had been a DJ at many raves. This lifestyle had introduced him to Ecstasy and LSD drugs, and he had started selling them as a low-level dealer. This had landed him in the middle of a major federal drug case, and he had been convicted and had spent a few years in prison. After his release he was under the supervision of the federal probation department in what is called Post Release Supervision. He told me that the Mortgage Industry was wrought with fraud, and that when mortgage fraud occurs it is most often prosecuted in the federal justice system. Because of this he said that federal probation officers are well aware of what constitutes mortgage fraud and that his PO only allowed him to own / operate a large mortgage company with the stipulation that the federal probation office would have 100% access to every single transaction the company did. He told me that they provide access to his PO to every case file and that every single transaction was scrutinized.

So your excuse for not following your instinct is that you were sold a bill of goods by a convicted drug dealer, about how federal probation officers are experts in mortgage law? 'Greg' must have been thinking, "Sucker!"

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

This convinced me that there was no possibility that anything illegal was happening with these transactions, so I agreed to purchase five homes and to use the proceeds from those transactions to cover the operating expenses of the software company in lieu of further capital calls.

So it's like John DeLorean and the cocaine, except you believed what you were doing was legal?

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

Had I not been convinced that these transactions could not have involved anything illegal there is absolutely no way I would have agreed to do them. I would have simply insisted that my investors continue to fund the operations until one of the multimillion dollar contracts came through.

It would have been sensible for you to do your due diligence with a real estate lawyer, rather than taking the claims of convicted felon at face value.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

So it is totally illogical to believe I would have knowingly and intentionally committed a major felony that would have landed me in prison for decades a) knowing full well that the feds were looking closely at this mortgage company’s activities, and b) knowing that I could simply rely on my investors instead.

It would have been easier for you to rely on your investors instead. You are free to try to convince the jury that they were standing by, eager to hand the company more money. But that only raises the question, "Whatever you knew, why didn't you choose the easy money over the mortgage fraud?"

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

Moreover, there were numerous times when I was at Greg’s office when his PO would visit, and he seemed perfectly comfortable with everything that was going on.

I would love to learn more about the probation officer who spends most of his time hanging out with a probationer at the probationer's business office. Most probation officers don't have the time for frequent social calls.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

There were literally hundreds of transactions just like mine occurring every week at this company.

In the end I was the only person indicted.

These hundreds of transactions per week included the exact same type of misrepresentations you made to the lenders? Perhaps the other people were more careful. Perhaps Greg really is as careful as you claim, and it was your own mistakes that made you unique.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

These homes never were flipped. Instead he forced them into foreclosure leaving me in financial ruins.

Who is "he" and how did "he" do that?

Perhaps it was your default that caused you to be investigated, as opposed to other transactions that did not involve default.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

Steve filed a countersuit (obviously he had no idea what we were really doing – he assumed we were trying to steal the company just as the multimillion dollar deal came through and beat him to the punch). We were told that we had to disclose the pending litigation to any company we were entering into agreements with which caused all of the pending deals to be put on hold. Then my homes went into foreclosure and we didn’t have the money to continue with the litigation I had started. In the end Steve got a default judgment against me, and my entire financial world fell to ruins.

I thought the homes had previously been "forced" into foreclosure, but I guess not. If you didn't want Steve to infer that you were up to not good, it is a shame you didn't clue Steve into your plans before surprising him with the lawsuit.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

Despite that some 40 people should have been interviewed as possible witnesses in my case I was ultimately forced to choose the top 5-6 as the court limited our investigation to just 36 hours.

Is your dialing finger broken? Is there some reason you can't speak to any of these witnesses yourself, and pass notes to your lawyer?

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

Whenever something didn't seem right I would ask "Greg," and he would say, "oh, yes, this is standard practice and is perfectly legal."

That's understandable. After all, whenever I have questions about the legality of something, I search out a convicted drug dealer who is positioned to profit from the transaction and ask him, "Is this really legal?" If he says "Yes", I just shut of my brain and forge ahead!

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

And in the Alice in Wonderland world of the sub-prime mortgage industry in 2006, where one could no longer rely on historical norms to determine what was right and wrong (stated incomes being accepted as just one example) I simply relied upon the professionals at the mortgage, lending, and title companies to assure that everything was legal.

No, really, you could rely upon historical norms. Lying about your income is lying about your income, even if everybody seems to be doing it.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

Christ, the same title company did all five mortgage closings - and they were all within 90 days - so obviously they knew that there had been a previous transaction within the past three years and that each home could not have been my primary residence.

And so did you. Was that one of the "norms" you thought was no longer applicable?

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

We even have the lady who did three of the four closings for which I've been indicted who is going to testify to the fact that not only did I not read the documents, nor did she explain them to me (she just told me where to sign), but that she didn't even know what a primary residency clause was.

I don't know how the woman would know what was going on inside your head, but it's your responsibility to hire competent help. It's your responsibility to make sure your helper has accurate information to put into the documents. It's also your responsibility to review documents for accuracy before you sign them.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

And yet my attorney STILL refuses to believe that I didn't read the documents.

You signed them, no?

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

"Steve" is good friends with the Koch brothers and was recently overheard bragging to someone at the Mexican Food restaurant he owns that Charles helped him "get me in trouble" with the feds.

If rumors about what was supposedly said at a Mexican restaurant are to be believed, maybe he tipped off the feds to the real estate scheme when you engaged in actions that made him think you were trying to steal his share of the business.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

Obviously I'm not going to post every detail of my defense in this forum. But the fact that I was made to believe that there couldn't be anything illegal as well as the fact that he actually was under federal supervision are two very compelling points.

Had you heard that from your real estate lawyer, somebody well versed in mortgage law, that might be compelling. Hearing it from a convicted drug dealer, who insists that federal probation officers are experts in mortgage law and scrutinize hundreds of transactions per week for any sign of illegality? Not so much. As evidence of gullibility, perhaps.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

The reality is that I had zero personal gain from these transactions as every penny either went to paying things associated with the home purchases (home improvements, utilities, mortgage payments, etc.) - none of which would have existed had I simply not done them - or to expenses of the software company which had I known or even suspected that these transactions were illegal I would have simply told my investors to continue to fund the operations.

So in the process of flipping homes, you managed to extract considerable amounts of money to fund your business. It follows that you either borrowed considerably more money than you required to purchase and rehab the homes, so as to be able to extract that money, or you borrowed enough money to acquire the homes and to rehab them but diverted the money to the business. Either way, I can see why a lender would call it fraud. Is there a third, innocent explanation that I've overlooked?

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

There was absolutely no reason for me to knowingly and intentionally commit a fraud to cover the expenses for a company I no longer had any ownership in merely to stop infighting when I could have simply insisted that the investors do their job - which was to fund the operations.

And if I accept that argument, the question becomes, "Then why did you do it?" Which I expect is getting us to why your lawyer believes you need to testify if you want a chance of avoiding conviction.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

The recordings of the meetings include Greg's presentation to the board of his proposal that I do the home flips as a stop-gap measure in lieu of capital calls - and the well respected realtor on our board asked a few questions and was satisfied that these transactions would be legal - even to the point that he was willing to allow the proceeds from these mortgage transactions to be used to fund our operations - obviously anyone who thought these would be illegal would not have allowed that to happen as this would have subjected our company to seizure and forfeiture.

Should the discussion be found admissible, I expect that the prosecutor will have a different interpretation of the statements, or of the answers to the real estate agent's questions that reassured him. Note also, a real estate agent is not a mortgage law expert. They're not a substitute for having a real estate lawyer review your contracts, they don't write or underwrite mortgages, they don't handle closings....

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

Ask anyone who has purchased a home in the past two decades and unless they are an attorney MOST will tell you they didn't read the documents - here are two articles that support this fact:...

There's a huge difference between not reading the documents in toto, and claiming to be unaware of the inaccurate information you (directly or through your agent) put on the application form prior to signing it.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

Despite what every one of you attorneys say any normal person would relate to the fact that it is the responsibility of the title company to assure things are legal.

No, it is not the responsibility of the title company to audit your mortgage application.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

How can a lay person be expected to find something that isn't?

Except you did know. You simply chose to believe absurd stories about mortgage law expert probation officers, and to convince yourself that old "norms" about filling out mortgage applications truthfully were no longer relevant.

It also seems unlikely that part of your disclosure to the real estate agent who was "satisfied" by your representations was informed that (a) your mortgage applications were not truthful, (b) you were not going to review any of the paperwork for the financial transactions prior to signing your name, and (c) you didn't feel that you had any responsibility to ensure that the information you provided on the mortgage applications was truthful. Given that you claim you didn't know that your applications were not truthful, and given that there would be a roughly zero percent chance of the board giving its blessing to anything that involved untruthful applications and unreviewed contracts, I'm not seeing that the conversation is going to be of as much use to you as you believe.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

And I did as much due diligence as I could do...

No, you didn't. As an obvious example, you claim that you didn't even read the mortgage applications you signed.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

...but there was absolutely ZERO reason for me to do something I knew to be illegal to cover expenses when I had five people whose sole responsibility in this venture was to fund the operations when the contracts did not do so.

Then it's unfortunate that you made false statements on your mortgage applications, leading the lenders, FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office to conclude that you intentionally did something illegal.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

I'm not sure why you people seem to get off on telling people they are guilty.

Hey, for all I know you need a squeegee to periodically wipe the drool off of your keyboard, but.... You're bright enough that you knew that the deal was too good to be true from the time it was first pitched to you, you're making excuses about "new norms" that seem to be a thin justification for knowingly filing false information on your mortgage applications (even as you claim that somebody else filled in the information and you chose not to review it), and it appears that you pulled a lot of money out of the mortgage proceeds for business purposes even though there's no chance that the banks lending the money would have done so had they known of your intent. So it's more than fair to say that things don't look good.

Quote:

Quoting Persecuted

It seems to be some sort of mental disorder among attorneys or people in the criminal legal system - you people just WANT to assume everyone who is charged with a crime is guilty. It's pathetic, really.

You don't need to assume that most people who are charged with crimes are guilty, as it happens to be a fact. Nobody is disputing that some people are charged with crimes they did not commit, and nobody is disputing that many others are overcharged. But here's the thing: We're not going to ignore that huge, black cloud hanging over your head, merely because you insist that you see nothing but sunshine. It's ominous.

Getting back to my earlier point.... A simple Google search leads me to press releases about mortgage fraud indictments from July, 2011. I see a case on the first page of results that matches the information you've shared here pretty closely. (If so, the reference to your unindicted co-conspirators makes me wonder if some are testifying for the prosecution.) If you are among the individuals whose indictments are mentioned on that page, think long and hard about how easy it is to connect you up with the indictment despite having only cursory information. FBI agents know how to use Google.

Re: Conspiracy to Commit Mortgage Fraud

Your thread title is "conspiracy to commit mortgage fraud" and you said in the first post that it was what you were indicted for. So who is the unindicted conspirator if you know? And why weren't they indicted, grants of immunity perhaps? I assume you were also indicted for mortgage fraud in a separate count?

Most of what you have written goes to the defense of mortgage fraud intent but I think it pretty much makes the conspiracy case.

Is it true or false that they have to find you guilty of mortgage fraud to find you guilty of conspiracy?

BTW this thread is already in the Google engine third one down. https://www.google.com/#q=conspiracy...fraud&start=10

Re: Conspiracy to Commit Mortgage Fraud

This dialogue has definitely helped me from the perspective of understanding some of the challenges I face. And thanks to whoever posted the link to that justice.gov page - there is definitely some valuable information there.

Re: Conspiracy to Commit Mortgage Fraud

What happened to the unsubscribe thread option?