Court To Scammer, "Give Up Your House Or Go To Jail" 152
coondoggie writes "Too many online scammers get away with what amounts to a wrist-slap, but a case if Las Vegas this week seems to be heading the right direction. According to the Federal Trade Commission, a business opportunity scammer has been held in contempt for the second time by a federal court and ordered to turn over the title of his home in Las Vegas or face jail time. The court found that the operator of the scam, Richard Neiswonger, failed to deliver marketable title to his home, in violation of a previous court order entering a $3.2 million judgment against him, the FTC stated. The FTC charged that the defendant deceived consumers with false promises that they could make a six-figure income by selling his 'asset protection services' to those seeking to hide their assets from potential lawsuits or creditors."
Haha! (Score:5, Insightful)
Can anyone else see the irony in the seller of "asset protection services" to "hide assets from potential lawsuits" failing to hide his assets from potential lawyers?
Not really... (Score:5, Insightful)
think about it - if his service actually worked, he wouldn't have been prosecuted for running a scam :)
Re:Not really... (Score:5, Funny)
Actually, this house is just a decoy. All of his real assets, being protected, are hidden.
Re: (Score:2)
If he's stashed away enough assets, the opportunity cost of going to jail should outweigh the cost of his house.
He can't sip a cocktail in the Bahamas if he's in jail.
Re:Not really... (Score:4, Funny)
Then he's innocent?
It would be the obvious defense. I wonder why his lawyer didn't think of that.
"Tell them my house is just a front and all my assets are in the Caiman Islands ! My scheme works, I'm not a scammer !"
"As a professional, I suggest you shut the fuck up. Also my fee just went up quite a bit."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds to me like he may have actually done it for his clients. So i agree, why is he being prosecuted?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
why does the judge even need the Title. If a court orders it forfeit, can't they just issue something like a "court's lien" to the county department of deeds... the feds seem to do it all the time with no trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
Especially if he's in a position of not needing it for a while.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's what I find interesting. Delivering marketable title seems to mean that he has to pay off all the liens. That may not even be possible for him given the current state of things.
He could simply sign over his existing "ownership" of the property to the court. There are plenty of real estate deals in which the loans are preserved, but the person paying them changes. I forget right now what that was called though.
However, AFAIK, judges have the power to effectively transfer ownership. So why all thi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Another poster mentioned that perhaps it's an order to get at money "offshore" that the court can't touch. One of the problems with offshore accounts is that even WITH a legal court order they won't turn over money, or even information. This is probably a way to lock him up until he pays up. Like you said, the only way they'll get any money to pay anybody back is if the guy goes and gets it to pay off this house. Otherwise he goes "bankruptcy" on his US assets, and pulls start up money from the bank offshor
Re:Not really... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Not really... (Score:5, Funny)
Given the state of the housing market in California, isn't it equally possible that he simply doesn't have a title to the place at all?
Re:Not really... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, those major tourist destinations where people go to drop thousands really are a pain to deal with. Heck, California is probably flush with cash anyway though, what with them having one of the largest economies in the world [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Las Vegas is effectively an outer suburb of LA. So it's easy to see where the mistake might be made.
It also suffers from many of the same problems including an absurd real estate bubble and corresponding crash (driven by many of the exact same speculators).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The fuck it was. That has been bullshit from day ONE.
What caused the problem was Wall Street and the Banks. Speculators had NOTHING to do with it. Don't for a minute keep spreading the lies about how regular people, the speculative investors, caused our current economic crisis. It implies that there is not a group of people who have gotten away with murder, and are continuing to do so at this very moment. Those investors have been destroyed 99/100 times.
Re: (Score:2)
What DID cause the real estate bubble and the corresponding crash was .... SECURITIZED MORTGAGES
We're getting a little offtopic here but I'll expound on that by exposing the crooked banlers' modus operandi.
Start with an adjustable rate mortgage. When the next year comes around, particulary when the price of gasoline has jumped from a buck a gallon to over four, stick it to the homeowner and jack up his interest. The poor schmuck is trying valiantly to make his payments but gets behind. Bingo, the bank can r
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The ruling says he's required to deliver marketable title.
That explicitly means he is required to use all resources available to him to pay off any mortgages on the property and have any encumberances by other parties released, or face contempt.
It suggests the court believes he has the resources available, or some liens/encumberances on the property are created by organizations under his control.
IOW, Since he ran an asset-protection business, the court may believe he has intentionally structured own
Re: (Score:2)
If that's the case, then why is he playing hard-to-get with his LV home? The only thing I could think of is that it's a time suck to allow some other hidden process to complete...
Re: (Score:2)
I think that's real-estate speak for "Owes more than it's worth." A house can similarly be "upside down" even though the roof is still skyward.
Re: (Score:2)
First thought I had was that I was "Wow, the very definition of Irony"
asset protection services (Score:2)
He's a thief, his ass-et belongs in jail. Why is it that a poor man who shoplifts food goed to jail, while a rich man who steals thousands of dollars simply has to pay for what he's stolen?
Re: (Score:2)
I have no more mod points else I would have modded u for sure
WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't give him a choice, take everything AND put him in jail...
Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Educating consumers, I believe is a lost cause. Not for lack of effort mind you. In the words of the amazing Ron 'Tater Salad' White, "You can't fix stupid".
All we as a society can do is punish this guy (appropriately) and make sure we keep our laws up to date with technology.
Remember kids there is a sucker born every minute.
Re:WTF? (Score:5, Funny)
That sounds better to me too. Punishing these people is a start but the reality is we need to do a better job of educating consumers. As long as there are suckers there will be people trying to scam them.
Hear! Hear! In fact, I have just the cure-for-naivete/stupidity you're looking for... right here and for a limited time only I'm willing to offer you a secret extract derived the the lubricant glands of the rare pythonus imaginarius. This elixir has been known cure even the most obstinately held absurd beliefs, why just the other day it helped cure some poor fool who thought he could solve the problem of confidence men by "educating consumers" - God's honest truth - the poor bastard actually believed that!! Act now and receive, as my gift to you, a one-size fits all societal curative ideology! Don't pass this opportunity up!!
And here's the recipe (Score:2)
a secret extract derived the the lubricant glands of the rare pythonus imaginarius.
>>> import lubricant_glands
>>> print lubricant_glands.extract
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is that as soon as you make a monetary system idiot-proof, nature goes and creates a better idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that as soon as you make a monetary system idiot-proof, nature goes and creates a better idiot.
And then the previous iteration of idiots elects Idiot 2.0 to be in charge...
Re: (Score:2)
As long as there are suckers there will be people trying to scam them.
Hence, make scamming legal and the problem fixes it's self.
Re: (Score:2)
That's backwards. You have to punish them, because it's impossible to fully educate customers (well, absent destroying capitalism and keeping transactions to simple barter).
Imagine that there are one million people, all equally intelligent and educated, and all equally hard working. Now imagine that each of them executes 10,000 equal-
Re: (Score:2)
Ok...let's think this through....
If it was high school curriculum, then people would know by the time that they're 16 that scammers are out to rip them off.
If people knew that, then it's not much of a leap of logic to figure out by the time you're 20 that banks, governments and other corporations are out to rip you off, too.
And that is the last thing the ruling elite want you to know.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Hey get RIAA on board, they're fantastic at this sort of thing.
Re:WTF? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well they are profiting from crime.
Re: (Score:2)
No one's suggesting we throw them out an air lock. Hell, it's really not worth sending them up to space, even if it is to send a message to other scammers.
Re: (Score:2)
I pity the kids, but his wife simply married the wrong asshole. If you marry a gangster you risk being shot, if you marry a fraudster you risk losing everything.
Actually everyone risks losing everything every day. There is no such thing as safety, but some activities are safer than others.
Re: (Score:2)
And get the news out in the mainstream press and in the right channels where opportunists will see it (IRC, forums, etc). Would spammers take the risks they do if the penalties were higher and more common?
Re: (Score:2)
Copying Music doesn't hurt anyone. Don't download ringtones and your virus problems will be solved.
Absolutely... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
It's about time (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I hope the government has a plan to build more jails because they will fill up fast with these fools.
No need for more jails, just let those folks out who don't pose a threat to others -- gamblers, hookers, and dopers. Well over half of all US prisoners are there on nonviolent drug charges.
It doesn't say if the scammees get their money. (Score:5, Insightful)
What I tell friends and family and anyone who wants to listen: consider all unsolicited emails as scams. The same for telemarketers - if you're on the DNC list, then those people are breaking the law by calling you which makes them criminals. You don't want to do business with criminals, do you?
Junk mail a lot (too many) of times are crooks too - you know the "checks" that come in the mail for you to deposit and send money via Western Union to others.
Some day, one of these assholes is going to scam the wrong person and they may end up wishing they've gone to jail.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've been getting calls from 202-495-7152 for about a week now, several times a day, and if I ask them to stop calling they hang up. I stayed on the line to see what it's about and it's one of those, "You won a million dollars, send us $10,000 for shipping insurance" scams.
I've reported them to as many people as I can, and no one cares.
So yeah, scamming is a pretty good way to make some extra cash, since no one cares enough to track them down or arrest them until they amass millions.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you should say that you are delighted that they have accepted your "call review service" at $X per call plus $Y per minute.
I stayed on the line to see what it's about and it's one of those, "You won a million dollars, send us $10,000 for shipping insurance" scams.
In which case you have an address to send them an invoice.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you should say that you are delighted that they have accepted your "call review service" at $X per call plus $Y per minute. [..] In which case you have an address to send them an invoice.
Yeah, that's going to be a raging success (just like the previous thousand times something similar's been suggested on Slashdot.)
They've been running a scam and ripping people off without concern as to whether it's legal. But they're *definitely* going to fork out when some (not-so) smartass basement dweller sends them an invoice for some half-baked quasi-legalistic scheme they thought up.
Re: (Score:2)
I personally prefer an old computer with a modem:
while true ; do /dev/ttyS0 /dev/ttyS0 /dev/ttyS0 /dev/ttyS0 /dev/ttyS0
echo "atdt ###-###-####" >
sleep 30
printf "\E" >
sleep 1
printf "\E" >
sleep 1
printf "\E" >
sleep 1
echo "ATH0" >
done
Re: (Score:2)
Some day, one of these assholes is going to scam the wrong person and they may end up wishing they've gone to jail.
I hope that a ton of media coverage erupts when it happens, otherwise it'll be just another statistic.....
Re: (Score:2)
I still get emails from people who scan the resumes on Monster.com and offer people a work-at-home position receiving checks, then wiring the money overseas... best of all, "it is perfectly legal!"
I think the Nigerians justify thei
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Jimmy, com'ere'amoment.
I got something for you. This asshole see, he promised my grandmother something and didn't make good. I'd like you to pay him a visit and discuss it real nice like. Explain to him how heartbroken my grammy is about losing her savings. See what sort of refunds he offers. Oh, take the boys with you, make it a night out on the town. Paint it red.
Re: (Score:2)
I love getting Junk Mail, the physical kind, how else would I light my pizza oven? No, really...
http://pizzaontherocks.blogspot.com/2009/09/wednesday-sept-92009.html [blogspot.com]
case background (Score:5, Informative)
The FTC has an archive of case materials [ftc.gov]. Looks like a complaint was brought in 1996, and he settled in 1997, which included agreeing to a permanent injunction. The FTC brought another complaint in 2006, got a temporary restraining order, and a finding of contempt of court in 2007. The 2007 filing [ftc.gov] is the one that instituted a $3.2 million fine and ordered Neiswonger to turn over title to a specific residence in Las Vegas as part of paying it.
It's not clear to me if that's his primary residence or a secondary one. Usually primary residences are shielded from civil judgments. If it's a secondary one, this case isn't unusual at all, since ordering a 2nd home to be sold to pay a judgment is common. If it's a primary one, I'm not sure if the rules are different because it's a contempt proceeding. (In theory it seems the rules might also be different for even primary residences purchased with ill-gotten money, but none of the complaints seem to allege that specifically.)
The FTC also has a slightly more detailed version of this news [ftc.gov], fwiw.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And other property... (Score:2)
Get all of his property, including anything off-shored (property, money & other stuff) and vehicles (car , boats & airplanes) that this moron has,
The most important that they get the off-shored stuff since most criminals now, like companies, are off-shored so they can put these items into tax and legal havens so these people don't have to worry about tax or government garnishing these things.
If the US is really smart, they should go after all these criminals so they can recoup lost of tax revenue th
Selling illegal services? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are legal ways to hide some assets from creditors; well not really "hide," but more like put in a form they can't reach. Though that is probably not what this guy was doing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not all forms of asset protection are illegal:
1. A Prenuptual agreement is technically a form of asset protection. Putting assets into some forms of trusts for dependants or descendants is also. In general, when there's a marriage or a child involved, or a business partnership, a second person's rights to privacy may mean a creditor has at best limited rights to know about assets, particularly ones they also can't legally claim. In the ordinary course, there shouldn't be legally shielded assets that a credi
I don't see the actual *crime* here... (Score:4, Interesting)
Granted, the end-product may (or may not - He may have said nothing more complex than "sell everything and bury your cash in the back yard") have violated a law or two, but he didn't actually sell the "asset protection" service, he sold educational material on how to hide assets. And he didn't really even do that, according to the FTC, he sold lessons on how to sell educational material on how to hide assets.
Seriously, how many layers of indirection do you have to toss in before it stops counting as a crime? If I convince you to pay me $20 to tell you where you can find bomb-making instructions, then send you off to the library after you pay up... Have I committed a crime?
Re:I don't see the actual *crime* here... (Score:5, Insightful)
IANAL, but if you knew the intent of the person wishing to find those bomb-making instructions, and you help him anyway, wouldn't that make you an accomplice to the crime?
Any wife involved? (Score:3, Funny)
not much much of a penalty (Score:2)
the last time I looked houses in Vegas were worth a box of chicklets. Gum, not strippers you perverts.
Re:My scheme really works!!! (Score:4, Informative)
problem. This is contempt of court. He stays in jail until he complies. Contempt of court is the only thing that can legally get you sent to jail indefinitely without a jury trial in the US.
Re:My scheme really works!!! (Score:4, Informative)
Civil contempt means that the person who is locked up holds the keys to the jailhouse doors in his or her own hands. Comply and be freed. Stay defiant and stay locked up. If you don't like it, you can appeal.
Courts wouldn't work without civil contempt sanction.
Re: (Score:2)
And if the person does not actually "posses the keys", sucks to be him. good luck proving that you honsetly do not know the password, that the money is really gone, etc.
Countries without civil contempt sanctions would beg to differ.
Re: (Score:2)
And if the person does not actually "posses the keys", sucks to be him. good luck proving that you honsetly do not know the password, that the money is really gone, etc.
Proving money is really gone is not too hard: just give full (and I mean full) disclosure of assets and transactions. The courts will have the proof that certain money transactions went your way (that's why they can recover that - one way or another it's proven you got it). It is your responsibility for tax reasons to keep your financial administration for a certain period of time (no idea on the actual period in the USA) and certainly banks will keep records of transactions in and out of your accounts. The
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly does that work with, for example, stolen goods? Some poor schmuck robs a bank and drives off with with $5,000,000. Police chase, he goes off a bridge trying to get away. Money floats down the river while the crook swims to shore. Police pick him up some time later in the woods, without a dime on him, and claim he stashed the goods some where in the woods. Judge offers leniency if money is returned.
So, he serves essentially a life sentence as he will not be released until he shows where he s
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly does that work with, for example, stolen goods? Some poor schmuck robs a bank and drives off with with $5,000,000. Police chase, he goes off a bridge trying to get away. Money floats down the river while the crook swims to shore. Police pick him up some time later in the woods, without a dime on him, and claim he stashed the goods some where in the woods. Judge offers leniency if money is returned.
The police will be able to verify this story by finding money floating in the river, stuck under tree trunks, witness reports, whatever.
So the judge asks, "Where is the money?" The response? "Lost in a fire." "Scattered over the Amazon." "Under a big 'W'." "Stolen by Jimmy the Nose." "I just don't know, your honor." The crook goes back in the cell for "contempt".
How does one prove lack of knowledge? How do you prove something is truly lost or destroyed?
Many of these things leave traces; and unless the story is completely made up there will be traces - or at least ways to verify it's believable or not. Stolen by or paid to other criminal? Name this guy, police can chase him down. Lost in a fire? Well there will likely be a record of that fire at some fire department. Can be checked.
And if nothing works - of course you wil
Re: (Score:2)
No. You gave away the ending in your opening: "Judge offers leniency if money is returned." Not returning it doesn't turn it into a life sentence, it means you won't get any leniency.
More generically, there's not going to be a contempt situation where you can go to jail indefinitely if the contempt isn't material to the case. IE, whether you return the money or not has no bearing on whether or
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
or (3. show the court what happened to their income, and that they have given full disclosure of their assets). To be thrown in jail for not disclosing assets means that the court has certain proof that there must be certain undisclosed assets present. E.g. someone has been proven to have received illegal income of say a couple million dollars, but only discloses half a million worth of assets. What happened to the rest?
I can not imagine that there is a way for the court to put someone in jail without havi
Re: (Score:2)
exactly, the idea of contempt is that you are holding up the court from making fair judgment.... so the court will wait for you to do your duty... you'll have nothing better to do.
That's one other thing about US courts is that it's your Legal DUTY to provide the information the court needs. While you can't testify against yourself in CRIMINAL cases, that's exceedingly narrow in that testifying and something "very bad" happening because of it isn't really the court's problem. In this case he was ordered to p
In Jail without trial [Re:My scheme really works!! (Score:5, Informative)
Contempt of court is the only thing that can legally get you sent to jail indefinitely without a jury trial in the US.
No, in fact, the (former) president of the United States stated that if you are suspected of terrorism, you can be held without charge indefinitely, without access to a lawyer, and without any right to challenge the fact that you were so designated (or even to see any of the evidence used to designate you a terrorist.)
For example, Jose Padilla was a U.S. Citizen, picked up on U.S. territory, and put into solitary confinement without being allowed to see talk to a lawyer and without any charges against him. On September 9, 2005, a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit ruled that President Bush indeed has the authority to detain Padilla without charges, in an opinion written by judge J. Michael Luttig.
So, no, contempt of court is not the only thing that can legally get you sent to jail indefinitely without a jury trial in the US.
Proposed Ammendment to the Constitution (Score:2)
I hereby propose to resolve this problem by an ammendment to the Constitution, to read as follows:
XXVIII. We really mean it.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it should probably say high treason.
will the maximum sentence for such to be execution, implemented with utmost haste.
As a practical matter removing the innocent then bombing DC might be the most effective way to go about things.
Re: (Score:2)
As a practical matter removing the innocent then bombing DC might be the most effective way to go about things.
Who's innocent in DC?
Re: (Score:2)
Ummm... that'd defeat the whole purpose, since charges of treason and the implementation of capital punishment are fraught with all kinds of Contitutional perils. This is especially so when they are carried out in haste, so no thank-you.
FWIW, my XXIX would be to abolish capital punishment. I'm not soft on crime though. If you committ armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, rape or murder the ammendment should also state you get life with no chance of parole, and it goes without saying that there's a
Re: (Score:2)
But... but he was a bad guy! He kicked his dog, peed on the American flag, tore the tag off of his mattress, returned his DVDs without rewinding them, did not have his pet spayed or neutered, only looked one way before crossing, and was personally at the controls of both planes that crashed into the World Trade Center.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Good thing the current President has changed all that [wsj.com]...
(Note: First news link I saw when I Googled it. I'm sure there are plenty better ones out there.)
Re: (Score:2)
Good thing the current President has changed all that [wsj.com]...
Well, that's the interesting thing of it. You give one president arbitrary powers, because you trust him to not misuse them, and, you know, you discover that the next president takes those powers, too. And the next. So you have to trust all of them not to misuse them.
Well, it's all perfectly legal. All that stuff about being innocent until proven guilty, constitutional rights-- that's obsolete. The courts said so-- if somebody says the word "terrorism," that word erases any of your so-called "rights".
Re: (Score:2)
The key word here is "legal". Just because the President says something does not make it legal. Nor does the opinion of three payed for judges make it legal.
The Second Circuit made the correct and lawful interpretation on December 18, 2003.
Re: (Score:2)
The key word here is "legal". Just because the President says something does not make it legal. Nor does the opinion of three payed for judges make it legal. The Second Circuit made the correct and lawful interpretation on December 18, 2003.
It's too bad that the decision you quote was appealed to the Supreme Court, who ruled that the Second Circuit Court did not have jurisdiction, which means that their decision has no legal standing. When the case was re-filed, and the decision appealed to United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, the court ruled [wikipedia.org] that the president has the right to detail people without trial for indefinite periods of time. That ruling remains the current legal precedent on the case. Note that iit
Re: (Score:2)
I am aware of that ruling. I am stating that that ruling itself is illegal and in clear contradiction with the constitution. If there is any semblance of law and justice left in America, it will be reversed.
Re: (Score:2)
It also means that clearly there has been a court case that defendant lost. The locking-up part is merely a way of enforcing a court order.
Re: (Score:2)
Contempt of court is the only thing that can legally get you sent to jail indefinitely without a jury trial in the US.
Tell that to the prisoners at Gitmo.
Re: (Score:2)
again. The key word here is "legal".
He's going to be in need of "ass" protection (Score:3, Insightful)
...once they ship his scamming ass off to Federal "pound-me-in-the-ass" prison.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Instead of being slightly subtle, you went for blatantly in-your-face explanation. Something a little better would have been:
Subject: "I hope he has protection..."
Body: "... for Federal 'pound-me-in-the-assets' prison."
See? You make a reference to the same joke, but incorporate the word "assets" in a novel way. This has been a preview of Joke Construction 101.
Re: (Score:2)
That depends on which rules you are using. Going by the official rules, you cannot collect rent while in jail.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_(game)#Rules [wikipedia.org]
Sorry but you are not correct.
In fact, landing in jail towards the end is a relatively cheap way to avoid having to pay rent.