Major Bust

The indictment is interesting reading.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/...n-ring/2143556

Might make a good movie.

If I just inspired a producer, I'd be happy to take a bit part in your film as 'pasty-white Congressman from Texas banging hot starlet-type escort.'

How many years they looking at?

How many years they looking at? Originally Posted by FatBastard

It's hard to accurately predict based on the scant facts in the article. Federal sentences are normally determined by a set of guidelines with values set for various mitigating and aggravating factors. My wild guess would be at least 5 years. And when you get time in a federal pen, you do the time. No early release B.S.

With the amount of money these guys were said to be making ($4 million made running the prostitution service, four vehicles bought with business proceeds including a 2009 Aston Martin, multiple cash deposits of up to $9,900), why in the world would they not hire their own attorney? Do all those assets just get frozen upon indictment so that they can't use any of it to pay a good defense attorney? Did they just piss all the money away so that there's none left to hire an attorney? I've seen a few other times where defendants have been alleged to have made loads of money through some illegal scheme but there's a note to having a court appointed attorney. I just don't get that.

Walso: Assets aren't frozen in federal cases -- they're forfeited -- and it's the suspect's burden to prove the asset wasn't obtained as a product of the illegal activity.

fatbastard: Your PM box is full. The providers probably won't face charges. They'll give evidence against those indicted. Everybody rats out everybody else in a federal case.

Thanks for response SJ. That's a sweet deal for Uncle Sam. Charge you with a felony and at the same time seize your assets to prevent you from best fighting the criminal charges.

Thanks for response SJ. That's a sweet deal for Uncle Sam. Charge you with a felony and at the same time seize your assets to prevent you from best fighting the criminal charges. Originally Posted by Waldo P. Emerson-Jones

That's why a smart criminal keeps some ready cash in a safe place for a rainy day. I was recently at the home of a client's father and he brought out a box of cash his son asked him to store. Since his son was in federal detention, it was raining fucking cats and dogs that day.

One of the Respondents middle name is "Patience."

He will need much of that.

Yea, the Feds RICO'd this deal. Once they RICO it every scrap of everything is theirs without one iota of proof. All they need is Probables.

RICO is a gnarlier statute then anti terror laws- well, they are both fairly gnarl...

One of the Respondents middle name is "Patience."

He will need much of that.

Yea, the Feds RICO'd this deal. Once they RICO it every scrap of everything is theirs without one iota of proof. All they need is Probables.

RICO is a gnarlier statute then anti terror laws- well, they are both fairly gnarl... Originally Posted by LBoog

No, that's incorrect. There is a forfeiture statute that's separate from the RICO statute. Forfeiture is used in RICO cases, but in many other types of cases as well.

No, that's incorrect. There is a forfeiture statute that's separate from the RICO statute. Forfeiture is used in RICO cases, but in many other types of cases as well. Originally Posted by ShysterJon

This is a little different than the above case, but it is one that I wonder about. Frequently, I'll read about a traffic stop on an Interstate hwy where the Highway Patrol pulls a car over and finds a huge amount of cash in the car. No drugs or anything outright illegal, but they newspaper says they Highway Patrol confiscated the cash since "nobody claimed it."

I asked one deputy about this and he said there's a federal law that allows them to confiscate if it's over $10K or, if like the newspaper says, "nobody claims it." His wife came over and he left, so that ended that conversation at the gym.

Is there any law that says how much cash you can have on you? And even if you got the money by the most nefarious of means, why not say it's yours and say nothing more.

Cop: Who's cash is this?

Suspect: Mine

Cop: Where did you get it?

Suspect: I chose to remain silent, may I go now officer?

At this point the cop has your name and a report that you were carrying a large amount of cash. Since you've claimed it, does this mean he can't take it? Or can he still take it and you have to go prove how you got that money before it's released?

The point being, whether you're honest or a crook, do you have the right to carry around a lot of cash and do the cops have a right to confiscated it?

I think there was a lottery winner who won $100 Million and he kept carrying around a lot of cash and once it was known, people kept breaking into his truck (parked outside of strip clubs) and stole $40-$50K each time. He just blew it off and went to the bank to get more. I think he was up there in West Virginia or Pennsylvania. I wonder if the cops would take his money? Causing a nuisance?

Just curious about these cases each time I read about them in the newspaper.

This is a little different than the above case, but it is one that I wonder about. Frequently, I'll read about a traffic stop on an Interstate hwy where the Highway Patrol pulls a car over and finds a huge amount of cash in the car. No drugs or anything outright illegal, but they newspaper says they Highway Patrol confiscated the cash since "nobody claimed it."

I asked one deputy about this and he said there's a federal law that allows them to confiscate if it's over $10K or, if like the newspaper says, "nobody claims it." His wife came over and he left, so that ended that conversation at the gym.

Is there any law that says how much cash you can have on you? And even if you got the money by the most nefarious of means, why not say it's yours and say nothing more.

Cop: Who's cash is this?

Suspect: Mine

Cop: Where did you get it?

Suspect: I chose to remain silent, may I go now officer?

At this point the cop has your name and a report that you were carrying a large amount of cash. Since you've claimed it, does this mean he can't take it? Or can he still take it and you have to go prove how you got that money before it's released?

The point being, whether you're honest or a crook, do you have the right to carry around a lot of cash and do the cops have a right to confiscated it?

I think there was a lottery winner who won $100 Million and he kept carrying around a lot of cash and once it was known, people kept breaking into his truck (parked outside of strip clubs) and stole $40-$50K each time. He just blew it off and went to the bank to get more. I think he was up there in West Virginia or Pennsylvania. I wonder if the cops would take his money? Causing a nuisance?

Just curious about these cases each time I read about them in the newspaper. Originally Posted by MartenWarner

There's no law that allows LE to seize and keep cash just because the amount seized is $10,000 or more. (Think about it for a minute and you'll probably realize the idea is absurd.)

Further, there's no law which prohibits someone from possessing $10,000 or more in cash. However, a business or trade is required to report cash transactions involving $10,000 or more to the IRS and an anti-terrorism agency called the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network by completing and filing a Form 8300.

LE can do whatever they want unless their power is contested and limited. If LE seizes an asset using the forfeiture law, LE keeps it unless someone makes a claim and wins. The claimant bears the burden of proof to show the asset was not obtained as the result of criminal activity. Apply these principles and all your questions are answered.

That's why a smart criminal keeps some ready cash in a safe place for a rainy day. I was recently at the home of a client's father and he brought out a box of cash his son asked him to store. Since his son was in federal detention, it was raining fucking cats and dogs that day. Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Was reading this article today and thought about this post. It blows my mind that a guy who had a net worth estimated over 2 billion has to a get court appointed attorneys.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/03...-continue.html

"Stanford was once considered one of the wealthiest people in the U.S. with an estimated net worth of more than $2 billion. But he had court-appointed attorneys after his assets were seized."