SMF-LiPF
Currently:
  • Paul - Petrea - LivingInCebuForums.com 4 3

Topic: Paul - Petrea - LivingInCebuForums.com  (Read 10524 times)

Description:

 

Offline Moalboring

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Jr. Member

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 0
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #150 on: February 22, 2012, 05:23:04 PM »
Quote from: 'whippy' pid='1010' dateline='1329919230'

I told several people what I thought about this, including Norseman.

but how would I have told you.

Same as now (when its already useless) - just posting in a forum. LinC for instance.
As if you had not posted a ton of replies to various topics and been banned or close to that.
If only you have had raised your concerns in the same tone, I am sure many of the investors would have changed their minds. But you have not.
Your post might have been deleted by Paul - but surely some people could have read it beforehand. Then that would have been a proof of something fishy was going on.

So no need to rave about megaphones when you were silent like fried fish. However posting in this triumphant tone now is good for what?
« Last Edit: February 22, 2012, 05:28:43 PM by Moalboring »

Offline harrell

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Jr. Member

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 0
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
    • http://www.google.com
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #151 on: February 22, 2012, 05:35:57 PM »
Quote from: 'Moalboring' pid='1035' dateline='1329931384'
Quote from: 'whippy' pid='1010' dateline='1329919230'


I told several people what I thought about this, including Norseman.

but how would I have told you.


Same as now (when its already useless) - just posting in a forum. LinC for instance.
As if you had not posted a ton of replies to various topics and been banned or close to that.
If only you have had raised your concerns in the same tone, I am sure many of the investors would have changed their minds. But you have not.
Your post might have been deleted by Paul - but surely some people could have read it beforehand. Then that would have been a proof of something fishy was going on.

So no need to rave about megaphones when you were silent like fried fish. However posting in this triumphant tone now is good for what?


Wait, I seem to recall that several people questioned the validity of several scams on LinC, but more people came to the defense of the scammers. The ones wanting to invest have blinders on and will do anything to justify what they want to do. I don't know the motives for the defenders of the obvious, yet they give validity to what is obvious a scam.
Maybe a few have learned a valuable lesson, but I doubt it. The world is full of fish and plenty of lowlifes willing to hook them.

Not sure who was deleting what, but anyone that did Paul's dirty work can be considered complicit to his activities. You had to be very naive to think Paul was some upstanding, trustworthy individual. All the warning signs were there from day one, it is just some preferred to ignore them.
A bad attitude is like a flat tire. If you don\'t change it, you\'ll never go anywhere.

Offline Moalboring

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Jr. Member

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 0
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #152 on: February 22, 2012, 06:11:26 PM »
Quote from: 'Americano' pid='1026' dateline='1329926052'
Q.  What are the different investment programs that you and Bill have been operating for forum members?

A.  Salary Loans and Expense Allowance.

This is not factual, to phrase it subtle. There were loans for certain shoe factories which were the 1st non-paying clients. Bill gave them loans despite some quite loud opposition in LinC GEL.
No shoe factory loans have been told to the investors in the beginning, only the above mentioned salary and expense loans secured by ATM card collateral. I will post Bill and Paul's email regarding this.


........

Q.  How was the business split up last October?

A.  Some investors were paid off through Paul and they could continue investing if they wanted to. Paul had to sign for the money given to him to pay off investors but I have no way of knowing if all were paid as agreed. Two investors contacted me and said they wanted their investment back and I told them that I already gave their investment to Paul. I don’t know if the issue was resolved.

This is not factual. I know of two investors who contacted Bill and Julie in October, one of which was me. I have not been told that my investment was back to Paul, I was told that the money was with the non-payer borrowers.

Q.  Can investors get their money back now or do they need to wait?

A.  I haven’t been posting in the forum because Bill was doing that and because of his death. Very soon I’m going to post in the investor’s forum named GEL and make a proposal. I will propose to pay out 50% to each investor and then make another pay out later.

Stinks like some small investors will get some money back to keep their mouth shut. How could those with higher amount expect anything from a bank account with only 20.000 in it?

Q.  When will you have enough money to do a 50% pay out?

A.  The borrowers agreed in writing that we would receive their December bonuses which would have been about 1.5 million but it didn’t happen. .....

And nothing else has happened. But if there is a written agreement, its very easy to start a legal action.

Q.  Paul told me and others that the payments would be taken out of the borrowers pay before they received it and deposited into an account. Are you saying that you have to personally collect it?

A.  There’s nothing like that in the Philippines were money is taken out of pay before the employee is paid. Employees are paid on the 15th and 30th of every month. I must be there to collect the money. I usually go to the collection area on Mon, Tue, Thru and Fri. of each week.

The initial story was about ATM cards as collateral.

Q.  How many borrowers are late on payments.

A.  Since I wasn’t there to collect for a long time there are a lot late. We have 75 borrowers with 100 loans. Some have 2 loans. 25 are current so 50 are late. They haven’t seen me so they haven’t been paying. Some have been late for a long time so I gave them a collection letter saying I will file a case in small claims court if they don’t pay in 10 days. It costs 2,000 to file against each person in small claims court but I believe they will start paying now without filing a case.

This fairy tale was told already in October, nothing has ever happened. No small claims court, no nothing.

Q.  Do you know if any investors money is unaccounted for?

A.  Bill was a very honest person. I’m sure he didn’t do anything dishonest. We initially had 27 investors. We paid off 20 investors and only have 7 now. All the money we have is in two accounts. Two investors asked for their money and I told them I already gave it to Paul. That’s the only thing I know about.

A number of things are not factual here and something strange which I was unaware of until now.

Surely there were at least three investors asking their money back, as I also asked my money back, never received, however Julie never told me that my money was with Paul.

If they paid off 20 investors, why they kept the two biggest investors for last? Look at the numbers. It was about 2 million initially and now we are looking for 1.7 million. So by paying out the majority of the investors, the majority of the dough still remain in. Just like in a ponzi scheme. To have testimonials on how good the Sh$t they offer is.

Regarding how honest Bill was, I will post some email communication from him, then any reader can decide for himself.


......
February 22  Meeting with Julie at her home. Looking at her book.

Julie -  Here are the names of the 27 initial investors. Here are the 7 investors we have now. 20 investors were paid off. Of the 7 investors we have now I only know the screen name of two.  Five I don’t know their screen names. Do you know which one is Kahuna?

Me – No, I don’t know his real name.

Julie – Do you know who Locktite is?

Me – No, I don’t know his name either. Out of those seven I only know one person.

Not factual, she knows me and one more investor at least, as we were there in their house together not even once, plus I met Julie in the Carcar municipio and in the hospital in Bill's room, too. So its at least two.

I really believe Bill and Julie have been honest and did the best they could with the loans and making pay outs.

Except for the ATM card story, the story about the Xmas collection supported by some big heads in the municipio and the shoe factory loan that has been made without having the investors agreed in it. Not to forget the proposed 5% monthly earnings that has never reached even 3%. Maybe more to come.

The only questions in my mind are:

1.  Did Paul turn over all invested money to Bill and Julie?  Only Paul knows the answer to that question without father investigation which involves all of the investors.

2.  When pay outs were made and Paul signed for the money, did he return all of the money to the investors?  Only Paul knows the answer to that question without father investigation which involves all of the investors.

The 20 investors who received their monies were fully paid, including the lousy interest. Part of my investment has been paid back some time last year, including some small interest.

3.  Is the money still in the bank account that only Bill and Paul had access to?   I guess we will know in May when Paul returns.

The money we are trying to find is not in that account. Its 1.7 million vs 60k in the accounts.

« Last Edit: February 22, 2012, 06:20:07 PM by Moalboring »

Offline whippy

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Jr. Member

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 1
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #153 on: February 22, 2012, 06:54:32 PM »
seems like the electric bill for the whippy stuff is the least of your problems.

Offline whippy

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Jr. Member

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 1
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #154 on: February 22, 2012, 08:23:44 PM »
Same as now (when its already useless) - just posting in a forum. LinC for instance.
As if you had not posted a ton of replies to various topics and been banned or close to that
[/b]

I did post on the LinC forum about it. The post was deleted in short order by maybe Paul, or maybe an ally of Paul. I don't know.

what I do know is that Paul had and probably still has respect for me, and knew beyond any doubt that I would never invest in this scheme. He never even asked me. He knew I'd just snort in derision.

I saw you giving a lift to Paul from Moalboal to Carcar in your smart car you probably can't afford any more. He wouldn't even have paid you for the gas.

I on the other hand have never given a moments' hospitality to the man in my life and nor would want to even though today I would count him as more of a friend to me than you are to him. See the difference? You can always say no.

you didn't see the difference and that's why you got took to the cleaners.

Offline lamoya

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Banned

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 0
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 23
  • Country: fr
    • View Profile
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #155 on: February 22, 2012, 08:47:59 PM »
Quote from: 'Americano' pid='916' dateline='1329880145'
Jr. is in trouble in Texas not Georgia and its not a rumor.  Attached is his Warrant of Arrest. It doesn't say Jr. but it can't be Sr. The date of birth, age, and weight can only be Woody Paul Petrea Jr.

The funny part to me is it says Evading Arrest. What is the saying, "Like Father Like Son".  Or the other one, "Following in His Father's Foot Steps."


Americano, Paul's son is not the subject on this forum, therefore wondering what this screenshot does here.  Maybe you should work harder to secure one for Paul in the PH, don't you think?

Offline whippy

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Jr. Member

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 1
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #156 on: February 22, 2012, 09:25:16 PM »
Paul's son is not the subject on this forum

I agree. The sins of the father should never be visited on the son, just like that. Never ever ever. If you don't know that you're a baboon or a gorilla and and as bad or worse than Paul.

Offline lamoya

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Banned

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 0
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 23
  • Country: fr
    • View Profile
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #157 on: February 22, 2012, 09:42:52 PM »
To the moderators. Am I banned of posting attachments? No, is not Paul's son warrant of arrest. This went through! It's some thing much more important and related to the subject. So please, find it and post it!.
I spent a lot of time to edit it for viewing in the forum!
I'll try again
« Last Edit: February 22, 2012, 10:05:18 PM by lamoya »

Offline lamoya

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Banned

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 0
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 23
  • Country: fr
    • View Profile
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #158 on: February 22, 2012, 10:12:13 PM »
Quote from: 'harrell' pid='1024' dateline='1329923492'
If this reply makes it through, it was about the 6th attempt to post.

This forum is looking like LinC part 2.
Do you think that if anyone sounded the alarm on a pending scam on LinC, that it would not go unchallenged and all the "feel good boys" that supported every scammer on LinC would tell you that you are wrong.

Go back and read the scam KC8UAL pulled on a few of the readers on LinC. He didn't get much, but maybe your pride.
I seem to recall maybe 2 people telling everyone that what Nick wanted to do was near impossible. You were warned as gently as possible, because if they came out and told everyone it was a scam, it would be deleted and the poster banned.
So many came to Nick's defense (many now here on this forum) that it boggled my mind how they could be so naive.
I guess you guys have lead a sheltered life to get sucked into these things. It is classic SCAM 101.

Offer something too good to be true, make it seem like you will be left out if you don't participate, get people to vouch for you (which many said Nick was good for what he promised), get the money, then start making excuses why things went wrong, and finally the "investors" do not have their money, and the scammer is enjoying life on your dime.

With Paul's scam, a simple GOOGLE search would reveal a few people knew from the very start that Paul was a SCAMMER.
http://sexpatswallofshame.blogspot.com/2010/10/paul-petreas-new-scam.html

If you guys need hand-holding with every aspect of your life, and feel the need to ask some of the most ridiculous questions, and then expect serious answers on some forum that has misfits, drunks, and who knows what else, then I guess you get what is the obvious.




Harrell, thanks for doing the great job, let me now complete it, sit back and relax,  get a little laugh reading the numbers.

I will not share Americano's and Julie's statements that  Bill Aragoni "was an honest person" . History tells  us other wise: That it was a setup  of two felons, one as we know him here in the PH. there  is no need to further introduce him.  The other one, Aragoni, as discreet   and low profile he chose to remain, that's a luxury now (internet) days. Click here to see it yourself.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-1178999.html
and here look for item#10
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/898/147/69498/
Less talk and straight to the point: Aragoni, in one of his rare post on LIC forum said this:
See attachment
What was the name of his business? Didn't Julie say anything to Americano? Was this business registered with the BIR? She Should know this because if it was, will be in her name as Bill was a foreigner living on a purchased BB visa, like anybody else in the LIC forum who had not a ACR card.
Below, is a screenshot of a spreadsheet that Paul made public for a few hours before retrieve it.The reason he did that is irrelevant - at least for now- I erased any information pertaining to the investors' ID with the exception of two that came publicly and acknowledged their participation on the "program" Bob Ward did it here yesterday, Jim Sibbick in the LIC forum. Other names you see on the bottom on the sheet have been published already as irrelevant, because they did not invest, at least as per Dec. 23. 2010.

Now, you want your money back? There is only one way. File charges for estafa against Paul Petrea and Julie. It's a very serious offense in the PH and I think no bailable. I think. Your chances to win the case? 100%. The whole scam is captured on the LIC forum, some of you have evidence, no need really much, is a straight forward case.
Winning a case, doesn't mean you will recover the money. But in this case, Julie will be forced to disclose everything she knows, something that now does only what Paul is instructing her to do or say. But you have to go fast. Paul needs much more money now than before to cover his hiding expenses. He needs more bribing capital than ever before. Because Paul is in the Philippines
Julie having the sword of Damocles on her head will tell you where the rest of the money is. Do not settle for promises.  
File charges first and negotiate later.

Let's discuss this, more later.

Offline PinasLover

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Moderator (Love Philippines)

  • Forum Moderators

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 0
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 36
    • View Profile
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #159 on: February 22, 2012, 10:29:11 PM »
lamoya, click on new reply. There you will see the option to add attachments.
My heart is in the Pinas :D

Offline MattWilkie

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Cebu Resident

  • Administrator

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 45
  • -Received: 65
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012


  • Posts: 821
  • Country: gb

  • Gender: Male
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Youtube
    • View Profile
    • http://www.tropicalpenpals.com
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #160 on: February 22, 2012, 11:24:49 PM »
Quote from: 'The Stig' pid='1012' dateline='1329921130'
Quote from: 'The Stig' pid='997' dateline='1329910766'
Quote from: 'whippy' pid='995' dateline='1329909795'
Does make you wonder how he left the country for his annual leave?[/b]

don't you even know that hundreds if not thousands of expats never take any 'annual leave'. They just arrange for some bent official in the BoI to stamp their passport for another year. It costs anywhere between 10,000 and 20,000 pesos to pay them.

it doesn't have to take place in any BoI office. The Mcdonalds upstairs in Divisoria in CDO is a favorite location. There can be quite a queue of foreigners' wives and girlfriends waiting there with their meal-ticket's passports and the money to pay for the stamp because of course the old fool is too old or too sick to even walk too far, never mind go to the trouble of getting to Cebu or Manila and flying out of the country for a couple of days. I know one guy who hasn't left the Philippines for five years and hasn't even left Camiguin for three. He just gets his wife to get on the ferry and shell out 15,000 for an annual stamp to some bent official who works at the CDO BoI. I would be ready to bet that Paul was doing something like that and thus had no need to leave the country for years at a stretch like many others.


Tourist Visa can be renewed LEGALLY for TWO years & even beyond


I have been asked by a member in a PM, how you can do this. I thought I would pass it on here for all too:

Quotehttp://immigration.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=207&Itemid=37

What is the maximum extension of stay that can be granted?
Foreigners holding temporary visitors visa pursuant to Philippine Immigration Act of 1940 and aliens admitted under E.O. 408 may extend their stay in the Philippines every 2 months for a total stay of 16 months. Extension of stay after16 months, up to 24 months need the approval of the Chief of the Immigration Regulation Division. Extension of stay after 24 months need the approval of the Commissioner. (MCL Memorandum dated 31 July 2007)


The important bit being that the Commissioner can extend BEYOND 24 months.


I agree there are ways round the system but when Paul had that vehicle accident involving a motorbike the discussions at the time were that he had told others his visa hadn't been renewed for 2 years.

But don't quote 24 months otherwise people start to assume they can just wander into immigration and ask for it. If people are willing to put the effort in to contact the Commissioner or people like Mr Abellion I am sure you can work almost anything out with immigration "legally". At the same time everytime I have heard about Paul and immigration its not been because he's had a perfect visa record.

Now as regards rubber stamping, anyone seen any deportations with people having visas upto date? Or aware of anyone who was getting such services rendered with extra stamps for being here? Because part of that problem is there is no exit and entry showing on the passport. No doubt immigration wouldn't bother you unless you were bothering them in some way. But does leave someone rather open to exploitation.

Regarding the lending business its probably that the majority of money is still out according to the last message from Americano (Not including what Paul seems to have received). If that is the case its going to be extremely difficult to recoup it after people have been getting away with not paying it for a period of time. The number of people that go bad gets higher the longer the debt stands, people who refuse to pay as well that realise that your not going to sue, your not going to send baliff's to the house then also increases.

It does appear that Bill's widow is an innocent party in this mind and to be honest never heard her mentioned as anything but that. Chances of recouping the money if there is only literally 10s of thousands in the business is literally down to years as it would need churning to recoup not removing funds from it. At the same time analyzing the number of loans outstanding and who owes them you may be able to sell the job lot to a collector on a commission basis but your looking at losing at least 10% of the job lot if not more for recovery.

Problem is though as it appears most people involved were silent investors there is nobody to do any of this as Bill was operating the financial side himself (apparently, haven't heard different in regards collections).

What could have happened though is this scenario which is extremely common in lending in the Philippines.

You lend out your money and get an increasing number of interest while at the same time the loan amounts continue to increase(This is why most people seem happy in the first 6 months of setting up these types of operations). After 6 months you start to see a failing rate at possibly 20% of clients and it starts to increase in number as more and more people become aware your not going to sue them or repossess assets. This would see a business go from profit to loss literally within a couple of months once it starts happening.

Now the question is this though if Paul was just an investor as he says but was responsible for giving back the money Bill recouped before his death did Paul get his own money back first completely instead of giving % back to everyone?

The ATM cards aren't important at this stage anymore as simply people would have been going hungry due to having no money if they did still hold peoples cards! Also you can order a replacement card as stolen/lost. The bank cards weren't important at all in the operation. Why lending companies use banks is a different reason not bank cards.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2012, 11:36:58 PM by alibi »
Tropicalpenpals.com "Your Friends In The Sun"

Offline The Stig

  • [Add as Friend]

  • FORUM LEADER

  • Private Forum Moderator

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 75
  • -Received: 47
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012


  • Posts: 549
  • Country: gb
    • View Profile
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #161 on: February 23, 2012, 12:41:38 AM »
Quote from: 'tropicalpenpals' pid='1051' dateline='1329953089'
I agree there are ways round the system but when Paul had that vehicle accident involving a motorbike the discussions at the time were that he had told others his visa hadn't been renewed for 2 years.

But don't quote 24 months otherwise people start to assume they can just wander into immigration and ask for it. If people are willing to put the effort in to contact the Commissioner or people like Mr Abellion I am sure you can work almost anything out with immigration "legally". At the same time everytime I have heard about Paul and immigration its not been because he's had a perfect visa record.



I don't understand this response. :huh: I gave it in reply to the post that said that anyone on a Tourist visa had to leave every 12 months - NOT TRUE you can renew for 16 months. Extending to 24 months can be done LEGALLY (it is on the BI website) by writing a letter asking for it. I know of at least 2 people who have done this & beyond - one in CDO & one in North Luzon. Nothing dodgy or underhand or semi legal.

I am NOT saying this applies to Paul, so separate the two in that respect.

Some say his scrotum has its own small gravity field...

Offline wowwowee

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Full Member

  • **
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 1
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 105
    • View Profile
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #162 on: February 23, 2012, 12:49:17 AM »
[/color][/size][/color][/size][/u]One mustnt lose sight of the facts :
1. Paul actively solicited funds from Linc members based on his credibility, and based on his assurances that because of the types of loans the money was pretty much guaranteed.
2.Paul advised people that he had a partner Bill, who was a banking expert, thus giving more credence to his request for investors
3. Paul and Bill both failed to protect the monies which they had been entrusted with and said that they had given the matter over to Bill's wife . This was done not only w/o the investors consent but it seems also w/o the investors knowledge . Loans were not provided by the investors based on the representations made by Julie- but rather by the representations made by Paul and Bill
4. When asked for information regarding the loan and both Paul and Bill either failed to respond to people or did so in an inadequate manner, so that it became impossible for the investors to know what was going on . This was in direct conflict to the agreement by which the investors put their monies in trust with Paul an Bill. Some people have been asking about their loans for over 10 months and both Paul and Bill refused to provide such information-
5 Julie took on the job of collecting the payments due but failed to do so . Instead she just let the borrowers go months and months without any attempt to collect the loans at all, this giving the borrowers the impression that there was no need to repay the monies.
6.  Now that the investors want their 1.7 M plus interest paid Paul has refused to accept responsibilty by trying to say that he had nothing to do with the loans, and that it was all up to Bill [ and of course leaving Julie in the hot seat]
7. Even though he knows that there is a huge amount of controversy regarding the loans Paul refuses to give any information, saying how he is busy elsewhere , although at the same time continues to post on other things every day on Linc.  In other words Paul is refusing to provide adequate answers to the people that he solicited funds from, and which he held in trust for them.

Some comparisons can be drawn between this case and Paul and Bill's case - especially if one decides to pursue this matter by way of criminal case [ estafa in the Philippines]

[/color]United States v. Sterling Douglas Fores, United States of America v. Brian Robert Keith, 902 F.2d 1566 (4th Cir. 1990)

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Date Filed: Tuesday, May 1st, 1990

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Sterling Douglas FORES, Defendant-Appellant.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Brian Robert KEITH, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 89-5190, 89-5191.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued Feb. 8, 1990.
Decided May 1, 1990.


Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (Cr. No. S-89-081)

Russell Paul Butler, Keiffer, Ditrani, Johnston, Butler & Reinstein, Camp Springs, Md., William F. Gosnell, Baltimore, Md., for appellants.

Christopher Bowmer Mead, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Md. (Argued) for appellee; Breckinridge L. Willcox, United States Attorney, Gregg L. Bernstein, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Md., on brief.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before SPROUSE and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges, and HIRAM H. WARD, Senior United States District Judge for the Middle District of North Carolina, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

1
Sterling Fores and Brian Keith appeal their convictions of conspiracy to defraud a bank under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 371 and bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1344. Appellants challenge a number of rulings made by the district court during the jury trial. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

I.

2
In November 1988 appellant Keith, presenting a fabricated contract with the District of Columbia Department of Employment Services, obtained a loan from Heritage Bank. Within the fabricated document appeared the name of appellant Fores, whom Keith described as his contact in the Department of Employment Services. William Aragoni, a Heritage Bank loan officer, verified through Fores that the contract was valid and that payment under the contract would be due in January. In actuality, however, Keith never had a contract with the District of Columbia government; the document he presented to Aragoni was an altered contract between the Department of Employment Services and the Washington Institute for Employee Training. Nevertheless, relying on appellants' misrepresentations, Aragoni authorized a loan to Keith of $45,000.00.

3
Keith failed to repay the loan when it came due and, after making further misrepresentations, obtained an extension until April 1, 1986. When the loan remained unpaid in April, Aragoni could not locate Keith. Thereafter, Aragoni called the Department of Employee Services, but Fores was unavailable, and no one there could confirm the existence of the fabricated contract. Keith never repaid Heritage Bank.

II.

4
Appellants first assert that the government's evidence that Heritage Bank was insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, an essential element as well as a jurisdictional prerequisite of both offenses, was insufficient to support the jury's verdicts of guilty. The trial transcript reflects testimony of a bank officer that Heritage Bank was FDIC insured in 1985 and 1987.* Appellants contend that since this witness did not work for the bank at the time during which the offenses were committed, he was incompetent to testify regarding the insured status of the bank, and that the evidence of FDIC insurance was insufficient to support the guilty verdicts. Although the most appropriate method of establishing FDIC insured status is to introduce the certificate of insurance for the relevant time period, we hold that the government's evidence of FDIC insurance in this case was sufficient to support the verdicts of guilty.

5
In United States v. Safely, 408 F.2d 603 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 983, 89 S.Ct. 2147, 23 L.Ed.2d 772 (1969), defendants challenged their bank robbery convictions on grounds that the evidence of FDIC insurance was insufficient. At that trial, a bank employee testified that the deposits "are" FDIC insured. Defendants contended that the testimony could have referred to the time of the offense or the time of trial. However, the district judge instructed the jury that it was for them to decide whether the employee referred to the date of the robbery or some other time. On appeal, this Court determined that the evidence of insurance, viewed in the context of all the evidence, was sufficient, since the "jury could draw the reasonable inference that the bank was insured at the time of the robbery." Safely, 403 F.2d at 605.

6
In a more recent case, United States v. Gallop, 838 F.2d 105 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 108 S.Ct. 2858, 101 L.Ed.2d 895 (1988), this Court addressed similar facts and held that testimony from a bank officer that the bank holding company "and its subsidiaries," which included the victim bank, were FDIC insured was sufficient to establish the existence of FDIC insurance for purposes of establishing federal jurisdiction. Id. at 111-12. This Court, citing numerous cases from other circuits, stated that a certificate of FDIC insurance is not a sine qua non of proof of jurisdiction. Id. at 112. Accordingly, we hold that the testimony of the Heritage Bank officer, although somewhat meager evidence, was sufficient to allow the jury to draw the reasonable inference that Heritage Bank was FDIC insured at the time of the offenses charged in the indictment.

7
Appellants next assign as error the district court's admission into evidence of appellants' other loan applications under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). Appellants contend that the probative value of the evidence was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice since the sole purpose of the evidence was to show criminal disposition. "The trial court has broad discretion in ruling on questions of relevancy and in balancing the probative value of relevant evidence against any undue prejudice." United States v. Zandi, 769 F.2d 229, 237 (4th Cir.1985). We find no abuse of discretion in the court's admission of evidence of the other loan applications and its instruction to the jury to consider them only to show that appellants acted intentionally and not because of mistake,
accident, or other reason.

8
Appellants further assign as error the district court's failure to admit statements in a business record which amounted to hearsay within hearsay. Appellants sought the admission of an inter-office memorandum containing hearsay statements of an employee of the Department of Employment Services and Mr. Aragoni. Appellants assert that the statements of the employee were not offered to prove the truth of the matters asserted, and that Aragoni's statements fell within the state of mind exception to the hearsay rule. Because it appears that the employee's statements regarded an earlier contract proposal and not the fraudulent contract used as collateral for the loan in this offense, and because a lender's state of mind is totally irrelevant in a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1344, we find no reversible error in the district judge's refusal to admit the statements. See United States v. Swearingen, 858 F.2d 1555, 1558 (11th Cir.1988), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 109 S.Ct. 1540, 103 L.Ed.2d 844 (1989).

9
We further find no error in the Court's determination that the misrepresentations made by appellants in obtaining the fraudulent loans were material as a matter of law, nor in the Court's decision to admit checks written by one conspirator to another as evidence of payment for criminal activity. Finally, discerning no prejudice to appellants, we find no merit in their contention that the district court abused its discretion by denying their motions for severed trials.

10
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is

11
AFFIRMED.


*
 The acts constituting the charged offenses occurred in 1985 and 1986. The government contends that the trial testimony actually regarded the years 1985 and 1986, and that the transcript incorrectly cites the years 1985 and 1987
« Last Edit: February 23, 2012, 07:24:06 AM by wowwowee »

Offline Ozepete

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Ozepete

  • **
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 100
  • -Received: 53
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012


  • Posts: 150
  • Country: au

  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • http://ozefridge.com.au
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #163 on: February 23, 2012, 01:58:02 AM »
I have been following this with interest because I was also offered to invest in this scheme (scam!) by Paul, but one look at it and I declined, fortunately because he was very convincing. Regards what has happened since, it is pretty obvious that the 'fat rat is in charge of the cheese' and may be still munching on it!!!
Also I don't think it's fair or justifiable to place any responsibility on Julie, she wasn't the one who made the offer or was operating this scam.  I don't know her but it appears that she wasn't even married to the late Bill  

Offline Terp54

  • [Add as Friend]

  • Jr. Member

  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2
  • -Received: 4
  • Date Registered: Feb 2012

  • Posts: 61
  • Country: 00
    • View Profile
    • Email
RE: Looking for Paul Petrea In Cebu
« Reply #164 on: February 23, 2012, 02:20:48 AM »
QuoteI don't know her but it appears that she wasn't even married to the late Bill.


My wife knows Julie and they weren't married.

 
Page-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-20-21-22-23-24-25-26-27-28-29-30-31-32-33-34-35-36-37-38-39-40-41-42-43-44-45

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last Post
24 Replies
664 Views
Last Post March 16, 2012, 11:54:32 AM
by Bob Ward

Home Messages   
{}Who's Online (2)
Loading...