ATM LEASEBACK SCHEMES-- any insight?

[worried]

You're missing the point... it doesn't really matter if grimreaper was right or not (at least not to me, or the 1300 losers out there).... what matters is that there's almost 600 winners apparently not accounted for by the Receiver (in addition to the 660 he mentions... if there's only 1300 losers and 2400+ total victims, then the rest have to be 'winners'...)... AND, that means a relatively small number of winning CONTRACTS (as a ratio of 31000+ CONTRACTS), has to be spread out over all those ~1100 winners, making all but 20 of them too small to go after.... that's the bad news.... I don't care if grimreaper was right or not except for this fact. And, again... I really suspect that not all those small winners are real... Arguing with grimreaper is a waste of time (especially when he's right)... looking for money is time better spent...

[Hyrion]

You're missing the point...

I understood your point on the rest of that.

I was simply keeping the record clear that if anyone - whether Grim or not - views the ratios you provided as indicating Grim was right, they'd be mistaken because the ratios you provided do not come close to being 1:1.

Arguing with grimreaper is a waste of time (especially when he's right)

Now that point in your original I missed: definitely missed the sarcasm.

[The Observer]

The main problem I have with the theory of Joel and Ed manufacturing a lot of small winners to hide additional skimming is that it would require a bunch of bank accounts that either (1) Ed and Joel had to provide real identification for or (2) Ed and Joel had to come up with a bunch of fake IDs when opening the accounts in the names of the "small winners." Either way, it would taken more time and effort to issue checks every month in the names of 200+ people or entities, endorse them with forged or fake signatures, deposit, and then issue checks back to Ed/Joel or otherwise go into the bank to do cash withdrawals or electronic transfers to other accounts, than just simply stealing the money outright.

[notorial dissent]

I have to agree with Observer here, this theory is just so much fantasy. Unless I have really missed something as we've gone along, the "boys" have not shown any indication or proof that they are anywhere near smart enough to have pulled something like this off.

I agree that it is troubling that there seems to be a sizable gap in the records, and I don't have any real idea of what happened. The lack of records is the really troubling part, and I'm not sure what the answer is there.

[webhick]

The gap could be trusts or corporations which have since been tied to individuals.

[The Observer]

The lack of records is the really troubling part, and I'm not sure what the answer is there.

It is troubling, but the only possible answer within the time frame allotted for the receiver to resolve the accounting is that we will never know the correct answer. The receiver is pushing to get this thing wrapped up before the available money runs out, so a complete forensic accounting is not going to happen. Just another SNAFU brought to you courtesy of Ed's hobo accounting system.

[webhick]

Just another SNAFU brought to you courtesy of Ed's hobo accounting system.

Don't insult the hobos. They don't operate can recycling investment schemes wherein you give them a can and in exchange, they give you $0.05 a month for life.

[webhick]

I just skimmed the report and it also said that there were investors who settled with the installment plan. If everyone makes their payments, it's like $690k paid back over the next year. There's also mention that tax returns prior to 2014 (Receiver filed 2014) were "significantly inaccurate." Specifically noted "reconciled fictitious assets previously depreciated".

How is Ed still licensed? Oh wait, a search of the California Board of Accountancy turns up nothing for him or his company. That bothers me. He's been doing this since 1979 and was never licensed?

[worried]

The main problem I have with the theory of Joel and Ed manufacturing a lot of small winners to hide additional skimming is that it would require a bunch of bank accounts that either (1) Ed and Joel had to provide real identification for or (2) Ed and Joel had to come up with a bunch of fake IDs when opening the accounts in the names of the "small winners." Either way, it would taken more time and effort to issue checks every month in the names of 200+ people or entities, endorse them with forged or fake signatures, deposit, and then issue checks back to Ed/Joel or otherwise go into the bank to do cash withdrawals or electronic transfers to other accounts, than just simply stealing the money outright.

I remember reading in one of the fee applications that the Receiver/Counsel was researching the idea of charging Citibank with 'aiding and abetting'....

Well,... if Joel wasn't hiding money by sending out checks then he either really WAS deluded into thinking he was running a real business (I'm having a hard time believing that) or he thought it might help him to LOOK like he thought he was running a real business (ok, maybe that's a bit more likely), but to go to the trouble of opening a new account after the freezing of the first and personally do multimillion dollar deals with fresh victims during the last week or so before the second account was found and frozen? How does that help him?

I appreciate the critique of my ideas and proposed explanations, I really do. I'm not saying I HAVE the answer, I just know there are questions that need to be answered. I suppose Joel's defense-friendly psychoanalyst would simply say that he was desperate to keep sending money out to make other people feel good.... I just have a really hard time with that.... I've accused him and Ed before of just being sociopathically sadistic in those final days and maybe that's all it was. I just hate to assume that's true when it wasn't and miss something.

[worried]

I just skimmed the report and it also said that there were investors who settled with the installment plan. If everyone makes their payments, it's like $690k paid back over the next year. There's also mention that tax returns prior to 2014 (Receiver filed 2014) were "significantly inaccurate." Specifically noted "reconciled fictitious assets previously depreciated".

How is Ed still licensed? Oh wait, a search of the California Board of Accountancy turns up nothing for him or his company. That bothers me. He's been doing this since 1979 and was never licensed?

Speaking of Ed... how come we haven't heard anything about him? We haven't seen a sentencing date for him, only Joel, and that's supposed to be Monday of next week (Nov 16th) unless it's been delayed again and we haven't heard. Is the prosecutor building an even better case against Ed ("ficticious assets... depreciated", etc.)?

[Judge Roy Bean]

Well, just for fun, here's a link to a list of some of what they're going to auction off from Bernie Madoff's holdings:

http://www.loweringthebar.net/2010/11/b ... ekend.html

Something tells me the pair involved in this scheme don't have those kinds of assets.

[worried]

Well, just for fun, here's a link to a list of some of what they're going to auction off from Bernie Madoff's holdings:

http://www.loweringthebar.net/2010/11/b ... ekend.html

Something tells me the pair involved in this scheme don't have those kinds of assets.

Wow! That is truly an awesome read! I have to repeat my favorite line here:

"80: the red loveseat on which Bernie and Satan used to sit and gaze into each other's eyes."

[Lost Income]

Given NAS has been running/growing for 19yrs creating poor records and multiple rat holes that hamper the Receivers ability to retrieve money, what is the potential for Joel & Ed to be reqd to pay a high restitution amount or to auction off their assets to help clean this up?

[Judge Roy Bean]

Given NAS has been running/growing for 19yrs creating poor records and multiple rat holes that hamper the Receivers ability to retrieve money, what is the potential for Joel & Ed to be reqd to pay a high restitution amount or to auction off their assets to help clean this up?

Believe me, there are a lot of prisoners and parolees who owe far more than they will ever be able to repay.

[Lost Income]

Thanks for the encouragement.

Joels name mentioned lots lately, so not sure where Ed is currently in all this but seems like he'd be in trouble for both NAS and his accounting biz??

[webhick]

I just blew another $40 downloading from the criminal docket. Ed's in there a lot recently and it looks like he's had some of his filing sealed. I might as well just post a link to the directory housing all the files so you can check it out. I haven't looked at everything yet. I've stopped using pads of paper to track my notes and have switched to Mendeley. It's a bit of a chore converting everything, but I'll hopefully be able to reference things faster in the future.

So, anyway, here's everything I've downloaded from the criminal case.

[Tednewsom]

Thanks for spending the 40 bucks! Appreciated!

There's a passel of support letters for ol' Wishner here, as with Gillis, and I just love the devotion these sweet fellows engender. I especially enjoyed a letter from a long-time friend of Wishner who, when he found himself in very desperate straits, went to Unka Wish to ask advice. Wishner whipped out his checkbook and wrote the guy a $10,000 check on the spot! Hey, THAT is a good man!

You dumb son of a bitch, it cost him nothing-- it was stolen money, you bonehead.

[Lost Income]

Yeah, I would hope the judge can understand that "nice" and "generous" are lots easier when using stolen money, and helps attract new victims.

[Lost Income]

From USDJ Email received this evening:

Defendants Joel Gillis and Edward Wishner were sentenced today (November 16, 2015) to the following:

Gillis: 120 months imprisonment, followed by 3 years of supervised release
Wishner: 108 months imprisonment, followed by 3 years of supervised release

A restitution hearing has been scheduled for February 1, 2016 at 10:00 AM before Judge Otero, courtroom #1, on the 2nd floor of the U.S. Courthouse, 312 N. Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012. the notification system will be updated after the restitution hearing.

The court ordered the defendants to surrender to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons on December 28, 2015.

[The Observer]

Oh boy. Ed likes to lay it on thick as well:

"Ed is genuinely an authentic, honorable man. I met Ed in his office about 8 months ago and I saw him extremely upset. I asked him if everything is okay. He briefly explained the trouble that he was in with his partner. I suggested that he state the fact about his level of involvement. His response: 'I will not throw my friend under the bus. That is not the kind of man I am.'"

Right - on the one hand Ed is telling his reference that his partner is to blame for all of this mess that Ed supposedly finds himself in, yet believes he has the obligation to go down the tubes with Joel simply because Ed is a better man than Joel? And of course no mention of the victims that Ed threw under the bus for 19 years.

The sentences, although not light and probably mean that Ed and Joel will not live long enough to get out, were not as hard as I felt they should have been. Of particular interest would be the judge's comments and reasoning for the sentence amounts.