Article

Note: Inger L. Jensen and Andrew Mackey (Fraudsters) created Andrew Samuel Mackey Financial Funding Corporation (ASM) as an investment company. Fraudsters hired intermediaries to recruit and represent to investors that ASM would place their money into foreign, high-yield investments that would return high-yields.

At first, Fraudsters made monthly payments to early investors, but these payments stopped shortly thereafter. Fraudsters then began to make excuses as to why ASM was not making payments under the investment agreements. While providing excuses, Fraudsters represented that ASM was profitable. Fraudsters attempted to prove its profitability by holding conference calls with intermediaries describing complex investment deals, falsifying 1099 forms, over-reporting cash on hand, describing finalized deals that did not exist, and encouraging people not to report matters to government officials to avoid slowing repayments.

During this time, Fraudsters had control of ASM accounts and used the money to repay some investors and for personal use. They also wrote checks to themselves and withdrew thousands through ATMs and over-the-counter transactions. They also approached a lawyer who informed them that the government would likely view the program as a Ponzi scheme.

Eventually, investors lost most or all of their investments, and the government launched an investigation into Fraudsters and found that ASM lost USD 5,500,000 and charged Fraudsters with conspiracy to defraud investors, wire fraud, and mail fraud. At trial, the court allowed testimony from investors, intermediaries, Fraudsters' advising attorney, investigators, and a forensic accountant. At the conclusion of the trial, a jury found Fraudsters guilty of the charges. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in a per curiam decision, rejected all arguments made by Fraudsters and upheld the convictions.

[JAH]

COPYRIGHT OF THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL BANKING LAW & PRACTICE

The views expressed in this Case Summary are those of the Institute of International Banking Law and Practice and not necessarily those of ICC or the other partners in DC-PRO.

This article represents the views of the author and not necessarily those of the ICC or any of the other partners in DC-PRO.