Forgot your password?
Please enter your email & we will send your password to you:
My Account:
Copyright © International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). All rights reserved. ( Source of the document: ICC Digital Library )
An infamous US conman faces fraud charges for swindling at least 20 investors out of nearly US$1.1 million in so-called prime bank schemes that used forged standby letters of credit (L/Cs).
Career swindler Clif Goldstein - long known to criminal law authorities as "Dr. Noe" - is to answer charges brought by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that also names Goldstein's older brother, Paul Howe Noe, and two US companies run by the brothers, Great American Trust Co. and Great American Trust Corp.
Criminal record
"Dr. Noe," whose multi-million dollar swindles have been widely chronicled in US newspapers and abroad for decades, is a high school dropout from Texas who has sometimes claimed to be highly educated in order to gain the confidence of his victims.
Goldstein, 71, formerly Clifford Dixon Noe, has a criminal record as a conman that dates back to the 1970s that includes multiple convictions and prison sentences for wire fraud, mail fraud and forgery. Goldstein's brother, Paul Noe, 74, also has an extensive criminal record, including convictions and prison sentences for embezzlement, larceny and wire fraud.
The SEC complaint, filed in the US District Court in Columbia, alleges that Goldstein, Noe and their companies sold wholly fictitious securities that they described as "stand-by L/Cs" sold by "top ten European banks." Four other defendants have been named in the complaint.
100% returns
The prime bank schemes were promoted through in-person solicitations and over the Internet, according to the complaint. Victims who were targeted typically included individuals associated with cash-strapped companies in urgent need of financing and sophisticated investors looking for high returns in short periods of time.
In some instances, the defendants promised to double investors' money in 13 weeks. Instead, the complaint charges, they pocketed the money for their own personal use.
This article represents the views of the author and not necessarily those of the ICC or any of the other partners in DC-PRO.