From: Anthony Fozard <Anthony.Fozard@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
Subject: Re: RCMP IMET followup correspondence re largest crime in Canadian History committed without any apparent police involvement
Date: December 7, 2010 4:23:26 PM MST
To: larry elford <lelford@shaw.ca>
Cc: Ian LAWSON <ian.lawson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
Sir,
I was under the understanding that Mr. Mike Miles was keeping you updated on the complaint. I have sent this request to Mr. Miles and I am also extending this request to your associates.
"You have suggested that a fraud and or a conspiracy in relation to a fraud has occurred in respect of the issuance and distribution of Asset Backed Commercial Paper (ABCP) in Canada. However, you are not able to provide us with any evidence in support of this complaint.
You have indicated there are others in your group who may be able to provide evidence of the fraud or conspiracy. I am formally inviting them to provide me with this evidence.
Please forward any direct evidence of the fraud or conspiracy to my attention at the indicated e-mail address."
A.P. (Anthony) FOZARD, Staff Sergeant BA, CIM, FCSI
RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team (Vancouver)
2200-401 West Georgia Street, Vancouver
British Columbia, Canada V6B 5A1
Telephone: (604) 602-4455
Facsimile: (604) 331-1222
EMail: anthony.fozard@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
(advocate comment: I am having to do some searching to determine where Sergeant Fozard is coming up with his wording (in red above) but I am somewhat less surprised to see that he has no answers and no responses to anything actually requested.
I am having difficulty coming up with a response to the communication from this member of the RCMP. Reasons:
(1) he has been (for a year now) offered the full help of more than one expert, former investment industry persons who can help explain these matters, and he has failed to call upon any of the persons I know of. Now he suggests that he is expecting these people to do his investigation for him? Where were the police on this when the complaints were made? Of course they ignored offers of help, or even of careful explanation. A "walk thru" of the evidence if you will. It is a shame that this force that has so very little real world investment or financial experience uses hubris as a means to not learn from citizens who are willing to volunteer to help the police. It is a shame on those officers who are unable to do this, to perhaps learn something new or different about the types of crimes and abuses being done today.
(2) Officer Fozard uses the words Fraud or conspiracy in his letter, attributing them to myself, when I am not certain that he is being accurate with my correspondence. Nevertheless he goes on to suggest "You have indicated there are others in your group who may be able to provide evidence of the fraud or conspiracy. I am formally inviting them to provide me with this evidence. "
Instead of letting me know this, that he should actually let "them" know of this. During his one year investigation, those persons who signed the original complaint should have been contacted and interviewed and information should have been compiled about what they know, and what they are willing to inform. Among those who signed the original compliant exists some of the top financial investigative expertise in Canada. To read his letter of last week it appears to me that he has done none of this, no contracting of the parties involved, and is now attempting to turn responsibility for the investigation to "others?"
(3) I obviously have concerns when crimes or abuses are committed against Canadians. Crimes and or abuses in the billions of dollars have been committed. It becomes further concerning when citizens make complaint to the only so called national police organization in the country, and they get what feels like a brush off. A brush off by persons who at times less qualified than the complainants to even understand the crime.
(4) I then read recent testimony to Parliament Justice and Human Rights Committees about the performance of the RCMP in prosecutions of this type, and see legal experts suggesting that the crown may not even be motivated, trained, or equipped to handle such criminal prosecutions. http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublication ... l=40&Ses=3
It all points to a situation whereby the police are unable to act, as evidenced by having virtually nothing to report back to a complainant, after nearly one year, on the largest financial crimes in Canadian history. Combined with a crown which may or may not be able to do this job. I have no evidence of this other than a gut feeling, some prosecution data, and comments by legal experts on the "weakness of the crown". It seems that prosecuting a
When combined with the exterior hubris that seems to emanate from the RCMP IMET, the attitude which seems to say. "leave this stuff to the experts, we will handle it", without nearly any success, it creates an atmosphere of fear and justification with this force. They (rightly) fear that they do not have the skills, the talents nor the resources to properly police complicated financial crimes, and they do not have the ability to honestly express that within their work environment. This puts them into a bit of a bind, personally, where to serve the public well, they would have to speak up and describe the shortcomings of their organization, and describe what resources they need. This cannot be done in any dysfunctional organization, and thus they must serve their bosses and political masters instead, letting the public be damned, bullied, or ignored, as required to "not" get the job done, so to speak.
It becomes quite clear when looking at the RCMP IMET of today, that events have conspired to create a vastly dysfunctional organization. (although the blame must also fall upon the crown, which is under the attorney general?, making it an even more political (and therefore untouchable) animal.) An organization which "cannot" work cooperatively with the public, with complainants, with others. But one which must act in a manner secretive, authoritative, and unable to answer to or follow simple professional practices.
I am grateful for the opportunity to see this in its full extent. it has taken years to witness, research and follow these financial abuses of Canadians to the point where the weak link can be identified. The weak link being the police and prosecution system which is simply not gear and equipped for twenty-first century crime. Unfortunately, the cost to the country has been greater than these organizations can ever imagine.
If there were a lesson to be learned here, or a solution found, I believe it will have to come from a completely new system of specialized investigative and prosecution talent to combat financial crimes. To continue to work with the RCMP as our greatest weapon against this is allowing damage to our citizens and to our economy of amounts greater than the cost of "each and every other crime in the country, combined". It is like trying to run a successful country while swimming with 100 lb weights on us to slow us and drag us down. There is simply no reason (other than politics, optics and ego) for this RCMP IMET to be allowed to hurt our country to this extent any longer.
Financial Investigator, Forensic Investment Analysis, Financial Malpractice Expert Witness, Author, Speaker, Systems Mechanic
http://www.lulu.com/shop/http://www.lulu.com/shop/larry-elford/about-your-financial-murder/paperback/product-23564385.html
Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar? Nope.
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Tue Dec 07, 2010 6:24 pm
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Tue Dec 07, 2010 6:22 pm
(note the date, posted here out of order, but necessary to follow the process followed to try and interest the RCMP into Canada's most financially damaging crimes)
Feb 15, 2010
A.P. (Anthony) FOZARD, Staff Sergeant
RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team (Vancouver)
2200-401 West Georgia Street, Vancouver
British Columbia, Canada V6B 5A1
Telephone: (604) 602-4455
Facsimile: (604) 331-1222
EMail: anthony.fozard@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
From: Larry Elford, former CFP, CIM, FCSI, Associate Portfolio Manager, retired
Re: Vancouver IMET file 2010-771
Dear Mr. Fozard,
I write to you with supplemental information regarding the complaint made by Canadians into the sale of Non Bank Asset Backed Commercial Paper (ABCP). I appreciate that the RCMP have confirmed the opening of a criminal investigative file into the sale of ABCP, as have law enforcement agencies in other countries.
Public documents are available which indicate that our provincial securities regulatory agencies provided essential help to sellers of this ABCP, to the financial benefit of the securities commissions as well as the investment sellers, and to the detriment of the public interest. I feel that the RCMP should also be made aware of these documents and of the propensity of securities commissions to act in a complicit manner with investment firms who are abusing the public. If these allegations are found to have merit, then we are talking about breach of the public trust by our provincial securities commissions.
None of the public securities commissions have been willing to answer questions on what process was followed and what public interest is served by letting substandard investments (those which did not met our laws) be sold without notice to Canadians. Of the approximately 5000 instances where securities commissions have let investment firms skirt our securities laws, I find no examples of public input or public notice of these deals. This may put them in a category of secrecy which further reflects poorly on the process and of those who allow our laws to be skirted.
It appears indicative of a captured regulatory system and one with incestuous relationships with the investment industry which appear to preclude proper duties of care being delivered to the public.
I write with slight reservation, knowing that not only have the securities industry claimed the right to self-police on matters such as this, but that the RCMP IMET has allowed securities regulators and self regulatory members to work on its force and advise from the position of an RCMP “insider”. These regulators, which are all paid a salary by the investment industry simply should not be on your joint management committees when investigating the investment industry. This could be construed as a conflict of interest were it necessary to investigate the industry or regulators who are paid by this industry.
I urge you to take public steps to show that your force is willing and capable of separating from the investigation, regulators or self regulators who are in fact paid and supported by the very industry you are investigating.
I further ask that the regulators themselves be investigated for breaches of the public trust.
Specific example include, but are not limited to:
The granting (to investment dealers) of permissions to violate Securities laws in order to help facilitate the sale of known defective investment products, and the simultaneous failure to ensure that the public were notified of this “exemptive relief” process before they invested in the products.
Failure to disclose market risks that were known to the regulators (as evidenced by the need for legal relief application) and intentionally veiled from public view by the industry.
Self-Preservation of regulatory agencies positions through moral disengagement and motivated forgetting towards a securities industry that funds the salaries of all investment regulators in Canada. Dishonest deed by agents of the crown. Failure to provide the duty of care promised to the public by a crown agent.
Regulatory and self regulatory board governance failure. Using boards composed of industry members and very little to none who represent the public interest.
Regulators knew or ought to have known that legal exemptions were detrimental to the protections intended by laws, and that by skirting them, the public was and is being placed at risk.
Granting of legal exemptions to the financial industry without notice or due process with the public is indicative of an “abuse of discretion” by an agent of the crown. Hiding the process from the public adds fuel to the argument of an abusive act.
Consistent record of favoritism toward the investment industry, with literally thousands of such behaviors (permissions granted to violate securities laws) that favor the industry and damage the public. Never a public notice was given. No public input was allowed.
Criminal allegations may include but not limited to the following against the provincial securities regulators and self regulatory agencies:
-Failure to provide the public with honest services
-Breach of duty to protect the public
-Regulators knew or should have known enough about their stated protective role in matters that affect the public interest to avoid allowing thousands of exemptions to be granted to those who sell investment products and advice.
-Breach of the public trust.
-Negligence.
-Negligently and intentionally failing to protect the public interest through a conflicted securities regulatory system.
-Breaching securities laws and practices that were intended to protect the investing public. Professional complicities with the investment industry that constitute a conflict of interest.
These matters have caused billions of dollars to be siphoned out of our economy, into the hands of investment sellers. Some of the matters may involve civil recourse from the agencies involved, and some may be criminal in nature. I trust that the RCMP will take these matters as seriously as the damage to our Canadian economy. I also trust that the RCMP IMET will take professional steps to separate all aspects of this investigation, from the regulators and self regulatory persons who are on IMET joint management committee’s, and whose regulatory agencies may be suspected of criminal code offenses against Canadians.
Yours,
Larry Elford, former CFP, CIM, FCSI, Associate Portfolio Manager, retired
Founder of http://www.investoradvocates.ca
Feb 15, 2010
A.P. (Anthony) FOZARD, Staff Sergeant
RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team (Vancouver)
2200-401 West Georgia Street, Vancouver
British Columbia, Canada V6B 5A1
Telephone: (604) 602-4455
Facsimile: (604) 331-1222
EMail: anthony.fozard@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
From: Larry Elford, former CFP, CIM, FCSI, Associate Portfolio Manager, retired
Re: Vancouver IMET file 2010-771
Dear Mr. Fozard,
I write to you with supplemental information regarding the complaint made by Canadians into the sale of Non Bank Asset Backed Commercial Paper (ABCP). I appreciate that the RCMP have confirmed the opening of a criminal investigative file into the sale of ABCP, as have law enforcement agencies in other countries.
Public documents are available which indicate that our provincial securities regulatory agencies provided essential help to sellers of this ABCP, to the financial benefit of the securities commissions as well as the investment sellers, and to the detriment of the public interest. I feel that the RCMP should also be made aware of these documents and of the propensity of securities commissions to act in a complicit manner with investment firms who are abusing the public. If these allegations are found to have merit, then we are talking about breach of the public trust by our provincial securities commissions.
None of the public securities commissions have been willing to answer questions on what process was followed and what public interest is served by letting substandard investments (those which did not met our laws) be sold without notice to Canadians. Of the approximately 5000 instances where securities commissions have let investment firms skirt our securities laws, I find no examples of public input or public notice of these deals. This may put them in a category of secrecy which further reflects poorly on the process and of those who allow our laws to be skirted.
It appears indicative of a captured regulatory system and one with incestuous relationships with the investment industry which appear to preclude proper duties of care being delivered to the public.
I write with slight reservation, knowing that not only have the securities industry claimed the right to self-police on matters such as this, but that the RCMP IMET has allowed securities regulators and self regulatory members to work on its force and advise from the position of an RCMP “insider”. These regulators, which are all paid a salary by the investment industry simply should not be on your joint management committees when investigating the investment industry. This could be construed as a conflict of interest were it necessary to investigate the industry or regulators who are paid by this industry.
I urge you to take public steps to show that your force is willing and capable of separating from the investigation, regulators or self regulators who are in fact paid and supported by the very industry you are investigating.
I further ask that the regulators themselves be investigated for breaches of the public trust.
Specific example include, but are not limited to:
The granting (to investment dealers) of permissions to violate Securities laws in order to help facilitate the sale of known defective investment products, and the simultaneous failure to ensure that the public were notified of this “exemptive relief” process before they invested in the products.
Failure to disclose market risks that were known to the regulators (as evidenced by the need for legal relief application) and intentionally veiled from public view by the industry.
Self-Preservation of regulatory agencies positions through moral disengagement and motivated forgetting towards a securities industry that funds the salaries of all investment regulators in Canada. Dishonest deed by agents of the crown. Failure to provide the duty of care promised to the public by a crown agent.
Regulatory and self regulatory board governance failure. Using boards composed of industry members and very little to none who represent the public interest.
Regulators knew or ought to have known that legal exemptions were detrimental to the protections intended by laws, and that by skirting them, the public was and is being placed at risk.
Granting of legal exemptions to the financial industry without notice or due process with the public is indicative of an “abuse of discretion” by an agent of the crown. Hiding the process from the public adds fuel to the argument of an abusive act.
Consistent record of favoritism toward the investment industry, with literally thousands of such behaviors (permissions granted to violate securities laws) that favor the industry and damage the public. Never a public notice was given. No public input was allowed.
Criminal allegations may include but not limited to the following against the provincial securities regulators and self regulatory agencies:
-Failure to provide the public with honest services
-Breach of duty to protect the public
-Regulators knew or should have known enough about their stated protective role in matters that affect the public interest to avoid allowing thousands of exemptions to be granted to those who sell investment products and advice.
-Breach of the public trust.
-Negligence.
-Negligently and intentionally failing to protect the public interest through a conflicted securities regulatory system.
-Breaching securities laws and practices that were intended to protect the investing public. Professional complicities with the investment industry that constitute a conflict of interest.
These matters have caused billions of dollars to be siphoned out of our economy, into the hands of investment sellers. Some of the matters may involve civil recourse from the agencies involved, and some may be criminal in nature. I trust that the RCMP will take these matters as seriously as the damage to our Canadian economy. I also trust that the RCMP IMET will take professional steps to separate all aspects of this investigation, from the regulators and self regulatory persons who are on IMET joint management committee’s, and whose regulatory agencies may be suspected of criminal code offenses against Canadians.
Yours,
Larry Elford, former CFP, CIM, FCSI, Associate Portfolio Manager, retired
Founder of http://www.investoradvocates.ca
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Sat Dec 04, 2010 6:55 pm
I’ll be anxious to hear their reply – if they send one. As you know, the RCMP refused to investigate the Mount Real case because it was “too complicated”. As a result there will never be any criminal charges laid against the perpetrators – there is virtually no policing of this industry and no oversight. Thank you for your tireless efforts in this cause.
Janet Watson
Quebec
Janet Watson
Quebec
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Sat Dec 04, 2010 5:44 pm
A.P. (Anthony) FOZARD, Staff Sergeant
RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team (Vancouver)
2200-401 West Georgia Street, Vancouver
British Columbia, Canada V6B 5A1
Telephone: (604) 602-4455
Facsimile: (604) 331-1222
EMail: anthony.fozard@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
From: Larry Elford, former CFP, CIM, FCSI, Associate Portfolio Manager, retired
Re: Vancouver IMET file 2010-771
It seems as if nearly one year has passed without communication, nor written reply from the RCMP into complaints of a criminal nature regarding the largest financial crimes in Canadian history.
I write to follow up with you in hopes of obtaining a response on the following matters:
1. Do you have any reply to a criminal complaint given to you over a year ago on ABCP investments, $32 Billion dollars missing from the economy? Vancouver IMET file 2010-771
2. A written reply is also sought to concerns that securities regulators and self regulators, sit on joint management committee’s of RCMP IMET making them “insiders” into criminal investigations which at times involve their industry and the industry that pays their salaries. The risk of conflicts of interest affecting criminal investigations have not been properly addressed by the RCMP. This concern and complaint was given to you approximately one year ago without response to date.
3. A criminal breach of trust complaint was provided to you against the Alberta Securities Commission for allowing security law exemptions (without public notice, nor public consultation) to be granted, in exchange for money. This allows tainted investments as well as tainted investment advice to be given or sold to consumers. This complaint was given to you on Feb 15th, 2010 and no response from you has resulted since this time.
Is the RCMP capable of undertaking such investigations or will it be required at this stage to admit inability to investigate? I understand if this is the case, but I hope that if so, the RCMP will inform the public that they are not protected from financial predation by professionals and regulators.
I send this letter and request a formal reply so it can form a part of the historical record on this matter of growing importance to Canadians.
Thank you for taking the time to respond to this communication.
Larry Elford, former CFP, CIM, FCSI, Associate Portfolio Manager, retired
Lethbridge AB
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:57 pm
Lets talk serious crime..........seriously.
I noticed Justice Minister Rob Nicholson’s announcement of broadening the definition of “serious offense” crimes. I would like to thank him for his diligent efforts to protect Canadians from crime, and give some additional food for thought.
During thirty years I have witnessed numerous crimes and abuses that go un-investigated and un-prosecuted due to the “protections” that the industry has in place.
The protections are:
An ability to be “self regulating”, ie, doing their own “industry enforcement”. Combine this with being able to hire or appoint the very persons who police the industry and a serious conflict of interest is put into place.
Further combine the ingredient of allowing the financial industry to pay the salaries of those enforcement people, and the deal is nearly sealed.
A final ingredient is needed. It is provided by paying salaries of three to four times higher for those people to ensure their true compliance. The top securities regulator in Canada is paid more than four times as much money as the top person in the USA.
Bingo, we now have a investment regulatory regime which is “owned” by the investment industry.
Some people have said that the financial industry was allowed to come close to collapsing the economy of the entire world, and I agree. What not many have said is just how easily and freely financiers are able to get away with this kind of behavior, particularly in Canada, where we place such trust in our few banks to put them “above examination”.
Having said all this, here is what I really think Canadians should have some concern about, or simply be aware of:
Some commonly observed crimes and financial abuses such as:
Fraud
Forgery
Breach of Trust
Negligent Misrepresentation
Secret Commissions
Fabricating Evidence
Obstructing Justice
False Pretence
False Document
Falsification of Books and Documents
Some of this list comes from my own experience within the industry. A few on the list comes from a Kelowna man whose 90 year old father was a victim of the industry. In his case, the police would not even respond. In each case I have experienced, the police choose not to become involved. They claim that crimes involving investments are referred to the financial industry regulators. Or worse, that criminal matters will NOT be looked into unless they are specifically invited to do so by the financial industry. Amazing when you think of it. The industry has placed itself “above our laws”. Our police and law enforcement bodies have naively become supporters of the ruse.
Our financial institutions in Canada have become too big to prosecute, and to ensure further protection, they have engineered a system by which they purport to police themselves. The result is that Canadians have the strongest financial firms in the world. The second result is that when mistakes are made, and billions are lost or skimmed due to trickery, the financial industry will win, and the public will lose. Every time. See flogg topic titled “Financial crime more than every other crime combined” at investoradvocates.ca for some haphazardly complied sources for this. Why haphazardly? You don’t think the financial industry is going to compile this list do you?
I have tried to meet and present these concerns to my local police commission. In my case they will not allow a member of the public to speak to them on the topic. I am hoping it is not because the local police commission chairman is a mutual fund salesman. I trust that they have better reasons than this to choose to see no evil.
To give the public a greater chance of not being taken for a ride by sellers of investment products, here are some free sources of education on industry tricks of the trade:
http://www.investoradvocates.ca a web forum by and for investment professionals who oppose predatory financial practices
http://www.breachoftrust.ca a video journey by an investment industry whistleblower (myself) who would like to freely share 30 years of observed industry tricks.
http://www.investorvoice.ca Site by a former investment industry professional who strives to place the public interest and public awareness above self interest.
Read FREE RIDER by John Lawrence Reynolds and THE NAKED INVESTOR to inform yourself about how the system is rigged to serve predatory practices first.
See Markarian vs CIBC case at http://www.investorvoice.ca or see the four page summary of how CIBC preyed upon an elderly couple to take their entire investment account from them. Article found at http://maisonneuve.org/ If you cannot gain access to it there, subscribe to their good magazine, and thank them for being one of the only media in Canada willing to speak truth to our largest industry. (also pasted online at
https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0Bz ... Yzhi&hl=en
I noticed Justice Minister Rob Nicholson’s announcement of broadening the definition of “serious offense” crimes. I would like to thank him for his diligent efforts to protect Canadians from crime, and give some additional food for thought.
During thirty years I have witnessed numerous crimes and abuses that go un-investigated and un-prosecuted due to the “protections” that the industry has in place.
The protections are:
An ability to be “self regulating”, ie, doing their own “industry enforcement”. Combine this with being able to hire or appoint the very persons who police the industry and a serious conflict of interest is put into place.
Further combine the ingredient of allowing the financial industry to pay the salaries of those enforcement people, and the deal is nearly sealed.
A final ingredient is needed. It is provided by paying salaries of three to four times higher for those people to ensure their true compliance. The top securities regulator in Canada is paid more than four times as much money as the top person in the USA.
Bingo, we now have a investment regulatory regime which is “owned” by the investment industry.
Some people have said that the financial industry was allowed to come close to collapsing the economy of the entire world, and I agree. What not many have said is just how easily and freely financiers are able to get away with this kind of behavior, particularly in Canada, where we place such trust in our few banks to put them “above examination”.
Having said all this, here is what I really think Canadians should have some concern about, or simply be aware of:
Some commonly observed crimes and financial abuses such as:
Fraud
Forgery
Breach of Trust
Negligent Misrepresentation
Secret Commissions
Fabricating Evidence
Obstructing Justice
False Pretence
False Document
Falsification of Books and Documents
Some of this list comes from my own experience within the industry. A few on the list comes from a Kelowna man whose 90 year old father was a victim of the industry. In his case, the police would not even respond. In each case I have experienced, the police choose not to become involved. They claim that crimes involving investments are referred to the financial industry regulators. Or worse, that criminal matters will NOT be looked into unless they are specifically invited to do so by the financial industry. Amazing when you think of it. The industry has placed itself “above our laws”. Our police and law enforcement bodies have naively become supporters of the ruse.
Our financial institutions in Canada have become too big to prosecute, and to ensure further protection, they have engineered a system by which they purport to police themselves. The result is that Canadians have the strongest financial firms in the world. The second result is that when mistakes are made, and billions are lost or skimmed due to trickery, the financial industry will win, and the public will lose. Every time. See flogg topic titled “Financial crime more than every other crime combined” at investoradvocates.ca for some haphazardly complied sources for this. Why haphazardly? You don’t think the financial industry is going to compile this list do you?
I have tried to meet and present these concerns to my local police commission. In my case they will not allow a member of the public to speak to them on the topic. I am hoping it is not because the local police commission chairman is a mutual fund salesman. I trust that they have better reasons than this to choose to see no evil.
To give the public a greater chance of not being taken for a ride by sellers of investment products, here are some free sources of education on industry tricks of the trade:
http://www.investoradvocates.ca a web forum by and for investment professionals who oppose predatory financial practices
http://www.breachoftrust.ca a video journey by an investment industry whistleblower (myself) who would like to freely share 30 years of observed industry tricks.
http://www.investorvoice.ca Site by a former investment industry professional who strives to place the public interest and public awareness above self interest.
Read FREE RIDER by John Lawrence Reynolds and THE NAKED INVESTOR to inform yourself about how the system is rigged to serve predatory practices first.
See Markarian vs CIBC case at http://www.investorvoice.ca or see the four page summary of how CIBC preyed upon an elderly couple to take their entire investment account from them. Article found at http://maisonneuve.org/ If you cannot gain access to it there, subscribe to their good magazine, and thank them for being one of the only media in Canada willing to speak truth to our largest industry. (also pasted online at
https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0Bz ... Yzhi&hl=en
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:41 pm
Hi Larry -
Thanks very much for linking us with Mr. S and the Post. I would like to send you a number of my Dad's recent summaries that I have typed for him. He is particularly concerned with RCMP in Kelowna refusing to allow him to take evidence of violations of the Criminal Code by the Canaccord broker - to them. My Dad is very concerned about a fix being put on the actions of local constables. Last year, when my Dad contacted a Constable Kincaid, who used to work with Nesbitt Jones, and who told my Dad that "that place was so corrupt that I had to leave". She expressed interest in trying to help Dad get enforcement of the criminal laws against deceptive practices in the sale of securities. In the subsequent time, my Dad has tried to communicate with her, and has never been able to get her to return a phone call.
In my next message I will attach some of my Dad's written summaries, such as his report on his encounters with Kelowna police on this matter, and their refusal to deal with enforcement of Criminal Code provisions. One of these constables, [Wilson from Economic Crimes] even has denied to my Dad over the phone that the Criminal Code prohibits any hint of deception in the sale of securities. Our local Crown Prosecutor Wendy Kavanagh has recommended that we take this matter up with the Watch Commander. We want to do this, but only when we have some way of ensuring that our communication is being monitored by outside parties. Since we are suspicious of a fix being imposed on the local staff, we do not want to got through a useless exercise.
Best regards,
Alan Blanes
Kelowna
(advocate comments, this email is typical of what occurs when a senior citizen reports financial abuse to police departments. It is simply far tooooo easy for police to delegate the problem to the securities industry........recipe for committing the perfect crime.)
Thanks very much for linking us with Mr. S and the Post. I would like to send you a number of my Dad's recent summaries that I have typed for him. He is particularly concerned with RCMP in Kelowna refusing to allow him to take evidence of violations of the Criminal Code by the Canaccord broker - to them. My Dad is very concerned about a fix being put on the actions of local constables. Last year, when my Dad contacted a Constable Kincaid, who used to work with Nesbitt Jones, and who told my Dad that "that place was so corrupt that I had to leave". She expressed interest in trying to help Dad get enforcement of the criminal laws against deceptive practices in the sale of securities. In the subsequent time, my Dad has tried to communicate with her, and has never been able to get her to return a phone call.
In my next message I will attach some of my Dad's written summaries, such as his report on his encounters with Kelowna police on this matter, and their refusal to deal with enforcement of Criminal Code provisions. One of these constables, [Wilson from Economic Crimes] even has denied to my Dad over the phone that the Criminal Code prohibits any hint of deception in the sale of securities. Our local Crown Prosecutor Wendy Kavanagh has recommended that we take this matter up with the Watch Commander. We want to do this, but only when we have some way of ensuring that our communication is being monitored by outside parties. Since we are suspicious of a fix being imposed on the local staff, we do not want to got through a useless exercise.
Best regards,
Alan Blanes
Kelowna
(advocate comments, this email is typical of what occurs when a senior citizen reports financial abuse to police departments. It is simply far tooooo easy for police to delegate the problem to the securities industry........recipe for committing the perfect crime.)
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Tue May 25, 2010 3:35 pm
Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
Yes, they have done so five (5) times since the force was established.
You read that correctly, and here is the source:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LEGISI ... 23&List=ls
the web site for new C-21 white collar crime bill
1.3 Integrated Market Enforcement Teams
In 2003, the Government of Canada created the IMET program, funding it through the RCMP. Ten IMETs are operational in four of Canada’s major financial centres,6 and their mandate is to investigate and lay charges for serious Criminal Code offences involving capital markets.
According to the 2007–2008 IMET annual report, the program’s total budget increased from $13.2 million in fiscal 2005 to $18.9 million in fiscal 2008.7 The IMET budget decreased to $16.1 million in fiscal year 2008–2009.8 From December 2003, when the program began, to March 2008, five investigations led to nine individuals being charged with a total of 29 Criminal Code offences.9 In fiscal year 2008–2009, however, 17 individuals were charged with 979 counts.10 A total of five individuals have been convicted since the IMET program was established, with sentences ranging from 39 months to 13 years.
(wow, in 2007 they had only 2 convictions, verses the 1200 in the USA. They are really gaining ground fast)
Yes, they have done so five (5) times since the force was established.
You read that correctly, and here is the source:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LEGISI ... 23&List=ls
the web site for new C-21 white collar crime bill
1.3 Integrated Market Enforcement Teams
In 2003, the Government of Canada created the IMET program, funding it through the RCMP. Ten IMETs are operational in four of Canada’s major financial centres,6 and their mandate is to investigate and lay charges for serious Criminal Code offences involving capital markets.
According to the 2007–2008 IMET annual report, the program’s total budget increased from $13.2 million in fiscal 2005 to $18.9 million in fiscal 2008.7 The IMET budget decreased to $16.1 million in fiscal year 2008–2009.8 From December 2003, when the program began, to March 2008, five investigations led to nine individuals being charged with a total of 29 Criminal Code offences.9 In fiscal year 2008–2009, however, 17 individuals were charged with 979 counts.10 A total of five individuals have been convicted since the IMET program was established, with sentences ranging from 39 months to 13 years.
(wow, in 2007 they had only 2 convictions, verses the 1200 in the USA. They are really gaining ground fast)
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Sat May 22, 2010 6:59 pm
Quote from a letter from RCMP saying that they "consult" with financial regulatory and self regulatory agencies "before" they consider criminal charges against financial crimes..............just like having some of the foxes sit in on the "consulting" group of the RCMP.
"However, even if a complaint does meet this initial threshold test, there is no guarantee that it will be undertaken as a full blown investigation by the Unit. In the case of an IMET investigation, the Unit Commander is obliged, by the conditions imposed by the federal government, to present all potential investigations to the Unit's Joint Consultative Group, ("JCG"), which is comprised of managers from the various agencies involved in the enforcement and prosecution of criminal, "quasi-criminal", and/or regulatory matters.
This is in direct contrast to what was quoted to me by an RCMP IMET Staff Sergeant in Vancouver recently.
"However, even if a complaint does meet this initial threshold test, there is no guarantee that it will be undertaken as a full blown investigation by the Unit. In the case of an IMET investigation, the Unit Commander is obliged, by the conditions imposed by the federal government, to present all potential investigations to the Unit's Joint Consultative Group, ("JCG"), which is comprised of managers from the various agencies involved in the enforcement and prosecution of criminal, "quasi-criminal", and/or regulatory matters.
This is in direct contrast to what was quoted to me by an RCMP IMET Staff Sergeant in Vancouver recently.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Wed May 05, 2010 8:19 pm
This story is a picture perfect example of how connections, corruption and cronyism have infected our financial system, our political system and heaven forbid our law enforcement. It illustrates how millions of dollars of advance trading were ignored while the man with the $7,000 profit was hung out to dry.
Ex-bureaucrat guilty of breach of trust
Finance department director knew changes were coming to income trust tax treatment
BY DON BUTLER, THE OTTAWA CITIZEN MAY 5, 2010
Serge Nadeau was a respected senior bureaucrat with a 14-year career at the Department of Finance when his world came crashing down on Feb. 15, 2007.
That's when Nadeau was charged with breach of trust under Section 122 of the Criminal Code, accused of using inside knowledge of pending changes to the tax treatment of income trusts to profit on a stock transaction.
He was discharged from his job as general director, analysis, in the department's tax policy branch the same day.
This week, more than three years after he was charged, the 53-year-old Nadeau pleaded guilty in Superior Court in Ottawa.
Justice Lynn Ratushny fined him $14,000 -- double his profit from his insider transaction -- and gave him a conditional sentence of 10 months. She also ordered him to do 100 hours of community service and prohibited him from trading securities, other than mutual funds, for 10 months.
Nadeau's crime was discovered almost by accident during one of the most politically sensitive police investigations in recent Canadian history.
In the middle of the 2006 federal election campaign, the RCMP announced it was investigating a suspicious spike in the purchase of income trust units.
The spike occurred just hours before then-finance-minister Ralph Goodale announced the Liberal government had decided not to impose a tax on income trusts, and would lower the tax on dividend income instead.
That prompted the opposition parties to accuse the Liberals of leaking the news to friends in the financial community. The allegation and police investigation helped defeat Paul Martin's government and elect Stephen Harper's Conservatives.
In an interview Tuesday, Nadeau's Montreal lawyer, Raphael Schachter, drew a line between his client's crime and the income trust leak case.
"This whole case of Serge Nadeau had nothing to do with the income trust leak case," Schachter said. But during the RCMP's 14-month investigation, he said, it "came across certain evidence that
Ex-bureaucrat guilty of breach of trust Page 1 of 3
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/story_prin ... 3&sponsor= 05/05/2010
implicated Mr. Nadeau in this isolated incident."
Along with Nadeau's Ottawa lawyer, Richard Auger, Schachter spent months negotiating a plea bargain with Paul Lindsay, the Ontario assistant deputy attorney general who handled the case for the Crown.
"There certainly was the risk of a very lengthy trial, with perhaps over 30 witnesses," Schachter said, including "various individuals of note." By reaching a deal, the parties "avoided a major disturbance in the lives of many people and in the administration of justice itself."
Schachter said Nadeau is "as relieved as one can be for an individual who is an inherently decent and honourable man to have gone through what he went through."
"This has been the most onerous and difficult time of his life, professionally as well as personally. He wants to get on with his personal life and his professional life."
During the 2010 winter university term, Nadeau taught economics at the University of Ottawa. The university's website describes him as a "replacement professor to the rank of assistant professor."
Schachter said Nadeau hopes to continue teaching. "He's very well-respected and doing a fine job, and hopefully will continue in that area."
University of Ottawa spokeswoman Nadine Saint-Amour said Tuesday it was "too early to comment" on Nadeau's status.
In passing sentence, Ratushny considered a 17-page summary of the evidence that was accepted by all parties. It reconstructs the events that led to the breach of trust charges.
In its 2005 budget, the Martin government announced it would hold public consultations about possible tax changes to income trusts and other "flow-through entities."
The announcement caused uncertainty in capital markets, and drove the value of most income trusts down in anticipation of an impending tax.
By mid-November 2005, it was apparent that a non-confidence motion would trigger an election before the scheduled end of the consultations. As a result, Goodale decided to accelerate his decision.
During this period, there were several discussions within the Department of Finance to which Nadeau was privy. In particular, he attended key meetings on Nov. 21 and Nov. 22, 2005.
At the first meeting, the options were reduced to two: leave the tax treatment of trusts unchanged while reducing the tax on dividend income; or impose a small tax on trusts and reduce the tax on dividends.
Ex-bureaucrat guilty of breach of trust Page 2 of 3
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/story_prin ... 3&sponsor= 05/05/2010
At the second meeting on Nov. 22, it was clear that Goodale was leaning toward the first option.
The following day, Goodale announced the tax treatment of income trusts would remain unchanged, while taxes on dividends would be reduced.
The announcement was made after financial markets had closed, to ensure no investor would have an unfair advantage.
According to the summary document, at 10:58 a.m. on Nov. 22, Nadeau transferred $45,000 from his RD Canada Trust line of credit to his TD Waterhouse discount brokerage account.
The next morning at 7:50 a.m. -- 10 hours before Goodale's announcement -- Nadeau electronically ordered the purchase of 3,100 units of the Yellow Pages Income Fund, a large income trust. The brokerage filled his order at 9:30 a.m., purchasing 3,100 units at $14.12 per unit. The total cost was $43,772.
When Nadeau bought the units, he knew there was a "high probability" Goodale would be announcing no change in the tax treatment of income trusts, "with the expectation that the trading value of the units would increase as a result of the announcement," the summary document says.
Nadeau knew, says the document, that "it would be improper to benefit personally from his knowledge" and that his purchase of the trust units "would be an apparent breach" of the public service's Values and Ethics Code.
On Dec. 1 and Dec. 12, 2005, Nadeau sold the Yellow Pages units in two batches, for $15.49 and $16.50 per share, netting a profit of about $7,000.
Neither Goodale nor Nadeau's superiors in the Department of Finance were aware of the transactions. Had they known, says the summary document, "they would not have approved of them and would have taken appropriate disciplinary action against Mr. Nadeau."
The document concludes there's no evidence Nadeau's action was the source of the "heavy market activity" on Nov. 23, 2005, that sparked the RCMP's politically fraught investigation. The source of that remains a mystery.
The RCMP could have found the identity of all the traders on that day in about twenty hours of detective work. It pointed at persons whom it would be "inconvenient" to prosecute, so the government bureaucrat takes the fall. An excellent example of Canadian corruption.
Ex-bureaucrat guilty of breach of trust
Finance department director knew changes were coming to income trust tax treatment
BY DON BUTLER, THE OTTAWA CITIZEN MAY 5, 2010
Serge Nadeau was a respected senior bureaucrat with a 14-year career at the Department of Finance when his world came crashing down on Feb. 15, 2007.
That's when Nadeau was charged with breach of trust under Section 122 of the Criminal Code, accused of using inside knowledge of pending changes to the tax treatment of income trusts to profit on a stock transaction.
He was discharged from his job as general director, analysis, in the department's tax policy branch the same day.
This week, more than three years after he was charged, the 53-year-old Nadeau pleaded guilty in Superior Court in Ottawa.
Justice Lynn Ratushny fined him $14,000 -- double his profit from his insider transaction -- and gave him a conditional sentence of 10 months. She also ordered him to do 100 hours of community service and prohibited him from trading securities, other than mutual funds, for 10 months.
Nadeau's crime was discovered almost by accident during one of the most politically sensitive police investigations in recent Canadian history.
In the middle of the 2006 federal election campaign, the RCMP announced it was investigating a suspicious spike in the purchase of income trust units.
The spike occurred just hours before then-finance-minister Ralph Goodale announced the Liberal government had decided not to impose a tax on income trusts, and would lower the tax on dividend income instead.
That prompted the opposition parties to accuse the Liberals of leaking the news to friends in the financial community. The allegation and police investigation helped defeat Paul Martin's government and elect Stephen Harper's Conservatives.
In an interview Tuesday, Nadeau's Montreal lawyer, Raphael Schachter, drew a line between his client's crime and the income trust leak case.
"This whole case of Serge Nadeau had nothing to do with the income trust leak case," Schachter said. But during the RCMP's 14-month investigation, he said, it "came across certain evidence that
Ex-bureaucrat guilty of breach of trust Page 1 of 3
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/story_prin ... 3&sponsor= 05/05/2010
implicated Mr. Nadeau in this isolated incident."
Along with Nadeau's Ottawa lawyer, Richard Auger, Schachter spent months negotiating a plea bargain with Paul Lindsay, the Ontario assistant deputy attorney general who handled the case for the Crown.
"There certainly was the risk of a very lengthy trial, with perhaps over 30 witnesses," Schachter said, including "various individuals of note." By reaching a deal, the parties "avoided a major disturbance in the lives of many people and in the administration of justice itself."
Schachter said Nadeau is "as relieved as one can be for an individual who is an inherently decent and honourable man to have gone through what he went through."
"This has been the most onerous and difficult time of his life, professionally as well as personally. He wants to get on with his personal life and his professional life."
During the 2010 winter university term, Nadeau taught economics at the University of Ottawa. The university's website describes him as a "replacement professor to the rank of assistant professor."
Schachter said Nadeau hopes to continue teaching. "He's very well-respected and doing a fine job, and hopefully will continue in that area."
University of Ottawa spokeswoman Nadine Saint-Amour said Tuesday it was "too early to comment" on Nadeau's status.
In passing sentence, Ratushny considered a 17-page summary of the evidence that was accepted by all parties. It reconstructs the events that led to the breach of trust charges.
In its 2005 budget, the Martin government announced it would hold public consultations about possible tax changes to income trusts and other "flow-through entities."
The announcement caused uncertainty in capital markets, and drove the value of most income trusts down in anticipation of an impending tax.
By mid-November 2005, it was apparent that a non-confidence motion would trigger an election before the scheduled end of the consultations. As a result, Goodale decided to accelerate his decision.
During this period, there were several discussions within the Department of Finance to which Nadeau was privy. In particular, he attended key meetings on Nov. 21 and Nov. 22, 2005.
At the first meeting, the options were reduced to two: leave the tax treatment of trusts unchanged while reducing the tax on dividend income; or impose a small tax on trusts and reduce the tax on dividends.
Ex-bureaucrat guilty of breach of trust Page 2 of 3
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/story_prin ... 3&sponsor= 05/05/2010
At the second meeting on Nov. 22, it was clear that Goodale was leaning toward the first option.
The following day, Goodale announced the tax treatment of income trusts would remain unchanged, while taxes on dividends would be reduced.
The announcement was made after financial markets had closed, to ensure no investor would have an unfair advantage.
According to the summary document, at 10:58 a.m. on Nov. 22, Nadeau transferred $45,000 from his RD Canada Trust line of credit to his TD Waterhouse discount brokerage account.
The next morning at 7:50 a.m. -- 10 hours before Goodale's announcement -- Nadeau electronically ordered the purchase of 3,100 units of the Yellow Pages Income Fund, a large income trust. The brokerage filled his order at 9:30 a.m., purchasing 3,100 units at $14.12 per unit. The total cost was $43,772.
When Nadeau bought the units, he knew there was a "high probability" Goodale would be announcing no change in the tax treatment of income trusts, "with the expectation that the trading value of the units would increase as a result of the announcement," the summary document says.
Nadeau knew, says the document, that "it would be improper to benefit personally from his knowledge" and that his purchase of the trust units "would be an apparent breach" of the public service's Values and Ethics Code.
On Dec. 1 and Dec. 12, 2005, Nadeau sold the Yellow Pages units in two batches, for $15.49 and $16.50 per share, netting a profit of about $7,000.
Neither Goodale nor Nadeau's superiors in the Department of Finance were aware of the transactions. Had they known, says the summary document, "they would not have approved of them and would have taken appropriate disciplinary action against Mr. Nadeau."
The document concludes there's no evidence Nadeau's action was the source of the "heavy market activity" on Nov. 23, 2005, that sparked the RCMP's politically fraught investigation. The source of that remains a mystery.
The RCMP could have found the identity of all the traders on that day in about twenty hours of detective work. It pointed at persons whom it would be "inconvenient" to prosecute, so the government bureaucrat takes the fall. An excellent example of Canadian corruption.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:03 pm
did I miss a meeting somewhere or is financial crime in Canada just considered "standard industry practice"?
** Media News ** No jail in sight for [Garth] Drabinksy
by : Theresa Tedesco, The Financial Post, Thursday, February 11, 2010
In the never-ending legal saga of Garth Drabinsky and Myron Gottlieb, the few hours the duo spent in custody last August [2009] just after they were handed stiff prison terms could be the only time they ever serve for orchestrating a massive accounting fraud at now-defunct theatre company "Livent Inc."
Last week, Drabinsky, 60, and Gottlieb, 66, who were each convicted of two (2) counts of fraud and one (1) count of forgery by Ontario Superior Court Justice Mary Lou Benotto on March 25, 2009, were granted an extension of their bail pending their appeal. The duo want the Court of Appeal to overturn the fraud convictions and prison sentences, seven years for Drabinsky and six for Gottlieb.
Under the terms of their release last August, the theatre executives were required to surrender on Feb. 5, 2010
However, the two men whose case has become synonymous with Canada's perceived ineptitude at prosecuting white-collar crime did what they have done for almost a decade. They applied for an extension of their so-called "sunset clause" -- and the Ontario Court of Appeal granted it, with the consent of the Crown Attorney's office.
Now, their new surrender date is June 11, 2010. But don't expect the disgraced theatre impresario or his former business partner to present themselves to be fitted for a prison jumpsuit that day either.
Consider that the criminal case against Drabinsky and Gottlieb began in 2002 when the RCMP charged the pair in October, 2002, with defrauding investors of $500-million. And that was three (3) years after the pair was already dodging the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which filed a bevy of criminal and civil charges against the former Livent executives in 1999. Facing the prospect of 140 years in prison and up to US$16-million in fines -- and fearing they wouldn't get a fair trial--Drabinsky and Gottlieb became fugitives from the United States and took their chances with the Canadian court.
That trial didn't happen until 2009 -- almost seven (7) years after the RCMP charges and a decade after the U.S. indictments.
FRAUDSTER'S FREEDOM EXTENDED ENDLESSLY TIMELINE
- 1999 U.S. District Attorney and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission file criminal and civil charges against Garth Drabinsky and partner Myron Gottlieb.
- OCTOBER 2002 - RCMP charges Drabinsky and Gottlieb with defrauding investors of $500-million.
- MARCH 25, 2009 - Each is convicted of two counts of fraud and one count of forgery.
- FEB. 5, 2010 - Drabinsky and Gottlieb's initial surrender date.
- JUNE 11, 2010 - New Proposed surrender date.
........please read the full article online at - http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=2548282&p=1
** Media News ** No jail in sight for [Garth] Drabinksy
by : Theresa Tedesco, The Financial Post, Thursday, February 11, 2010
In the never-ending legal saga of Garth Drabinsky and Myron Gottlieb, the few hours the duo spent in custody last August [2009] just after they were handed stiff prison terms could be the only time they ever serve for orchestrating a massive accounting fraud at now-defunct theatre company "Livent Inc."
Last week, Drabinsky, 60, and Gottlieb, 66, who were each convicted of two (2) counts of fraud and one (1) count of forgery by Ontario Superior Court Justice Mary Lou Benotto on March 25, 2009, were granted an extension of their bail pending their appeal. The duo want the Court of Appeal to overturn the fraud convictions and prison sentences, seven years for Drabinsky and six for Gottlieb.
Under the terms of their release last August, the theatre executives were required to surrender on Feb. 5, 2010
However, the two men whose case has become synonymous with Canada's perceived ineptitude at prosecuting white-collar crime did what they have done for almost a decade. They applied for an extension of their so-called "sunset clause" -- and the Ontario Court of Appeal granted it, with the consent of the Crown Attorney's office.
Now, their new surrender date is June 11, 2010. But don't expect the disgraced theatre impresario or his former business partner to present themselves to be fitted for a prison jumpsuit that day either.
Consider that the criminal case against Drabinsky and Gottlieb began in 2002 when the RCMP charged the pair in October, 2002, with defrauding investors of $500-million. And that was three (3) years after the pair was already dodging the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which filed a bevy of criminal and civil charges against the former Livent executives in 1999. Facing the prospect of 140 years in prison and up to US$16-million in fines -- and fearing they wouldn't get a fair trial--Drabinsky and Gottlieb became fugitives from the United States and took their chances with the Canadian court.
That trial didn't happen until 2009 -- almost seven (7) years after the RCMP charges and a decade after the U.S. indictments.
FRAUDSTER'S FREEDOM EXTENDED ENDLESSLY TIMELINE
- 1999 U.S. District Attorney and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission file criminal and civil charges against Garth Drabinsky and partner Myron Gottlieb.
- OCTOBER 2002 - RCMP charges Drabinsky and Gottlieb with defrauding investors of $500-million.
- MARCH 25, 2009 - Each is convicted of two counts of fraud and one count of forgery.
- FEB. 5, 2010 - Drabinsky and Gottlieb's initial surrender date.
- JUNE 11, 2010 - New Proposed surrender date.
........please read the full article online at - http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=2548282&p=1
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Sun Dec 27, 2009 6:54 pm
Red flags hang over Mounties' image
THE CANADIAN PRESS
The use of an RCMP Taser against Robert Dziekanski at
Vancouver's airport was "inappropriate" and the explanations
of the four officers involved weren't credible, says the force's
independent watchdog. (Dec. 8, 2009)
December 26, 2009
James Keller, The Canadian Press
VANCOUVER–An RCMP cadet wearing a blue T-shirt and her hair tied back in a bun stands remarkably still against a chain-link fence as a steady stream of pepper spray is blasted at her face.
She opens her eyes and starts whimpering from the pain, scrambling to complete a set of tasks that include repeatedly kneeing a fake suspect and finding a radio lying on the ground to call for help
"I can't breathe," she says through tears once the exercise is over, exhausted and hunched over one of her instructors at the RCMP's training centre in Regina.
It's a scene from Courage In Red, a television series that broadcast for the past two months documenting the daily lives of RCMP members, from the grind of basic training to isolated policing in the far North.
The show, which looks like a recruiting video, is an attempt to boost the Mounties' profile at a time when Canadians are increasingly skeptical of their national police force, with recent scandals and controversies continuing to tarnish their iconic image.
It might take more than a feel-good television series to repair the force's battered image ahead of a year that could prove pivotal for the RCMP's future in this country.
Reports from the public inquiries into Robert Dziekanski's death and the 1985 Air India bombing are almost complete, major policing operations such as the Vancouver Olympics and the G20 will be under heavy public scrutiny, and all of that will come before 2012 contract negotiations with provincial and territorial governments, at least one of which has mused about dropping the RCMP altogether.
Observers say the RCMP can survive its current malaise, but only if it successfully addresses very real concerns that it isn't accountable and has no appetite for change.
The Mounties tend to handle most criminal investigations involving their own members, and provincial oversight bodies typically have no jurisdiction over the national force. The RCMP's own watchdog can only make non-binding recommendations, and some critics say those recommendations are too often ignored.
Simon Fraser University criminologist David MacAlister argues there simply isn't enough oversight of the RCMP. Until that changes, he says, the force's image problems will only get worse.
"People are probably starting to wonder, why do we have the RCMP? They're not accountable locally, so why would we bother keeping them?"
Paul Kennedy, the outgoing chair of the force's complaints commission, released a report this year that called on the RCMP to stop investigating itself in serious cases to avoid conflict of interest. He repeated that recommendation in a report this month that scolded the officers involved in Dziekanski's death and criticized the subsequent homicide investigation.
The RCMP, however, has appeared hesitant to accept Kennedy's recommendations, saying changes are in the works but suggesting a blanket policy forbidding the force from investigating its own officers would be impractical.
The force and the federal government also say they're waiting for the Dziekanski and Air India reports before deciding just what changes to make.
Kennedy says the RCMP knows what's wrong and how to fix it, and should have acted by now.
RCMP Sgt. Tim Shields, who served as the force's media relations officer in B.C. during the high-profile public inquiry into Dziekanski's death, readily acknowledges the Mounties have work to do, and he insists change is imminent.
"It's without question the RCMP's image has taken a hit, and we are going to work as hard as we can to try and rebuild that trust with the public," says Shields.
"What is important is that the public sees that there is an effective system in dealing with those mistakes and that changes are made as a result of that system."
Shields acknowledges 2010 could be a make-or-break year for the force, especially with the massive RCMP-led security operation at Vancouver Winter Olympics.
"I think it's fair to say that this is a very critical time for the RCMP," he says. "I doubt that the organization has been the focus of as much media attention as we received over the past couple of years, and our response to some of these major incidents is going to determine the outcome of public opinion and possibly the future of the force."
THE CANADIAN PRESS
The use of an RCMP Taser against Robert Dziekanski at
Vancouver's airport was "inappropriate" and the explanations
of the four officers involved weren't credible, says the force's
independent watchdog. (Dec. 8, 2009)
December 26, 2009
James Keller, The Canadian Press
VANCOUVER–An RCMP cadet wearing a blue T-shirt and her hair tied back in a bun stands remarkably still against a chain-link fence as a steady stream of pepper spray is blasted at her face.
She opens her eyes and starts whimpering from the pain, scrambling to complete a set of tasks that include repeatedly kneeing a fake suspect and finding a radio lying on the ground to call for help
"I can't breathe," she says through tears once the exercise is over, exhausted and hunched over one of her instructors at the RCMP's training centre in Regina.
It's a scene from Courage In Red, a television series that broadcast for the past two months documenting the daily lives of RCMP members, from the grind of basic training to isolated policing in the far North.
The show, which looks like a recruiting video, is an attempt to boost the Mounties' profile at a time when Canadians are increasingly skeptical of their national police force, with recent scandals and controversies continuing to tarnish their iconic image.
It might take more than a feel-good television series to repair the force's battered image ahead of a year that could prove pivotal for the RCMP's future in this country.
Reports from the public inquiries into Robert Dziekanski's death and the 1985 Air India bombing are almost complete, major policing operations such as the Vancouver Olympics and the G20 will be under heavy public scrutiny, and all of that will come before 2012 contract negotiations with provincial and territorial governments, at least one of which has mused about dropping the RCMP altogether.
Observers say the RCMP can survive its current malaise, but only if it successfully addresses very real concerns that it isn't accountable and has no appetite for change.
The Mounties tend to handle most criminal investigations involving their own members, and provincial oversight bodies typically have no jurisdiction over the national force. The RCMP's own watchdog can only make non-binding recommendations, and some critics say those recommendations are too often ignored.
Simon Fraser University criminologist David MacAlister argues there simply isn't enough oversight of the RCMP. Until that changes, he says, the force's image problems will only get worse.
"People are probably starting to wonder, why do we have the RCMP? They're not accountable locally, so why would we bother keeping them?"
Paul Kennedy, the outgoing chair of the force's complaints commission, released a report this year that called on the RCMP to stop investigating itself in serious cases to avoid conflict of interest. He repeated that recommendation in a report this month that scolded the officers involved in Dziekanski's death and criticized the subsequent homicide investigation.
The RCMP, however, has appeared hesitant to accept Kennedy's recommendations, saying changes are in the works but suggesting a blanket policy forbidding the force from investigating its own officers would be impractical.
The force and the federal government also say they're waiting for the Dziekanski and Air India reports before deciding just what changes to make.
Kennedy says the RCMP knows what's wrong and how to fix it, and should have acted by now.
RCMP Sgt. Tim Shields, who served as the force's media relations officer in B.C. during the high-profile public inquiry into Dziekanski's death, readily acknowledges the Mounties have work to do, and he insists change is imminent.
"It's without question the RCMP's image has taken a hit, and we are going to work as hard as we can to try and rebuild that trust with the public," says Shields.
"What is important is that the public sees that there is an effective system in dealing with those mistakes and that changes are made as a result of that system."
Shields acknowledges 2010 could be a make-or-break year for the force, especially with the massive RCMP-led security operation at Vancouver Winter Olympics.
"I think it's fair to say that this is a very critical time for the RCMP," he says. "I doubt that the organization has been the focus of as much media attention as we received over the past couple of years, and our response to some of these major incidents is going to determine the outcome of public opinion and possibly the future of the force."
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Sun Dec 27, 2009 6:52 pm
Toronto Star
Why politicians are afraid to take on the RCMP
December 26, 2009
By James Travers
National Affairs Columnist
OTTAWA
Some anniversaries should never be forgotten. It was four years ago this Christmas holiday that the RCMP meddled in a federal election, tilting its outcome, as even Conservatives confirm, and arching eyebrows over the relationship between the national police force and ruling parties.
Little has changed since. It remains a mystery why in the heat of a campaign then-Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli curiously revealed a criminal investigation into alleged Liberal income trust leaks. It remains a glacial work in progress to reform an RCMP that a 2007 inquiry concluded is horribly broken.
Wrapped around both the mystery and the slow-motion reforms are layers of fear and distrust more common to tinpot dictatorships than mature democracies. Politicians are keenly aware of the proven RCMP career-wrecking potential and dot a line between its behaviour and success resisting reorganization and civilian oversight.
Those changes were to be in place this month. Instead, Ottawa is delaying again, this time for Justice John Major's report on the 1985 bombing of Air India Flight 182.
While delaying, Conservatives are comforting a force rattled by serial snafus, including an internal pension scandal and Robert Dziekanski's Vancouver airport death. Gone within days will be Paul Kennedy, the RCMP complaints commissioner whose scathing reports and urgent demands for independent investigations embarrassed Mounties and irked Conservatives.
Ottawa insists reform and a new commissioner are coming. But restoring trust begins with fully airing what Zaccardelli did and why it's so easy for him to remain silent.
Each of the three national parties has reason to push the past under the rug. Liberals want to erase memories of the ethical failures and infighting Zaccardelli stirred, the NDP prefers to forget its fevered response to the faxed RCMP letter and Conservatives have zero interest in adding a retrospective taint to an election victory.
Still, public trust demands the removal of all suspicion that a federal election was less than free and fair. Conservatives are not only failing to restore that confidence, they are compounding the legitimate worry that politicians are too intimidated or self-interested to act when the RCMP plays politics.
That reticence is easily explained. Wild RCMP runs at high-profile politicians, including Ontario's former finance minister Greg Sorbara and B.C.'s one-time premier Glen Clark, are reminders that the RCMP, despite concerns about its competence, is still credible enough to ruin those in public life.
Logic argues that it's in the interest of political elites to modernize a historic force that operates with the secrecy of a cult. Implementing fundamental changes recommended more than two years ago and still promoted by Kennedy would protect politicians from frivolous investigation while restoring public faith that the RCMP is safely under civilian control.
Both should have been priorities after Zaccardelli, later defrocked for misleading Parliament in the Maher Arar affair, apparently tinkered with an election. Any doubts about the legitimacy of that campaign should have been dispelled before voters next cast a ballot.
Instead, politicians opt not to risk RCMP wrath. Instead, a country that actively promotes its democratic brand abroad is now marking the fourth anniversary of an outrage so beyond the Canadian experience that it remains hard to believe it happened here and still harder to accept that the truth remains securely under lock and key.
James Travers' column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday.
Why politicians are afraid to take on the RCMP
December 26, 2009
By James Travers
National Affairs Columnist
OTTAWA
Some anniversaries should never be forgotten. It was four years ago this Christmas holiday that the RCMP meddled in a federal election, tilting its outcome, as even Conservatives confirm, and arching eyebrows over the relationship between the national police force and ruling parties.
Little has changed since. It remains a mystery why in the heat of a campaign then-Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli curiously revealed a criminal investigation into alleged Liberal income trust leaks. It remains a glacial work in progress to reform an RCMP that a 2007 inquiry concluded is horribly broken.
Wrapped around both the mystery and the slow-motion reforms are layers of fear and distrust more common to tinpot dictatorships than mature democracies. Politicians are keenly aware of the proven RCMP career-wrecking potential and dot a line between its behaviour and success resisting reorganization and civilian oversight.
Those changes were to be in place this month. Instead, Ottawa is delaying again, this time for Justice John Major's report on the 1985 bombing of Air India Flight 182.
While delaying, Conservatives are comforting a force rattled by serial snafus, including an internal pension scandal and Robert Dziekanski's Vancouver airport death. Gone within days will be Paul Kennedy, the RCMP complaints commissioner whose scathing reports and urgent demands for independent investigations embarrassed Mounties and irked Conservatives.
Ottawa insists reform and a new commissioner are coming. But restoring trust begins with fully airing what Zaccardelli did and why it's so easy for him to remain silent.
Each of the three national parties has reason to push the past under the rug. Liberals want to erase memories of the ethical failures and infighting Zaccardelli stirred, the NDP prefers to forget its fevered response to the faxed RCMP letter and Conservatives have zero interest in adding a retrospective taint to an election victory.
Still, public trust demands the removal of all suspicion that a federal election was less than free and fair. Conservatives are not only failing to restore that confidence, they are compounding the legitimate worry that politicians are too intimidated or self-interested to act when the RCMP plays politics.
That reticence is easily explained. Wild RCMP runs at high-profile politicians, including Ontario's former finance minister Greg Sorbara and B.C.'s one-time premier Glen Clark, are reminders that the RCMP, despite concerns about its competence, is still credible enough to ruin those in public life.
Logic argues that it's in the interest of political elites to modernize a historic force that operates with the secrecy of a cult. Implementing fundamental changes recommended more than two years ago and still promoted by Kennedy would protect politicians from frivolous investigation while restoring public faith that the RCMP is safely under civilian control.
Both should have been priorities after Zaccardelli, later defrocked for misleading Parliament in the Maher Arar affair, apparently tinkered with an election. Any doubts about the legitimacy of that campaign should have been dispelled before voters next cast a ballot.
Instead, politicians opt not to risk RCMP wrath. Instead, a country that actively promotes its democratic brand abroad is now marking the fourth anniversary of an outrage so beyond the Canadian experience that it remains hard to believe it happened here and still harder to accept that the truth remains securely under lock and key.
James Travers' column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Sun Dec 06, 2009 5:07 pm
- images.jpeg (2.74 KiB) Viewed 10882 times
But the veil of secrecy has now been pierced, and a far darker story has
begun to emerge. A story of fraud and deception on an almost unimaginable
scale.
In February 2007, the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) found Brost guilty
of a $36.5 million investor fraud known as Strategic Metals. Some of the
fraud proceeds found their way to MM. In July, the ASC identified Brost as
the mastermind behind the fraud, and fined him $650,000, the largest fine
ever issued in the ASC's history. Brost actually admitted to his part,
stating (page 5, paragraph 21 of the full report) he had "set wheels in
motion that led to what amounted to a fraud on investors". The ASC report's
concludes with the statement (paragraph 139, page 27) "Given that this is...
a fraud on investors, we urge staff... to refer this case to the authorities
responsible for administering criminal laws."
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) have launched a separate criminal
investigation into the Strategic Metals case. Under the Canadian Freedom of
Information (FOI) Act, we obtained an RCMP search warrant issued October
2006. It cites evidence that the Merendon Mine refinery and gold mining
operations are a hoax. It includes eyewitness accounts from former MM
employees who claim the company has only a small amount of gold, which they
melt down again and again each time an investor group comes through. It
cites evidence from an individual with a strong background in gold refining,
who claims the refinery is an utter sham which might deceive the general
public but is not nearly sophisticated enough to deceive anyone in the
industry. Witnesses claim MM does possess some legitimate assets, but
nowhere near the amount necessary to repay investors, with or without the
massive income they are now owed by the company. The company survives
solely because the IFFL has successfully and fraudulently convinced
investors to keep their money invested for the long term.
Read the October 2006 RCMP Search warrant for yourself.
Read JUNE 2007 updated RCMP Search Warrant - Further evidence of fraud!!
The information in these warrants is shocking. Undoubtedly IFFL structurists
will attempt to discount the report, or denounce it as a lie. But one thing
is sure - an experienced criminal court judge deemed this evidence
sufficiently credible to grant a far-reaching search warrant to the RCMP.
Those who ignore it do so at their own peril.
The RCMP criminal investigation is ongoing. Assuming Brost and Sorenson are
convicted of criminal theft, droves of IFFL investors will quickly flee and
attempt to recover their funds. If the search warrant evidence is accurate,
most will be unsuccessful.
ARE YOU WILLING TO RISK YOUR LIFE SAVINGS THAT THE RCMP EVIDENCE IS WRONG?
Back to top
Last update: Aug 2007.
____________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________
RCMP Alberta IMET criminal charges not laid until September 15, 2009!
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Wed Oct 14, 2009 4:16 pm
Request for Public Safety Hearing on White Collar Crime
Minister Jim Prentice
Environment Minister and MP for Calgary Centre-North
And
MP Garry Breitkreuz
Chairman of the Committee of Public Safety and National Security
and
Roger Prefontaine
Clerk of the Committe of Public Safety and National Security
I am the chair of the Shire Victims Group, a group of 3000 alleged victims
of white collar crime. I am embarrassed daily to report back to our the
Shire Victims Group that the RCMP have not taken significant action in
starting an investigation into the crimes of Shire International alleged by
our victims despite the four months that have passed since our first attempt
to file a complaint. The RCMP continue to wait for information through
victims, our civil action and the bankruptcy protection process and the onus
is on us to prove fraud has taken place so that they can investigate. I ask
how the average Canadian citizen can undertake an investigation to prove
fraud without the powers of the RCMP?
The RCMP response to repeated requests to further an investigation into
Shire International is that there are not sufficient resources and that such
an investigation with be both costly and long. Each time I provide new
information with hopes that it will be enough, I am met with the same
answer, its not enough and there are still not enough resources. Sadly, it
took a full 8 weeks to hop from group to group and investigator to
investigator just to get an appointment and be able to make my first
complaint. It is a frustration to our entire group that the RCMP waits for
us to conduct an investigation through the civil court processes and then
turn that information over to the RCMP.
I would like to request a Public Safety Committee hearing on police
services' handling of securities crime, financial fraud, and white collar
crime complaints, assessment, investigations and prosecutions. With the
growing media reports of white collar crime across Canada, I wonder how many
victims out there have yet to report that they are victims of similar crimes
due to the current state of the system and lack of investigations due to
insufficient resources and procedures in place. Such crimes need to be
investigated quickly and correctly to ensure that justice is served for
victims and others are deterred from committing such crimes in the future.
Sincerely,
Jenn Lofgren
cell: 403-922-2224
email: investor@telus.net
blog: http://shireinvestor.blogspot.com
Minister Jim Prentice
Environment Minister and MP for Calgary Centre-North
And
MP Garry Breitkreuz
Chairman of the Committee of Public Safety and National Security
and
Roger Prefontaine
Clerk of the Committe of Public Safety and National Security
I am the chair of the Shire Victims Group, a group of 3000 alleged victims
of white collar crime. I am embarrassed daily to report back to our the
Shire Victims Group that the RCMP have not taken significant action in
starting an investigation into the crimes of Shire International alleged by
our victims despite the four months that have passed since our first attempt
to file a complaint. The RCMP continue to wait for information through
victims, our civil action and the bankruptcy protection process and the onus
is on us to prove fraud has taken place so that they can investigate. I ask
how the average Canadian citizen can undertake an investigation to prove
fraud without the powers of the RCMP?
The RCMP response to repeated requests to further an investigation into
Shire International is that there are not sufficient resources and that such
an investigation with be both costly and long. Each time I provide new
information with hopes that it will be enough, I am met with the same
answer, its not enough and there are still not enough resources. Sadly, it
took a full 8 weeks to hop from group to group and investigator to
investigator just to get an appointment and be able to make my first
complaint. It is a frustration to our entire group that the RCMP waits for
us to conduct an investigation through the civil court processes and then
turn that information over to the RCMP.
I would like to request a Public Safety Committee hearing on police
services' handling of securities crime, financial fraud, and white collar
crime complaints, assessment, investigations and prosecutions. With the
growing media reports of white collar crime across Canada, I wonder how many
victims out there have yet to report that they are victims of similar crimes
due to the current state of the system and lack of investigations due to
insufficient resources and procedures in place. Such crimes need to be
investigated quickly and correctly to ensure that justice is served for
victims and others are deterred from committing such crimes in the future.
Sincerely,
Jenn Lofgren
cell: 403-922-2224
email: investor@telus.net
blog: http://shireinvestor.blogspot.com
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Do the RCMP get their man if he is white collar?
by admin » Fri Sep 18, 2009 5:25 pm
Victims burned while RCMP fiddled for years with
Alberta Ponzi scheme
BY DAVID BAINES, VANCOUVER SUN SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
It would have been Edna Coulic's 44th birthday today. The Kelowna woman won't be around to
celebrate because she committed suicide last October.
Her sister, Gloria Lozinksi of Calgary, said Coulic became depressed after she realized she had been
duped out of $300,000 in a massive Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Alberta confidence men Milowe
Brost and Gary Sorenson.
Both were charged with fraud by the RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team in Calgary earlier
this week. Estimates of total losses range from $100 million to $400 million. Brost is out on bail, and
Sorenson is believed to be hiding in Honduras.
Lozinski figures they should both be charged with murder: "At the end of the day, they pretty much
pulled the trigger," she told the Calgary Sun.
This is the brutal reality of white-collar crime. It is not simply a crime against property, it is a very
personal and debilitating assault against innocent people.
Parliament is beginning to respond. In 2004, the Criminal Code was amended to increase the
maximum sentence for fraud from 10 years to 14 years. Earlier this week, the Conservative
government announced it will introduce further amendments that, among other things, would provide
minimum mandatory sentences for serious frauds.
It is not likely, however, that any of this would have saved Coulic. The damage had already been done.
The key is to detect these schemes at an early stage and prosecute the perpetrators in a timely
manner. The problem is not so much what we do with fraudsters when they get to court, it's getting
them to court. In this regard, Canada is a complete failure.
I first wrote about Brost in December 2002, when he was pitching his investment schemes at T. Harv
Eker's Millionaire School. (Eker is a North Vancouver motivational speaker who has introduced his
devotees to many fraudulent investment schemes. He is, in my view, a public menace.)
At the time, Brost and his company, Capital Alternatives Inc., was promoting a gold investment
scheme, which was based in the Bahamas and operated out of Central and South America. He told
investors the scheme was "backed 100 per cent in gold concentrate and gold bullion", and the
expected return was 20 to 60 per cent.
He was also promoting an investment in "stale credit card debt," which he grandly called the
http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print ... 7&sponsor=
"Consumer Debt Recovery Program". He claimed thissort of debt could be acquired at a deep discount
and turned into cash at a large premium -- 18 to 54 per cent per year.
In June 2004, I reported that Brost was stumping around B.C. promoting these schemes.
"A few weeks ago, he made a presentation at University College of the Cariboo in Kamloops," I wrote
at the time. "On May 30, there was another meeting at the Radisson Hotel in Burnaby. The pitch
appears to be working. I have been told that one man in his 60s has invested $250,000 of his
retirement money."
I asked Sasha Angus, then the B.C. Securities Commission's enforcement director, whether he knew
about Brost's activities.
"We are aware of the situation and looking at it," Angus told me.
In September 2004, the Alberta Securities Commission issued a cease-trade order against Brost and
his main operating company, the Institute for Financial Learning, forbidding them from selling
investments in the depository and three other schemes.
In October 2005, the Alberta commission issued another notice of hearing alleging that Brost and
Capital Alternatives had induced investors to invest millions of dollars into another scheme called
Strategic Metals Inc.
At that point, the commission referred the file to the RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team,
which began an investigation.
In February 2007, the hearing panel found Brost had illegally sold $36.5 million in investments. "Brost
not only does not recognize the seriousness of his misconduct, but he is also prepared to shamelessly
overlook it," the panel noted. It fined him $650,000 and permanently banned him from the Alberta
market.
The B.C. Securities Commission piggy-backed on this order and also issued a permanent ban, but not
until April of this year.
It didn't matter, of course, because Brost ignored every administrative order that was issued against
him. The only thing that would stop him was jail. But the RCMP IMET team in Calgary didn't file
charges and didn't put Brost behind bars until this week -- four years after the Alberta commission had
referred the file to the police.
Why did this take so long? Supt. Eric Mattson, who heads the IMET team, told the Calgary Herald they
"could not act until there was enough evidence. "
"During that time, we didn't want to be seen as market-breakers. We don't want to accuse a group of
http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print ... 7&sponsor=
committing crimes and say, 'Don't do this,' because at the end of the investigation perhaps we don't
have sufficient information to lay charges and we'd be open to [civil litigation] as well. We may end up
interfering with what could have been legitimate business."
In my view, these comments are outrageous. This was a patently fraudulent scheme when I ran across
it in 2002. It was a patently fraudulent scheme when the Alberta commission referred it to the RCMP in
2005. Depending which start date you use, it took seven years or four years for the Mounties to shut
this thing down. That is a disgrace. But the real tragedy for Canadians is that this is par for the course.
Two years ago, the Conservative government tried to clean up the mess that is the RCMP IMET
program, but the attempt has utterly failed. Prime Minister Stephen Harper's proposed amendments to
the criminal code will do nothing to solve the problem of timely prosecution.
What we need is a royal commission of inquiry into white-collar crime in Canada. Nothing short of a
complete overhaul can save us from this systemic dysfunction. Let's not allow Edna Coulic to die in
vain.
dbaines@vancouversun.com
Alberta Ponzi scheme
BY DAVID BAINES, VANCOUVER SUN SEPTEMBER 18, 2009
It would have been Edna Coulic's 44th birthday today. The Kelowna woman won't be around to
celebrate because she committed suicide last October.
Her sister, Gloria Lozinksi of Calgary, said Coulic became depressed after she realized she had been
duped out of $300,000 in a massive Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Alberta confidence men Milowe
Brost and Gary Sorenson.
Both were charged with fraud by the RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team in Calgary earlier
this week. Estimates of total losses range from $100 million to $400 million. Brost is out on bail, and
Sorenson is believed to be hiding in Honduras.
Lozinski figures they should both be charged with murder: "At the end of the day, they pretty much
pulled the trigger," she told the Calgary Sun.
This is the brutal reality of white-collar crime. It is not simply a crime against property, it is a very
personal and debilitating assault against innocent people.
Parliament is beginning to respond. In 2004, the Criminal Code was amended to increase the
maximum sentence for fraud from 10 years to 14 years. Earlier this week, the Conservative
government announced it will introduce further amendments that, among other things, would provide
minimum mandatory sentences for serious frauds.
It is not likely, however, that any of this would have saved Coulic. The damage had already been done.
The key is to detect these schemes at an early stage and prosecute the perpetrators in a timely
manner. The problem is not so much what we do with fraudsters when they get to court, it's getting
them to court. In this regard, Canada is a complete failure.
I first wrote about Brost in December 2002, when he was pitching his investment schemes at T. Harv
Eker's Millionaire School. (Eker is a North Vancouver motivational speaker who has introduced his
devotees to many fraudulent investment schemes. He is, in my view, a public menace.)
At the time, Brost and his company, Capital Alternatives Inc., was promoting a gold investment
scheme, which was based in the Bahamas and operated out of Central and South America. He told
investors the scheme was "backed 100 per cent in gold concentrate and gold bullion", and the
expected return was 20 to 60 per cent.
He was also promoting an investment in "stale credit card debt," which he grandly called the
http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print ... 7&sponsor=
"Consumer Debt Recovery Program". He claimed thissort of debt could be acquired at a deep discount
and turned into cash at a large premium -- 18 to 54 per cent per year.
In June 2004, I reported that Brost was stumping around B.C. promoting these schemes.
"A few weeks ago, he made a presentation at University College of the Cariboo in Kamloops," I wrote
at the time. "On May 30, there was another meeting at the Radisson Hotel in Burnaby. The pitch
appears to be working. I have been told that one man in his 60s has invested $250,000 of his
retirement money."
I asked Sasha Angus, then the B.C. Securities Commission's enforcement director, whether he knew
about Brost's activities.
"We are aware of the situation and looking at it," Angus told me.
In September 2004, the Alberta Securities Commission issued a cease-trade order against Brost and
his main operating company, the Institute for Financial Learning, forbidding them from selling
investments in the depository and three other schemes.
In October 2005, the Alberta commission issued another notice of hearing alleging that Brost and
Capital Alternatives had induced investors to invest millions of dollars into another scheme called
Strategic Metals Inc.
At that point, the commission referred the file to the RCMP Integrated Market Enforcement Team,
which began an investigation.
In February 2007, the hearing panel found Brost had illegally sold $36.5 million in investments. "Brost
not only does not recognize the seriousness of his misconduct, but he is also prepared to shamelessly
overlook it," the panel noted. It fined him $650,000 and permanently banned him from the Alberta
market.
The B.C. Securities Commission piggy-backed on this order and also issued a permanent ban, but not
until April of this year.
It didn't matter, of course, because Brost ignored every administrative order that was issued against
him. The only thing that would stop him was jail. But the RCMP IMET team in Calgary didn't file
charges and didn't put Brost behind bars until this week -- four years after the Alberta commission had
referred the file to the police.
Why did this take so long? Supt. Eric Mattson, who heads the IMET team, told the Calgary Herald they
"could not act until there was enough evidence. "
"During that time, we didn't want to be seen as market-breakers. We don't want to accuse a group of
http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print ... 7&sponsor=
committing crimes and say, 'Don't do this,' because at the end of the investigation perhaps we don't
have sufficient information to lay charges and we'd be open to [civil litigation] as well. We may end up
interfering with what could have been legitimate business."
In my view, these comments are outrageous. This was a patently fraudulent scheme when I ran across
it in 2002. It was a patently fraudulent scheme when the Alberta commission referred it to the RCMP in
2005. Depending which start date you use, it took seven years or four years for the Mounties to shut
this thing down. That is a disgrace. But the real tragedy for Canadians is that this is par for the course.
Two years ago, the Conservative government tried to clean up the mess that is the RCMP IMET
program, but the attempt has utterly failed. Prime Minister Stephen Harper's proposed amendments to
the criminal code will do nothing to solve the problem of timely prosecution.
What we need is a royal commission of inquiry into white-collar crime in Canada. Nothing short of a
complete overhaul can save us from this systemic dysfunction. Let's not allow Edna Coulic to die in
vain.
dbaines@vancouversun.com
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2923
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Canada
Return to Click here to view forums
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests