At the time of his plea, prosecutors said Grass admitted to a series of illegal activities, from backdating contracts and severance letters to misleading the company and federal investigators about a $2.6 million real estate deal. They said he also met with employees called to testify before the grand jury and encouraged them to lie. During Grass' time at the head of the Camp Hill-based company founded by his father, Alex Grass, its stock price soared as Rite Aid engaged in an aggressive expansion effort. But the grand jury said the boom years were accomplished by "massive accounting fraud, the deliberate falsification of financial statements, and intentionally false SEC filings." Less than a year after
| Josey Embezzlement Case | | | Jennifer Allgeier | 9/11/2011 | | Jeanette Elizabeth Josey is involved in a million dollar embezzlement case. She is accused of embezzling the money from her employer James Gillikin. James Gillikin is the owner of Gillikin Marine Railways, Inc., Morgan Creek Seafood, James T Gillikin Inc, Traveler Captain Jimmy Inc and Captain James II Inc. Josey worked as the office manager for the group for seventeen years. Detectives in Carteret County said that this is the largest embezzlement case they have encountered. According to WITN.com news channel Josey embezzled the money from legitimate payee accounts of the corporation’s general accounts and then converted the money to her own use.
Attorney Paul J. Fishman announced. David Findel, 45, of Monmouth County, N.J., was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Peter G. Sheridan in Trenton federal court. He had previously pleaded guilty to an information charging him with wire fraud. According to the information to which Findel pleaded guilty and statements made in Trenton federal court: Findel is the former CEO of Worldwide Financial Resources (“Worldwide”), which was in the business of originating residential home loans. Worldwide worked with borrowers to prepare mortgage applications and qualify the borrowers for home mortgages.
Department of Justice | |10. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE IN 2 OR 3 SENTENCES WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT. Eddie Antar utilized multiple financial fraud schemes to steal millions of | |dollars from his company, Crazy Eddie. He and his family profited from his fraudulent activity for 18 years. | | | | | |SECTION 2: CASE SUMMARY
Introduction Ralph Mariano, former senior systems engineer with the United States Navy’s Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), pleaded guilty to conspiracy and to defrauding the U.S government of up to $20 million. He spent millions of taxpayer dollars in every imaginable way, money intended to protect the people of our nation. Using all the people involved in this case, Mariano directed them and other manipulators to bill the Navy for work that was never performed. One may think that in a case like this, dealing with the government, it would be impossible to pull off a scheme such as this one. However, with the persuasion of a few willing individuals along with his high ranking position in the Navy, he was able to orchestrate this scheme to perfection before ultimately getting caught in February of 2011.
1. In fact, identity theft has grown so rapidly that federal and state prosecutors, judges and local law enforcement have been affected by its demand to protect consumers. 2. Credit card fraud, mortgage fraud, check fraud and personal identifying information, such as name, Social Security number, date of birth and bank account info are listed as the most common forms of identity fraud. (Federal Trade Commission) 3. Studies by the Federal Trade Commission have concluded that approximately 15million US citizens have had their identities used in a fraudulent manner each year.
Enron was described as “House Of Cards” as it was built over a pool of gasoline. It all sort of became smoke and mirror. Louis Borget, former Enron's CEO was also exposed to be rerouting company’s money to offshore accounts. Once their schemes were discovered by the auditors, Kenneth Lay encourages them to "keep making us millions". However, the traders were fired once it was revealed that Enron's reserves were gambled away which nearly destroyed the company.
With a pay package that included more than seven million shares and options, Dunlap stood to make more than $200 million personally if he could keep Sunbeam's stock price flying. In the spring of 1998, when Dunlap and his team ran out of tricks, Sunbeam corrected its books, declared bankruptcy, and the stock price plunged from $53 at its peak to just pennies today. In an ominous harbinger of the Enron scandal, the SEC discovered that Andersen accounting documents had been destroyed. In the case of Waste Management -- which in 1998 issued the largest corporate restatement before Enron -- the company had exaggerated its earnings by $1.7 billion. The SEC's investigation found a long-running cover-up -- not just by Waste Management, but by Andersen as well.
These dummy companies were financed by several banking institutions in order to make these deals, allowing Enron to hide billions in debt. By 2001 Enron had created hundreds of special purpose entities to prop up stock prices. The business maneuvers siphoning losses away from the corporation were perpetrated by upper management, who had easy access to the tools needed to cover up such questionable business practices. These special purpose entities were a product of Enron’s investment in many accounting consultants whose only goal was to find ways for Enron to skirt GAAP. The loophole employed by Enron has since been plugged by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, however, the external auditors’ failure to exercise professional judgment in relation to such dealings reflects poorly on the effectiveness of their audit practices.
It was owned by his sons and to ensure billion dollar targets for Maytas, Raju inflated cash and bank balances in Satyam’s financial records. * He acquired 6800 acres of land property by pledging promoter shares and raising funds. * To hide the deceit in Satyam’s books, Raju decided to acquire a controlling stake in Maytas infrastructure and properties. This deal was strongly criticised by the shareholders. However few members of the BOD agreed to this deal as they were not aware of the consequences of such an act.