NETeller founders in court yesterday

[Woody0]

Neteller patrons to see longer wait for money

Posted 2/14/2007 10:55 PM ET

By Jon Swartz, USA TODAY
SAN FRANCISCO — The waiting game for thousands of U.S. patrons with money tied up in an online payment service under federal investigation just got longer.
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York late Wednesday said it extended the deadline until March 16 to decide whether to indict the co-founders of Neteller, an Internet money-transfer service popular among gamblers. Stephen Lawrence and John Lefebvre were arrested in January on a charge of conspiracy to transfer funds with the intent to promote illegal gambling
For U.S. customers of the site, it was another delay in their efforts to recoup their money, which remains in Neteller accounts until the legal matter is resolved.
Neteller says U.S. authorities have frozen access to about $55 million in U.S.-based accounts.
"As a result of the restrictions placed by third parties, court-ordered seizures and related legal concerns, (Neteller) is unable to make payments to U.S. customers," says a posting on the company's website.
FBI agent Neil Donovan has said funds are being held in court as potential evidence. He did not provide a timetable on when customers may get their money back.
Though money-transfer companies such as Neteller do business with financial institutions and merchants, many also allow gambling companies to transfer money collected from U.S. gamblers to bank accounts outside the USA. Neteller last month closed its U.S. Internet gambling services, erasing about two-thirds of its business.
A law signed by President Bush in October bans the use of credit cards, checks and electronic fund transfers for Internet gaming. U.S. residents place more than half of all bets to major offshore casinos in an estimated $10.6 billion industry. However, most online gaming sites are based offshore, outside the reach of American law enforcement.
With Neteller's financial future teetering in the balance, consumers might choose less reliable money-transfer services instead, says Ken Dreifach, an Internet attorney.

 

[Woody0]

Perhaps someone familiar with Federal Law can explain how someone can be arrested on charges of money laundering, then a month later the AG asks for a month's extension to decide whether to indict.

What's the difference between charges and indiction? How long can the decision to indict be delayed? Isn't this an abuse of due process? If charges are stayed what happens to the fishing expedition going on at NETeller, is the information obtained tainted and not acceptable in court?

 

[Dante]

they are trying to figure out how to Rig it so they get indicted or are trying to get a bigger settlement out of them and that just takes more time.


Justice system at its finest.

 

[xpanda]

What's the difference between charges and indiction?

An indictment is handed to the courts by a grand jury. Grand jury indictments are mandatory for federal crimes.

How long can the decision to indict be delayed? Isn't this an abuse of due process?

Dunno.

If charges are stayed what happens to the fishing expedition going on at NETeller, is the information obtained tainted and not acceptable in court?

I think NETeller is "voluntarily" handing over records for inspection. What is dubious, in my mind, is the distinction between issuing a subpoena for those records and seizing $55M in funds and then using the forfeiture as leverage. I suspect the latter is what's happened. Not sure how any evidence obtained from extortion should be considered admissable.

 

[buddyboy]

cops arrest you. you are still not guilty. u can ask for bail.

then the DA reviews the case and decides to either cut u free cuz they can't prove a case,
or to bring u in front of the grand jury to indict you of a crime.

u are still not guilty. u can still ask for bail.

this has to be done in a timely manner... if the DA asks for more time, (from a judge) then the judge will ask you what you want to do... then the judge decides whether or not to delay the grand jury process and for how long.

u are still not guilty and u can still ask for bail.

 

[CollegeFan]

Perhaps someone familiar with Federal Law can explain how someone can be arrested on charges of money laundering, then a month later the AG asks for a month's extension to decide whether to indict.

What's the difference between charges and indiction? How long can the decision to indict be delayed? Isn't this an abuse of due process? If charges are stayed what happens to the fishing expedition going on at NETeller, is the information obtained tainted and not acceptable in court?

It's only an abuse of DP if the delay is "unreasonable." Basically, the government is entitled to a reasonable delay, as long as the defense is not prejudiced.

If the government can show that it is a "good faith investigative delay," they are okay. Not a tough standard to meet.

Regarding the "frozen" funds, someone here is not telling the whole truth. Frozen funds are not evidence in court. (Generally, funds are frozen to prevent further illegal activity.) The evidence in court will come from all of the documentation/paperwork/etc that Neteller has regarding these "funds." It is entirely NOT necessary to freeze funds in order to obtain evidence. In fact, it is an impossibility to use as evidence "frozen" funds.

 

[quantumleap]

cops arrest you. you are still not guilty. u can ask for bail.

then the DA reviews the case and decides to either cut u free cuz they can't prove a case,
or to bring u in front of the grand jury to indict you of a crime.

u are still not guilty. u can still ask for bail.

this has to be done in a timely manner... if the DA asks for more time, (from a judge) then the judge will ask you what you want to do... then the judge decides whether or not to delay the grand jury process and for how long.

u are still not guilty and u can still ask for bail.

This is correct buddy. But the courts have a time limit as to how long they can hold you without charging you.

This set of rules leaves wide open the possibility for abuse. I'm surprised more people aren't arrested just to piss with them only to release them later.

 

[Bet-It-All]

How has neteller commited a crime if the bill hasn't gone into effect? Also why do you need to hold the money as evidence. That just seems like an excuses to keep the money.

 

[poopah]

The Government is trying to steal money here, they want to hit two birds with one stone, they want to convict the neteller guys, at the same time they want access to all the U.S accounts, and since 99% of money in neteller is gaming related, they want to go ahead and seize the money on the basis that it was being used in an illegal activity. 55 million is a good chunk of motivation for these thieves to make up a case. In fact I would not at all be surprised if they let the former owners go for exchange of all the u.s money frozen. Guaranteed robbery coming up. Ps, how the hell is it legal to attach this bill to the main port security act when they have absoluteley nothing to do with each other, it's like attaching an alcohol ban act to a homeland security act.

 

[AdamSelene]

How has neteller commited a crime if the bill hasn't gone into effect?

They aren't being charged with any UIGE offense, they are being charge with money laundering -- transmitting US dollars to offshore sportsbooks that are allegedly violating the 1961 Wire Act by taking telephone wagers on sporting events.

Although a critical aspect of money laundering is concealment, NETELLER never concealed what they were doing. Money laundering is quite simply put making dirty money (illegal) look like clean money (legitimate business/transactions). No money laundering took place here, but the federal government has perverted and abused money laundering laws so far as to be ridiculous.

 

[TheCappers]

They can't sieze the money in a Blanket Trial. According to the 14th Admendment. We have the right to Due Process. If the Government wants the 55 mil they will have to try each and every one of the account holders. Something they are not willing to do.

 

[AdamSelene]

They can't sieze the money in a Blanket Trial. According to the 14th Admendment. We have the right to Due Process. If the Government wants the 55 mil they will have to try each and every one of the account holders. Something they are not willing to do.

Believe what you like but I believe you are wrong. I claimed the minute the charges were made public the DOJ was seizing every cent they could find of NETELLER's, and people claimed nonsense. Wasn't it obvious?

NETELLER has on its books (half-year end 2006) $99 million belonging to gambling merchants.

Do you think it would be difficult for the U.S. government to file a civil forfeiture suit against that $55 million seized alleging it as part of the $99 million owing to "illegal" gambling enterprises?

That doesn't even get to the $164 million in accumulated profits NETELLER has in cash that the government can also claim is the proceeds of illegal money laundering.

The US government can sue for forfeiture of a lot more assets than $55 million before they ever get down to individual account balances.

 

[WVU]

but the US would have to win in court to get the frozen funds. If they offer a deal it will probably be about 20 million taking into account what paypal paid. It will be worth it for them to fight and get it all back than to give 20 million.

 

[snoop]

Believe what you like but I believe you are wrong. I claimed the minute the charges were made public the DOJ was seizing every cent they could find of NETELLER's, and people claimed nonsense. Wasn't it obvious?

NETELLER has on its books (half-year end 2006) $99 million belonging to gambling merchants.

Do you think it would be difficult for the U.S. government to file a civil forfeiture suit against that $55 million seized alleging it as part of the $99 million owing to "illegal" gambling enterprises?

That doesn't even get to the $164 million in accumulated profits NETELLER has in cash that the government can also claim is the proceeds of illegal money laundering.

The US government can sue for forfeiture of a lot more assets than $55 million before they ever get down to individual account balances.

Let's assume DOJ is gonna confiscate $55 mils which "was in transit" when busted. What happens to a much larger sum of money belongs to US acct holders which Neteller is insisting that it is offshore escrow acct?