Source: https://www.assetsearchblog.com/
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 23:20:08+00:00

Document:
Your divorcing spouse may be hiding assets at an offshore trust. Your divorcing spouse may secretly transfer marital assets to the offshore trust. The divorcing spouse could also make new purchases through the offshore trust. The trust could purchase: real property; jewelry; valuable automobiles; and almost anything else. This means your divorcing spouse could hide assets by titling assets in the name of an offshore trust.
Todd Kozel was accused of this kind of scheme. Mr. Kozel allegedly hid assets at a sham Isle of Jersey trust, as set forth by “ Ways To Hide Money & Commit Crimes.” Although real estate mogul Michael R. Mastro’s case didn’t involve divorce, Mr. Mastro allegedly used three trusts to hide assets. This was mentioned at “Mr. Mastro’s Bankruptcy Estate & His Self-Settled Trusts.” If your divorcing spouse is using an offshore trust to hide marital assets from you, you may be able to gather documents that can help you identify: the custodial bank for the trust; the trust’s income beneficiaries; the trustees; etc.
Below is a list of documents/ a production request related to a divorcing spouse who was a U.S. taxpayer hiding marital assets at an offshore trust. The list has been sanitized/changed for privacy reasons. If you are in a pending divorce, you may be able to use the list during the pretrial discovery phase. You could use the list for your request that your divorcing spouse supply you with documents, (i.e. your production request). You might use the list even if you are not in a pending divorce. This is true because the list can focus your attention on documents that could reveal your divorcing spouse has hidden assets at an offshore trust.
& an offshore credit card.
By transferring money through multiple jurisdictions; offshore bank accounts; etc., one can disguise the beneficial ownership of money. An individual or corporation might use just one of these elements or a combination of them to secretly transfer money. The elements can be used as laundering links to wash hidden money in a money laundering circuit. Mr. Horsky is thought to have hidden money by transferring it through multiple jurisdictions at banks in the United States and Zurich, Switzerland. Mr. Horsky is believed to have titled his offshore bank accounts in the names of offshore shell companies he had established.
At his shell companies, Mr. Horsky allegedly used a nominee director who lived in Zurich. Mr. Horsky reportedly hid valuable stock certificates he owned in an online auction company, by physically depositing them into a Swiss stock custody account. In addition, Mr. Horsky purchased fine art from auction houses across the globe and apparently paid for the art with monies from his offshore bank account(s). Mr. Horsky was also accused of having an offshore credit card which he only used in Europe. At the “Position Of The United States With Respect To Sentencing,” you can read more about how Mr. Horsky supposedly hid his money.
This is my 12th post covering what private investigators can and can not legally do when conducting asset searches. One thing most private investigators do during asset searches is look for publicly available information a.k.a. Open Source Intelligence (“OSINT”). Websites that can help private investigators collect OSINT, are listed at the OSINT Framework. It has links to websites like Spydialer which identifies phone numbers & FotoForensics the digital photo forensics tool. Additional OSINT tools are featured at the blog article OSINT Reasearchers-Human vs Machines.
Law enforcement officials also use OSINT. This is demonstrated by prosecutors in Poland who were searching for assets allegedly laundered by a shell company. The prosecutors researched the shell company by using CorporationWiki’s website, which harvests OSINT. This research revealed the shell company had addresses in London, the U.K. & in Delaware, U.S.A. Based on the Delaware address, the prosecutors drafted a letter rogatory which was eventually filed with the Court in Delaware. The letter rogatory basically asked the Court for permission to subpoena witnesses in Delaware who knew about the shell company.
18 U.S. Code § 1956 (money laundering).
Mr. Benjamin’s Divorce & His White Collar Crimes and my post mentioning Dr. Michael Brandner, are about divorcing husbands thought to have hidden money from their wives and the IRS. Mr. Benjamin apparently hid money domestically & Dr. Brandner reportedly hid money offshore. Although Mr. Benjamin & Dr. Brandner are believed to have used different ways to hide money, both were convicted of tax fraud (26 U.S. Code § 7201) & wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343).
Prosecutors claimed Mr. Benjamin had hidden money by: failing to file tax returns; pocketing cash payments from customers; paying personal expenses from a business bank account; and cashing customers’ checks instead of depositing them into his bank account. Meanwhile, prosecutors in USA v. Brandner alleged Dr. Brandner hid money by driving across international borders with cash &/or checks &/or gold. Prosecutors also alleged at their superseding indictment or trial brief that Dr. Brandner hid money via: a safe deposit box in Costa Rica; bank accounts in Costa Rica & Panama; & a Panamanian shell company which had a nominee president who was Dr. Brandner’s intermediary.
Last month prosecutors in USA v. Kozel similarly claimed millionaire Todd Kozel hid money from his ex-wife by going offshore. From 2004 to 2014 Mr. Kozel was the CEO of Gulf Keystone Petroleum Ltd. While CEO, Mr. Kozel reportedly had an average annual income of about $10 million. Mr. Kozel’s December 14, 2018 criminal complaint basically alleged that with the help of a Swiss lawyer/gatekeeper, Mr. Kozol formed a sham offshore trust on the Isle of Jersey. Mr. Kozol apparently used the trust to conceal his true beneficial ownership of millions of Gulf Keystone Petroleum Ltd. stock share certificates. Additionally, Mr. Kozol is thought to have concealed his beneficial ownership of a NYC condominium which Mr. Kozol claimed he only rented. Mr. Kozol is alleged to have secretly purchased the condominium through a NYC shell company supposedly controlled by Mr. Kozol’s trust. Mr. Kozol’s December 14th criminal complaint is reproduced below.
Fifteen West African countries sent judges; &/or prosecutors; &/or law enforcement agents to attend the asset recovery workshop I recently lectured at in Abuja, Nigeria. I was one of four resource persons at the workshop which was a joint project of the European Union and the Inter Governmental Action Group Against Money Laundering In West Africa. At the work shop, I talked about government officials, (i.e “politically exposed persons“), who launder large bribe payments offshore. I explained that others hiding vast sums of money also usually launder their money offshore. Therefore, if you are going to conduct asset searches to detect hidden money, you should learn to spot the money laundering indicators.
The indicators include: employing strawpersons to act as bank signatories; abusing trusts; hoarding cash/engaging in bulk cash smuggling; etc. I made a list of the indicators at my post “Red Flags For An Asset Search.” The money laundering case involving Mr. Vladimir Kuznetsov has some of these indicators. As I mentioned in a lecture I gave during the asset recovery workshop, Mr. Kuznetsov was a Russian diplomat working at the United Nations in New York City. Prosecutors in the United States accused Mr. Kuznetsov of washing bribe payments through Nikal, Ltd. which was a suspected offshore shell company Mr. Kuznetsov had formed. Mr. Kuznetsov used Nikal, Ltd. to open an offshore bank account in Antigua & Mr. Kuznetsov titled the offshore bank account in the name of Nikal, Ltd.
Mr. Kuznetsov’s associate, (who took bribe payments from companies seeking contracts at the United Nations), transferred bribe payments to Mr. Kuznetsov’s offshore bank account. Mr. Kuznetsov then reportedly wire transferred the bribe payments in his offshore account to financial accounts in New York City at Chase Manhattan Bank &/or the United Nations Federal Credit Union. On March 2, 2007, Mr. Kuznetsov was convicted of conspiracy to commit money laundering. On October 12, 2007, Mr. Kuznetsov was sentenced to fifty one months’ imprisonment. Money laundering indicators or red flags that Mr. Kuznetsov had hidden money were Mr. Kuznetsov’s use of a suspected shell company, Nikal, Ltd. & Mr. Kuznetsov’s use of the offshore bank account.
¹Video Courtesy of The Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units.
On October 8th & 9th in Abuja, Nigeria I will lecture about asset recovery & tracking assets. I will present 2 lectures to law enforcement agents who work in West Africa. The lectures are called “Whistleblowers, Secret Bank Accounts & Recovering Hidden Assets” & “Asset Recovery Case Studies & Discussion.” I am presenting the lectures during an asset recovery workshop held by The Inter Governmental Action Group Against Money Laundering In West Africa (GIABA).
and best practices for an asset search or bank search.
At “Case Studies & Discussion” I go over how criminals hide their illicit assets offshore. I also talk about how law enforcement agents try to track illicit assets through: (1) mutual legal assistance treaty (“MLAT”) requests & (2) asset forfeiture laws.
There is always a money trail you can follow during your asset search. This is true no matter how your adversary hides assets. Even if your adversary maintains a secret offshore bank account there is a money trail. The money trail at the offshore bank would consist of: account opening documents; monthly account statements; and bank signature cards. Therefore, as part of your asset search you would seek these documents from the offshore bank. You might do this by employing a letter rogatory or a compelled consent form.
Perhaps most important to remember is that a money trail can involve many elements. The suspected money trail in the criminal case of USA v. Tully Lovisa et. al., is thought to include: nominees (i.e. intermediaries/straw persons); shell companies; and post office boxes in New York and the Netherlands. Prosecutors may claim Mr. Tully Lovisa &/or his co-conspirators used these elements to launder the illicit profits of an advance fee scheme. The July 10, 2018 indictment in the case alleges Mr. Lovisa &/or his co-conspirators mailed phony prize notices to hundreds of thousands of victims.
The notices supposedly indicated the victims won cash prizes ranging from tens of thousands to millions of dollars. The notices allegedly said the victims could collect the prizes by mailing a $20 or $25 processing fee to the post office boxes in New York or the Netherlands. According to the indictment, Mr. Lovisa &/or his co-conspirators never paid valuable prizes to the victims and the supposed scheme generated more than $30 million in illicit profits from the processing fees paid by the victims.
In 2010 the Federal Trade Commission sued Mr. Lovisa for an alleged advance fee scam similar to the alleged advance fee scam described at Mr. Lovisa’s July 10, 2018 indictment. The 2010 lawsuit was settled via a stipulation filed with the Court on 4/19/12. A review of the 2010 lawsuit reveals the suspected money trail in that case could have consisted of shell companies and post office boxes. The 2010 lawsuit claimed Mr. Lovisa had sent personalized mailers in violation of 15 U.S.C. §45 (a), which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts. One of these alleged mailers mentioned by the 2010 lawsuit, is reproduced below.
If forged documents were used to hide or steal money, you may need handwriting experts/forensic document examiners to conduct a questioned document examination. “A Case of Tax Fraud, Identity Theft & Murder” showed how forged letters were used by “Chuck” to steal money from “Mr. Wallace’s” Cayman Island bank account. Chuck forged Mr. Wallace’s signature in 2 letters Chuck sent to “Bob,” a banker at the Cayman Island bank. By impersonating Mr. Wallace at the 2 forged letters, Chuck was able to drain Mr. Wallace’s Cayman Island bank account. Although I partly sanitized it for privacy reasons, one of the letters Chuck forged is available here.
Link charting software enables one to visualize relationships and associations between people and/or things. This visualization can assist you or your private investigators in following a money trail/tracking assets. You may similarly use link charts in court to support your claim that money was hidden from you. A link chart of a money laundering circuit is discussed at the webpage How FINTRAC Builds A Case. Link charts for analyzing telephone toll calls, methamphetamine and cocaine distribution and various crimes are published by RFF Electronics.
Forensic computer experts can assist you if you give them physical access to items thought to store digital evidence. These items can be a computer, mobile phone, flash card from a digital camera, etc. At a forensic computer examination, the experts can use keywords to search for hidden assets; look for databases like Quickbooks; search for logins at banks; and seek data which was supposedly deleted.
A scheme to hide assets may start out with the primary goal of placing assets beyond your reach. The scheme may then develop the secondary goal of hiding assets from tax authorities/committing a tax fraud. To increase your chances of a successful asset search, you should therefore look for indicators of tax fraud. A good list of the indicators is published by the IRS at IRM 25.1.2.3, Fraud Handbook – Indicators of Fraud.
Just one indicator listed at the Fraud Handbook is “deposits into bank accounts under nominee names.” This means secretly depositing money into bank accounts titled in the names of intermediaries (i.e. nominees). “Red Flags & The IRS Search For Attorney Memmott’s Assets” analyzes the tax fraud case against the now-disbarred California attorney Orion Memmott. Prosecutors accused Mr. Memmott of hiding assets from the IRS by titling real estate & bank accounts in the names of nominees.
In USA v. Beverely, Docket No 17−cr−60093, prosecutors similarly accused Timothy J. Beverley of hiding assets from the IRS. Prosecutors claimed Mr. Beverley of Pompano Beach, Florida failed to report to the IRS $2.2 million he allegedly stole from his employer. Page 4 ¶14 (b) of Mr. Beverley’s superseding indictment said Mr. Beverley hid his stolen money in bank accounts titled in the names of nominees. Mr. Beverley supposedly committed the theft & alleged tax fraud while on supervised release from his earlier money laundering case. In the laundering case, prosecutors accused Mr. Beverley of hiding the illicit proceeds of a bank fraud. Mr. Beverley apparently hid the proceeds of the bank fraud by washing them through bank accounts belonging to the NASCAR team Mr. Beverley once owned—Tyler Jet Motorsports.
The public corruption case brought against former Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent Christopher V. Ciccione, II (“Ciccione”), could show the importance of gathering tips when searching for assets. U.S. law enforcement officials collected a tip which led them to discover illicit assets or bribes given to Ciccione: about $20,000 in cash; a Rolex watch worth approximately $12,000; a hotel stay at the Marriott in Bogota, Colombia; a party; a dinner; liquor; & the services of prostitutes. The tip originated from governmental authorities in Colombia who had tapped phones & detected the apparent bribery scheme between Ciccione & Colombian narcotics kingpin Jose Bayron Piedrahita Ceballos (“Piedrahita”). At his 11/30/17 Factual Basis For Plea, Ciccione admitted taking the bribe payments, except for the Rolex watch.

References: § 1956
 § 7201
 § 1343
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 §45
 v. 
 V.