OffshoreAlert
Daily news, documents and intelligence about Offshore Financial Centers and those who conduct business in them that you will not find anywhere else.
RSS Feed Print
Huck/Daniel J. Wright/Diligizer
Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 8:08:40 PM

By: Hunter says don't expect an apology....

Sorry but no apology from me. My comment with respect to the board has always been that it is a great source of information. I plan to continue to use all boards that provide information including, but not limited to, ragingbull message boards, Diligzier, Black Board, Yellow Board, Goldhaven, OBNR, and others. I can't apologize for thinking it is a good board for information any more than I can apologize for thinking boards run by players like Steve Hupfer of Global Services Inc. are good boards for information.

Also not going to apologize for exchanges related to the incorrect identification of hunter. My harsh attitude towards Lisa is a result of recent postings that are separate from her accusations related to the people behind the Diliger board adn don't try to confuse the two. Decent people don't post the following kind of information due to a disagreement.

NOTE: This is an R rated link. Don't open unless you want to see a picture of a big fat mostly naked woman.

POST MADE AT BOARD
Subject: A picture of Becky/hunter trying to get Greg to bedPosted By: hi Ms Kidd - Unregistered UserPosted At: (8/29/02 2:00:08 pm)Reply
d">www.karasxxx.com/potd/amapic.shtml?hornyalien d

LINK FROM WORD FILE
NOTE: This is link from Word file.
http://www.karasxxx.com/potd/amapic.shtml?hornyalien
And here are some of my comments to Steve DeMello of ezboard about the post.

Not sure Lisa Arden made the following post at the Black Board this morning but once again it leaves the impression that the Becky Kidd in Hoover AL is hunter. I would appreciate it if Moderators would bring to my attention any posts that continue to identify the Becky Kidd in Hoover AL as hunter.
....
....
Not exactly the best thing to have at a due diligence board hosted by ezboard.
....
....
Thank you,
hunter


Maybe you think I should apologize for some brutal exchange with Lisa. Think again bud. Gloves came off and it is up to her if they reamin off.

Here is a repost from the Diligizer board made by myself. You just read it and let me know what you think I should apologize for!!!!

The only person who deserves an apology is BECKY KIDD IN HOOVER AL.

Reply to Charles
Subject: Oh Charles it used to be so simple.....
You make it seem so simple and there actually is an element of fear involved. Last week sights were set on me for the simple reason that I disagreed with the banned poster about the Diligizer board. I have yet to see the banned poster stop attacking once a battle is started. Think you have resolved an issue then the banned poster finds something else to continue the attack. Ignoring the banned poster doesn't seem to work and you can forget logic or reason. In my opinion, the banned poster is simply too sick to deal with in normal terms and hence the rumble will continue.

Now for the element of fear. I communicate with a lot of people via the internet, phone conversations, and personal meetings. When it comes to concern about my activities they tend to fall into two groups. Those who don't think there is anything to worry about and those who worry plenty. While I tend to hope the first group is right, I can't discount statements like the following.

"be careful you are putting out too much information"

" FOR THE LOVE OF GOD – YOU JUST BE CAREFULL NOW – DO YOU HEAR"

"I have told Hunter repeatedly, both in e-mails exchanged and in telephone conversations that she needed to be careful about her identity and other personal information due to the nature of her posts and the type of people she makes her posts about"

Below I will briefly discuss the events surrounding a publicly traded stock that might explain why I continue to receive statements like the ones above. When I first started my hunting I was focused on a small group people and the concern about my identity was strictly personal. I personally know people who invested in the program and some were/are believers. Assuming the players ever face any kind of action by authorities and my identity and action was made known to certain people then a few relationships would be destroyed. Because I tended to focus on this reason to keep my identity unknown, I downplayed the comments I was receiving and hearing like the ones above. Told myself all kinds of things to downplay these comments. Things like there are so many people out there posting that a certain element doesn't even pay attention to the boards, that there are posters who are putting out a lot more information than myself and while other posters can sometimes get brutal with their posts my mainly focus on publicly available information, and the best reason of all is that you just don't see posters getting kidnapped, attacked, or even murdered. All of the above tends to make me think the first group is right but those comments by the other group are still out there. I would feel a lot better and even post my personal information if I didn't keep running into the mob element. I am actually very surprised that no one has asked why don't I post my personal information since it would clear up the mistaken identity of hunter but everyone in the second group doesn't think I should do that and even though I struggle with this decision I am holding off on taking that step. While I assume some risk for my actions could you imagine how myself and others would feel if something happened to this other person because of the incorrect identification.

Anyway back to the mob element. At first glance there doesn't appear to be too much of that element involved in HYIPs but that quickly changes when you look at dog stocks which is something I do. Below is a list of some shareholder in a publicly traded company and I have followed some of the entities closely. Thank goodness I am not interested in the entities that were set up for Phil Abramo because he was a "capo" or "captain" of the DeCavalcanle Famly of Cosa Nostra and someone got murdered in this one.

Stock transaction related to SC&T International
COMMON STOCK - September 10, 1996
In April and May 1995, the Company issued and sold $1,000,000 in
principal amount of 6% notes, 75,000 shares of Common Stock, and warrants to
purchase 588,500 shares of Common Stock at a price of $1.20 per share, to
Maraval and Associates, Bauman, Ltd., Robert Adams, Caspian Consulting, Ltd.,
Roddy Diprimo, Ltd., and
Umbiquity Holdings, S.A. The Company retired the $1,000,000 principal amount of
these notes with proceeds from its initial public offering.
NOTE: Entities set up for Phil Abramo and associates:
Maraval, Bauman, Robert Adams, Caspian Consulting, Roddy Diprimo, Umbiquity.

Partial list of Shareholders that acquired shares in a private placement of Series A Preferred Stock
Cummins Investments Ltd - uses addr. of Maslo Fund
Maslo Fund Ltd - interested party
Star High Yield Investment Management - interested party
Winward Island Limited - interested party


Brutal is an understatement if you ever get to read the indictment of Phil Abramo. Pressured brokers and when someone in the Bahamas moved some of Abramo's funds, which he didn't like, they were shot in the head. Forget brutal exchanges at a message board or any discussion. Just a matter of finding someone to squeeze the trigger. Just shows what can happen when you piss off the wrong person, which is something I try to avoid doing, but I do think it explains why I receive comments from the second group.

So you see Charles things aren't so simple. Do you sit back and let the wrong person be identified as hunter without a challenge? Once engaged there is practically no way to disengage. Kind of like trying to stop Romeo in the middle of things. Not sure about you but you couldn't pay me to try and interfere with something like that. Once the gloves are off, or in your case once the bull is committed, there isn't any turning back. The rumble will probably continue as will the action for Romeo. Best you enjoy the results of Romeo's actions and skip the rumble at the boards. It ain't pretty.

Have a good one,
hunter








Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 7:35:26 PM

By: quip

Hunter I think you owe Lisa an apology. If she says she has proof, then it is time everyone believes her. I believe there will be much more to come in the next few days. And, one must never assume it will not be about them.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 6:31:59 PM

By: Hunter was surprised

I was surprised by your post and this was news to me.

hunter


Internal Administrator
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011
Joined: 10/12/2010
Posts: 5780


Posted: 8/31/2002 6:13:53 PM

By: Lisa Ann Arden

I regret to inform you, this is "HUCK' aka Daniel J. Wright.
Date: 8/31/2002 6:03:00 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Minstral14
To: p.mukundan@icc-ccs.org.uk



One of the Diligizers.

How inutterably sad, for me, and for all.

I posted this as Guest:

More
Posted By: guest - Unregistered User
Posted At: (8/31/02 4:50:05 pm)
Reply

216.239.35.100/search?q=cache:gUN8nmk6aUsC:www.sfo.gov.uk/publications/ 2000_2001/section_05.asp+%22daniel+wright%22+fraud&hl=en&ie=UTF-8


Case Studies

All that Glisters is not Gold

This is a case that illustrates a ruthless confidence trick, where a bogus investment expert and her associate put up a front of wealth and success to dupe private clients and creditors out of around £3 million. They adopted a scheme they picked up in the US; a scheme that would appear attractive, if suitably packaged, to people of some wealth. They set out to dazzle, but the façade hid an empty operation built on greed and self indulgence.

During 1997, the Hertfordshire Police received complaints from anxious creditors about two women who were not paying their accounts. It seemed that the two women, Evelyn Burton and Lyla Andre, were walking out of expensive hotels without paying, after running up considerable bills. At face value, such misdeeds would not attract the attention of the Serious Fraud Office, but as so often happens in criminal investigations, one thing leads to another. Inquiries by the Police led them to uncover incriminating documents left by the two women in a hotel room in St. Albans. The discovery prompted the Police to refer the matter to the SFO, though the Police continued to be involved in the investigation.

Burton and Andre were long-time business associates. They arrived in the UK in September 1996 from the US where they had spent some time after leaving Australia, their home country, to evade the interest of the authorities for suspected crimes committed down-under. In the US they had met an American attorney called Daniel Wright. The three of them set up a US registered company, the Westgate Development Corporation. This company was presented to victims as Burton’s “investment vehicle” but was in fact used as a channel through which money was passed.

Burton, supported by Andre, started in the high-living mode as soon as they arrived in the UK. Collected by a chauffer-driven limousine from the airport they proceeded to run up a substantial bill at the Berkeley Hotel in London, much of which remains unrecovered. Whilst there, they made the acqaintance of the owner of an employment agency. They were, they said, looking for staff for a country home they were planning to buy. Through this route they were introduced to what the Press have called the “horsey set”. They soon set about networking among the affluent sector of society which attends such equestrian events as the Windsor Horse Show.

Burton would give the impression that she was an experienced and successful bond trader and could offer interested investors very attractive returns through her finance business in the States. All this was done in an environment of champagne receptions, arriving at events in expensive cars, with servants in tow, and generally demonstrating extravagence. Whatever they did and wherever they went, it was all done with impressive aplomb. The façade clearly won them many clients. Their victims included two Swedish businessmen who trusted them with over £186,000, business partners from Belfast who invested around £100,000 and a land-owner in East Anglia who bought into the programme for over £90,000. There were many more. Burton was long on promises but short on delivery. As part of her technique for infiltrating the right circles she offered sponsorship to the prestigious Arab Horse Society Show at Haydock and commissioned expensive bronze horses as prizes. She neglected to pay the artist for this work and none of the cheques presented to winners at the show were honoured.

By late 1997 it began to unravel. Disgruntled creditors and investors were asking questions. Sensing that it would be wise to disappear, Burton and Andre left the UK, turning up in New Zealand in January the following year, via a short stay in the Netherlands. Warrants for their arrest were issued and an extradition order made. They contested the extradition but at the same time became embroiled in criminal proceedings in New Zealand for a fraud committed there. They were arrested by the New Zealand Police in February 1999 and held in custody. Burton was tried at Auckland Circuit Court ten months later and received a six-month prison sentence but was released on the basis of time already spent in custody awaiting trial. Charges against Andre were dropped. They both agreed to return to the UK under Police escort to face the SFO proceedings.

On 24 January 2000 the defendants were charged at St. Albans Magistrate Court and the case later transferred to Wood Green Crown Court. The trial opened a year later. Burton pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring with others to defraud investors. Andre admitted she had dishonestly retained a wrongful credit and had also evaded a liability by deception. They were sentenced on 9 February to prison terms of five years for Burton and three years eight months for Andre. It was not possible to bring charges against Daniel Wright, the American attorney who was their partner in Westgate Development Corporation.



216.239.35.100/search?q=cache:gUN8nmk6aUsC:www.sfo.gov.uk/publications/%202000_2001/section_05.asp+%22daniel+wright%22+fraud&hl=en&ie=UTF-8




35. Burton and André were long-time business associates in a Melbourne brothel. They arrived in the UK in September 1996 from the USA where they had spent some time after leaving Australia to evade the interest of the authorities for suspected crimes committed there. In the USA they met an American attorney called Daniel Wright. He introduced them a scheme known as a high yield investment programme. This was a way of attracting funds from individuals attracted to select opportunities to achieve higher returns than, say normally available on the stock market. The three of them set up a US registered company called Westgate Development Corporation. The company however was simply a vehicle for channelling money through a bank account in Maryland, USA.


This makes me really sad.
Posted By: guest - Unregistered User
Posted At: (8/31/02 4:39:40 pm)
Reply

This is Daniel's address:







Entity Name: WESTGATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Dept. ID #: D04475562


Mailing Address
WESTGATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

4912 BUTTERNUT DR
ROCKVILLE, MD 20853 2325

Personal Property Filings
Asmt. Year Filing Date Extension Penalty Amount Penalty Paid Date
2002 No
2001 No
2000 No
1999 No
1998 No

Personal Property Assessments Summary
Asmt. Year Date Assessed County Base Town Base Date Certified
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
Personal Property Assessments Certification Information
Asmt. Year Location County License Town Date Certified









Taxpayer Services Division



Entity Name: WESTGATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Dept. ID #: D04475562


Principal Office (Current):
4912 BUTTERNUT DRIVE
ROCKVILLE, MD 20853


Resident Agent (Current): NO ACTIVE AGENT FOUND


Status: FORFEITED
Good Standing: No
Business Code: Ordinary Business - Stock
Date of Formation or Registration: 08/13/1996
State of Formation: MD
Stock/Nonstock: Stock
Close/Not Close: Not Close








Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 10:19:25 PM

By: Huck/Daniel's Bar Information

http://www.msba.org/directory/results.cfm

Daniel Jay Wright
Member

4912 Butternut Dr
Rockville, MD 20853-2325
Montgomery County
Email: djwright6@comcast.net
Telephone: (301) 871-9000

Bar Admissions
Member Admitted (DC Bar): 12/01/1979
Member Admitted (MD Bar): 01/02/1992

Section Membership
Section of Business Law

Practice Areas
Banking/Finance


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Members: Update your information here.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 10:18:43 PM

By: Sooltauq

Thanks. Can you please fax the Fed-Ex receipts? Here is another article:

Extradited women face jail over high-class cons
16 JANUARY 2001
NZPA

Two lesbian former brothel madams extradited from New Zealand last year by British police now face jail for ripping off England's equestrian set of stg550,000 ($NZ1,840,696).

Australians Evelyn Burton, 56, and Lyla Andre, 50, rubbed shoulders with the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh as they targeted the wealthy "horsey set" with tall tales of huge investment returns.

They were warned today they faced jail when they appeared in London's Wood Green Crown Court.

"You must not assume because I'm granting you bail that there is going to be anything other than a custodial sentence. All options are open," Judge Peter Ader said.

The case was adjourned until February 9 for medical and psychiatric reports for Burton and a pre-sentence report for Andre.

Detective Constable Jim Frost, who led the case against the pair, suggested the British elite had been naive.

"What they didn't realise is that if it's too good to be true, it probably is," he said.

Posing as high rollers at a string of equestrian events, the couple embroidered their make-believe image of burgeoning bank balances and business success, with gold Rolls-Royces, stretch limousines, five-star hotels and a trio of servants.

Four years ago, to bolster their fictitious credentials, they promised stg176,000 ($NZ589,000) sponsorship to the Royal Windsor Horse Show. On the strength of that, they gained passes to the Royal Box, where they were introduced to the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh.

The cheque they wrote subsequently bounced, an occurrence that was their trademark around the world.

Promised huge guaranteed profits by a United States-registered company that was nothing more than a front, those they sucked in were left more than stg550,000 out of pocket, the court was told.

Some creditors found themselves with unpaid bills almost four times that amount.

Burton, who has swapped luxury hotels for a bail hostel in North London, admitted one count of conspiracy to defraud between October 1996 and March 1998.

Police said she teamed with US attorney Daniel Wright and they together conned a string of victims into entering into agreements with Westgate Development Corporation, a company set up as a vehicle for the swindle.

One loser was Michael Bullen, a former equerry to the Queen, who was left stg60,000 out of pocket.

Grey-haired Andre, who is staying at the same hostel as her co-defendant, pleaded guilty to one count of dishonestly retaining a wrongful credit, and two charges of evading a liability by deception.

Although the case was not opened, a statement released after the hearing by the Serious Fraud Office said: "They defrauded numerous individuals of large sums of money by persuading them to buy into high yield investment programmes operated through Westgate."

It said the US company was controlled by Burton, who was its president, secretary, treasurer, sole director and shareholder. Andre was vice-president.

Police who investigated found they once ran the Magic Moments Massage Parlour in Melbourne, Australia. They turned their backs on the red light industry to go upmarket and launch an investment company.

They fled for the US, arriving in Britain in September 1996.

Three months into their stay they visited the Olympia Horse Show in a stretched limousine.

Their fate was sealed when a London hotelier was so desperate to get the women out of their rooms after they had run up a stg10,000 bill that he staged a false fire alert.

Local police arrived and searched their belongings, discovering a string of documents indicating the hotelier was not the only person waiting for his money.

They fled Britain in December 1997, arriving in New Zealand a few weeks later, where warrants for their arrest and an extradition order caught up with them.

In January last year, the couple finally gave up their battle against the British extradition order and returned to Britain. - NZPA


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 10:14:19 PM

By: Fax number for Daniel/Huck in Maryland

My fax is 301-871-5315.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 10:12:40 PM

By: Lisa Ann Arden

I have sent Daniel/Huck Fed Ex packages to that address. He lives there. I have the receipts.

His phones 301-871-7000, 301-871-9000

Plus: DILIGIZER ARCHIVE 6
> Re Professional Help

>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re Professional Help
Posted By: Claw - Unregistered User
Posted At: (9/29/01 5:34:46 pm)


Huck:

I couldn't agree more. I have always given my opinion that one should pay for professional help for due diligence on prospective programs and the people associated with such programs. Paying a little up front makes so much more sense than risking the whole amount on the back end. I too am not in that business but know several who are. Having an attorney involved in the process is no guarantee that one will not be scammed as there are not that many who are truly competent in this arena. I know of two superbly qualified attorneys: one in Pennsylvania and one in the Rockville, Maryland area.
Leaving aside the issue of whether or not a person should actually be looking, if they are compelled to do so despite many warnings to the contrary, they cannot be too careful when going "grail hunting".

Regards, Claw



Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 9:52:54 PM

By: Sooltauq

Yes, it appears that an American attorney named "Daniel Wright" from the Maryland area was involved in a HYIP scam. I've never talked with either Mr. Wright or the Diligizer known as "Huck", but to tie up loose ends can somebody positively verify that this is the same guy?

If so, this saga gets stranger and stranger.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 8:28:35 PM

By: Hunter agrees that .....

The less important the better. Never claimed to be a crime fighter. As Hunter, I do a couple of things. Look for information and share it with those interested. The people interested includes investors, government people, reporters, and probably even some players.

It brings me great comfort that you are in the first group of people who think there isn't anthing to worry about and I hope you are right and the more people who think I am not important the better.

You commenting on anyone's behavior is a joke.

hunter


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 8:16:50 PM

By: Lisa Ann Arden

It is astounding you are pursuing this.

There is NO WAY you could be in more danger than me, David Marchant, Jay Adkisson, or anyone else that uses their real name and is a bonfide crime fighter. You are simply not as important as you think. But then, I have always had a problem relating to people who refer to themselves in the third person, so...

Your behavior now is simply reminiscent of one of those crooks on Diligizer who persists in posting to a thread about themself they wish wasn't there, and keeping it on the front page, and making a much bigger deal of it then it need, or should be.

Grow up.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 9:20:33 AM

By: Statement of the Director

This has NOTHING to do with Lisa. The DIRECTOR of the U.K. Serious Frauds Office says that it was Daniel Wright how "introduced" this HYIP scheme, and not vice versa.

You revisionist and unsupported contention that he was "just an attorney" is totally exploded by the statement of the Director, who is much more credible than some anonymous poster.

35. Burton and André were long-time business associates in a Melbourne brothel. They arrived in the UK in September 1996 from the USA where they had spent some time after leaving Australia to evade the interest of the authorities for suspected crimes committed there. In the USA they met an American attorney called Daniel Wright. He introduced them a scheme known as a high yield investment programme. This was a way of attracting funds from individuals attracted to select opportunities to achieve higher returns than, say normally available on the stock market. The three of them set up a US registered company called Westgate Development Corporation. The company however was simply a vehicle for channelling money through a bank account in Maryland, USA.

"Combating Prime Bank and High-Yield Investment Fraud"
Speech by Rosalind Wright CB,
Director of the Serious Fraud Office
At Barclays Bank World Head Office Presentation Theatre
54, Lombard Street, London
On 21st March 2002
(Organised by the Institute of International Banking Law & Practice)


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 9:01:55 AM

By: No way! Lisa is trying to ruin a good man!

What this whole post does not say is volumes.

Here are the facts:

was he charged with any crime.
was he convicted of any crime.
was he charged with any civil offense.
was he found liable for any civil offense

I think the answer to that is no.

Isn't This is a normal function for an attorney, incorporate a company for a client. And where does it say in the corporate papers that he WAS a partner? Although the article states that he was a “partner” in the corporation, in fact that is not legally possible.

A corporation has officers and directors, not partners.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 12:48:08 AM

By: More proof, unfortunately

This message is not flagged. [ Flag Message - Mark as Unread ]

From: "Ann de Nice" | This is Spam | Add to Address Book
To: monchou2u@yahoo.com
CC: djwright6@comcast.net
Subject: Fwd: wav file
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 01:37:00 -0400





Now go away as you promised.

Do not reply to this email either.b

>From: Daniel Wright
>To: anndenice@hotmail.com
>CC: Phil McGourty
>Subject: wav file
>Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 23:48:14 -0400
>
>Dear Ann:
>
>I received your message from Phil.
>
>Let me say again that I appreciate your consideration in removing the
>original post.
>
>When I first discovered the link on your board, I was shocked and
dismayed.
>I didn’t intend to have the recording posted on the boards. Now that
I’ve
>had a day or so to think it over, however, I’ve reached a slightly
>different
>conclusion. I don’t think the recording casts me in a negative light.
I
>did nothing wrong, nor was I accused of doing anything wrong. A
message
>was
>left on my answering machine, to be delivered to other parties.
>Accordingly, if you want to re-post it, edited or not, I will not
object.
>Personally, I wouldn’t feed the frenzy, but I will leave that to your
best
>judgment.
>
>I hope this dispute is resolved soon, so we are not continually faced
with
>such unfortunate issues. If there is anything I can do, please feel
free
>to
>contact me. I do ask that our communication remain confidential.
>
>
>Thanks again.
>
>Daniel Wright
>
>
>
>
>



Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 11:49:14 PM

By: Huck was your last friend?

I thought Huck was your best friend - Look out Yeti Man - here she comes


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 10:27:20 PM

By: More Proof Daniel J. Wright, is a Diligizer.

-----------------
Forwarded Message:
Subj: RE: And who
Date: 8/11/2002 10:22:39 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: djwright6@comcast.net
To: Minstral14@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)



You can eliminate my name from contention. Tell you that. When I stop by the "Pub" for a "brew" I go as Diligizer since it is anonymous. Also, I don't think Phil because he has that new name (acuteDD) that is anonymous at the "Pub."

Bottoms up!

Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Minstral14@aol.com [mailto:Minstral14@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2002 10:17 AM
To: djwright6@comcast.net
Subject: And who


is emirates8? I saw he/she at hte White Horse Pub yesterday. Interesting for a brand new screen name. Could THAT be Phil? Umobert? YOU?

Lisa


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 8/31/2002 10:23:00 PM

By: quip

Maybe all should check out the Corporate Records. And when you do please post them for further public interest.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 10:49:38 AM

By: Hunter would be reaching for straws....

I am the last person to ask about investigations and such. Also I don't know if the operative word is "yet" or "never". I think in Westgate Development some people faced action. My guess is the investigation is closed and no charges were made against Daniel but could be wrong. Definitely haven't paid any attention to that one other than briefly reading the statement by the Serious Fraud Office that has been posted. In the case of Tedder, absolutely no one involved in Global Investments Inc has faced action and the investigation is ongoing. Well, that might not be quite true because the reporter in NY did write that Tedder lost his license due to his involvement in Global Investments Inc.

I definitely wouldn't argue that all people involved in HYIPs get nailed. Impossible to imagine that government folks have a perfect record when it comes to nailing players involved in HYIPs.


hunter


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 10:34:43 AM

By: Partially agree

The operative word is "Yet". Sometimes investigations and prosecutions take time, agree? And U.S. authorities might not even know about what happens abroad, until somebody brings it to their attention, agree?


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 10:26:20 AM

By: Not sure fair comparison.....

Probably not a fair comparison because Tedder is still being investigated. Time will only tell what will happen in the end. I will point out that Tedder has already lost his license (not the case with Daniel), Tedder is mentioned in an SEC Litigation Release (not the case with Daniel), Tedder has an open Criminal Case against him (not the case with Daniel), and Tedder faced action by the Florida Bar (not the case with Daniel).

Probably not the best example but your point is well understood.
hunter


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 10:19:49 AM

By: Scam Artists Squirm

Are you saying that because he hasn't been prosecuted yet that the Director of the Serious Frauds Office was telling lies.

I bet your next argument is that Lisa has hoodwinked the Director of the Serious Frauds Office, right?

And does this mean that every scammer who was never prosecuted didn't really do it? Hey, Hunter - guess this means that David Tedder is really INNOCENT!!!


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 9:57:35 AM

By: Facts

But the facts are,

was he charged with any crime.
was he convicted of any crime.
was he charged with any civil offense.
was he found liable for any civil offense

I think the answer to that is no.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 9:56:28 AM

By: Hunter's repost from Black Board

SUBJECT: Documentation about case is needed....

If possible someone should try to get documents related to the case. This exchange will never go anywhere because it is the comments of posters who support Daniel vs. the comments in the release by the Serious Fraud Office. Without more information it doesn't look to me like either side will budge an inch.

No matter what either side thinks this is a surprise to those of us who communicated with Daniel over the years and weren't aware of his past.

No one should read any more into this comment then what is typed. Just surprised - nothing more and nothing less. Hopefully won't see anything like hunter is stabbing Daniel in the back, hunter supports Lisa (NOT), or hunter has changed her opinion about the boards (NOT). Just a nice simple expression of my surprise.

Have a good one,
hunter


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 1:39:36 PM

By: What scam artists do

Scam artists divert attention from the main issue. The issue here is that the Director of the Serious Fraud Office has clearly stated that Daniel Wright "introduced" two scammers to HYIPs and help them facilitate their scams.

This is the point, Lisa is a distraction.

Scam artists distract, that's what scam artists do.

Scam artists are all really innocent too. It was all a big misunderstanding.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 1:22:18 PM

By: Lisa Said It

Lisa, if Huck was your mentor; if he had any kind of a relationship with you - why would you then be surprised he had a relationship with two alledged former hookers.

This in my opinion would be a step up from anything you and he had together.

You Ms. Lisa are scum and everything is above you in the how sick i am department.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 1:05:31 PM

By: Max

"How inutterably sad, for me, and for all" that you are trying to destroy everything and everyone you have ever touched. I wonder if this happened about 7 years ago, why he has never been charged with any criminal or civil compaint? Still working on their case? I think not.

Do you think it is conceivable that there are any inaccuracies in the SFO statement? The day will come when you will regret that you took as true everything you read, called Dan a crook and then and set out to destroy one of the last persons who had a friendship with you.

How utterly sad for you.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 12:45:15 PM

By: Lisa Ann Arden

Lisa is not trying to ruin anyone. I made no commentary at all. I simply posted documentation.

I can assure you, this is not something I knew, this is not something I wanted to know, this is not something I would have believed if someone had just told me it was so, and it is information/behavior that I find to be personally devastating and inexplicable. The mere fact that he would enter into ANY kind of partnership with women of this character and background (they were already under investigation in New Zealand) is hard to understand, or justify.

Daniel was, my mentor, and I thought, very good friend. I thought Daniel's character was unassailable for a very long time. I no longer do, and not just as a result of this evidence.

Further, I find the fact that every post relating to this has been deleted from every ezboard forum, to be extremely suspicious.

I have also found evidence that BOTH Paul Renner, and his father Klaus Renner, have been involved in numerous HYIP schemes/scams in one way or another. I will be posting this information here later.

p.s. I did not make any of the posts about this on the Yellow Board, or the 8th DD board.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 11:49:27 AM

By: Serious Frauds Office

The statement of the Director is clear, unequivocal, and unambiguous. Nothing to call them about.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 11:01:26 AM

By: Hunter thinks you should call....

Hunter thinks you should call the Serious Fraud Office if this is something that really interests you. I got to run because got a lot of activities planned. I think you want everyone to conclude certain things about Daniel from the information in the release. There is no reason to convience people. They can read the release and form their own opinion. They can even form a different opinion than you.

Couple of things will repeat.

Daniel Wright contributed a lot to Diligizer.

Paul gets to run the board the way he wants and get anyone to help out that he wants. Paul controls the Blacklist and who is or isn't on the list. I would be surprised to see anyone on the Blacklist who assisted with the board.

Of course, I was surprised by the release yesterday and don't expect the surprises will end.


Have a good one,
hunter


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 8:04:50 PM

By: More Info Please

Did not Claw speak at this same seminar?


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 7:58:58 PM

By: Yes there IS proof

Your continuing to repeat lies won't make them come true. The Director of the Serious Frauds Office said this, which absolutely IS proof that Daniel Wright was involved in an HYIP scam (even if they couldn't get jurisdiction over him in the UK):

35. Burton and André were long-time business associates in a Melbourne brothel. They arrived in the UK in September 1996 from the USA where they had spent some time after leaving Australia to evade the interest of the authorities for suspected crimes committed there. In the USA they met an American attorney called Daniel Wright. He introduced them a scheme known as a high yield investment programme. This was a way of attracting funds from individuals attracted to select opportunities to achieve higher returns than, say normally available on the stock market. The three of them set up a US registered company called Westgate Development Corporation. The company however was simply a vehicle for channelling money through a bank account in Maryland, USA.

Speech by Rosalind Wright CB,

Director of the Serious Fraud Office

At Barclays Bank World Head Office Presentation Theatre

54, Lombard Street, London

On 21st March 2002

(Organised by the Institute of International Banking Law & Practice)

http://www.sfo.gov.uk/publications/speechesout/sp_29.asp?id=29

Continue to assert that there is "no proof" of wrongdoing is plainly false, and disingenuous.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 7:58:54 PM

By: Yes there IS proof

Your continuing to repeat lies won't make them come true. The Director of the Serious Frauds Office said this, which absolutely IS proof that Daniel Wright was involved in an HYIP scam (even if they couldn't get jurisdiction over him in the UK):

35. Burton and André were long-time business associates in a Melbourne brothel. They arrived in the UK in September 1996 from the USA where they had spent some time after leaving Australia to evade the interest of the authorities for suspected crimes committed there. In the USA they met an American attorney called Daniel Wright. He introduced them a scheme known as a high yield investment programme. This was a way of attracting funds from individuals attracted to select opportunities to achieve higher returns than, say normally available on the stock market. The three of them set up a US registered company called Westgate Development Corporation. The company however was simply a vehicle for channelling money through a bank account in Maryland, USA.

Speech by Rosalind Wright CB,

Director of the Serious Fraud Office

At Barclays Bank World Head Office Presentation Theatre

54, Lombard Street, London

On 21st March 2002

(Organised by the Institute of International Banking Law & Practice)

http://www.sfo.gov.uk/publications/speechesout/sp_29.asp?id=29

Continue to assert that there is "no proof" of wrongdoing is plainly false, and disingenuous.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 7:31:59 PM

By: Facts

There is NO proof Mr. Wright did one thing wrong. Was he charged with one thing whether criminal or civil? No is your answer.

This Cyber Court, that makes you all the cyber jury, doesn't reasonable doubt come into play at all? Or is it just flog them? and Damn the consequences. I have yet to see one real bit of wrong doing.

I think if you ask Ms.Roz Wright about some of the statements in her speech she will agree that they carried several inaccuracies. And maybe agree that all he did was work up corporation papers for these ladies and set up a client trust account. Why don't you all call her and ask.

And After 7 years, Mr.Wright was never criminally nor civilly charged


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 6:46:57 PM

By: NO, Alpo is probably next!

Better get your >G-force


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 5:49:06 PM

By: Nutshell

It is clear that several members of the Diligizer team are, or at least have been, some very bad scam artists (bad both to the nature of their crimes and because they were dumb enough to be caught, too). Since Bukovich and Wright have been reported by law enforcement authorities to be scammers, it doesn't take much imagination to consider that may have been similarly involved in profiting from HYIP scams.

It is amusing that, just as with Bukovich, anonymous posters come on here and claim that it was all a mistake or misunderstanding, and that it was no big deal. But statements of the SEC (as to Bukovich) and of the Director of the Serious Frauds Office (as to Wright) are clear and unequivocal to the contrary.

Background of Renner and Kramer-Wilt coming next to a theatre near you - strap your seatbelt tight for this wild ride!


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 5:24:06 PM

By: Deeper questions

I think it has clearly been established that Huck is Daniel J. Wright is/was involved with Renner and the running of the Diligizer board so I shall not even offer my proof of the same.

What I would like to know is whether or not Wright introduced Renner to the 2 ladies in London? It would make sense if they were buddies. And, as it was a big case in London, why do their names not appear on the Black List? Is his involvement in scams what qualifies him to speak authoritively on them?
Hmm, the plot thickens.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/3/2002 6:41:40 PM

By: John Colvin

The QC characterized the case against Burton and Andre as "advance fee fraud" and a barrister involved in the extradition characterized the scheme as "international bond trading fraud."

http://www.hardwicke.co.uk/cvs/cv_pu.htm

http://www.9goughsq.co.uk/cvs/Jonathan%20Loades.html


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/2/2002 5:26:19 PM

By: Fraud Watch

Hunter made her decision, and you made yours. Live with it.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/2/2002 1:12:08 PM

By: Puzzled

Lisa says [with regard to "huck"]

"and it is information/behavior that I find to be personally devastating and inexplicable. The mere fact that he would enter into ANY kind of partnership with women of this character and background (they were already under investigation in New Zealand) is hard to understand, or justify."

Yet, she fully expected both "huck" and Mr Adkisson to enter into a relationship with her still-born "foundation"....

Does this not defy logic, and raise the bar on double-standards?

Then again, maybe it's just garden-variety hypocrisy?


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/2/2002 1:06:59 PM

By: Whatsthisherethen

Is that post of yours as close to an apology and admission of misbehaviour as you ever get?

Re: Huck/Daniel J. Wright/Diligizer
By Lisa Ann Arden on 8/31/2002 8:16:50 PM
E-mail: minstral14@aol.com

It is astounding you are pursuing this.

There is NO WAY you could be in more danger than me, David Marchant, Jay Adkisson, or anyone else that uses their real name and is a bonfide crime fighter. You are simply not as important as you think. But then, I have always had a problem relating to people who refer to themselves in the third person, so...

Your behavior now is simply reminiscent of one of those crooks on Diligizer who persists in posting to a thread about themself they wish wasn't there, and keeping it on the front page, and making a much bigger deal of it then it need, or should be.

Grow up.

Methinks the "grown up thing" would've been for Lisa to never have initiated the problem, or is that too simplistic?


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 8:57:22 PM

By: Here it is

Obviously, you failed reading comprehension. Sentence3 and 4, if you still can't find it.

35. Burton and André were long-time business associates in a Melbourne brothel. They arrived in the UK in September 1996 from the USA where they had spent some time after leaving Australia to evade the interest of the authorities for suspected crimes committed there. In the USA they met an American attorney called Daniel Wright. He introduced them a scheme known as a high yield investment programme. This was a way of attracting funds from individuals attracted to select opportunities to achieve higher returns than, say normally available on the stock market. The three of them set up a US registered company called Westgate Development Corporation. The company however was simply a vehicle for channelling money through a bank account in Maryland, USA.

Source: http://www.sfo.gov.uk/publications/speechesout/sp_29.asp?id=29


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 8:52:11 PM

By: Cyber Jury

Tell me where does it say anywhere at all that Mr. Wright introduced them to the "scheme"


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/1/2002 8:25:57 PM

By: Yes

Claw did speak at the same seminar and so did Renner! But STILL the case fails to make it to the Black List.

One other thing. Isn't it a Lawyer's responsibility to know his clients? Surely, he cannot believe he is only guilty by association - he "introduced" the scheme to them.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 10:58:34 AM

By: Sooltauq

Actually, I've tried several cases from the defendant's side too (and I've never worked for a prosecutor's office), and I am more than willing to give the benefit of the doubt -- and in fact can't even begin tell you the number of private e-mails from all sorts of persons that I have received in relation to this matter that I have disregarded.

On the other hand, I am willing to credit a statement from the Serious Fraud Office that specifically mentions a person, and describes that person has having "introduced" the HYIP scheme, assisted in the formation of the company, was responsible in part for the control of the company (I don't think one can reasonably surmise the anonymous American was anybody other than the American attorney in question), apparently set up a bank account in his home town to transfer the criminal proceeds through, etc., just as I would credit an SEC litigation release made in advance of any proceeding.

As we all know, some scam artists are able to keep the authorities at bay for long periods of time before being formally charged, i.e., Clyde Hood ran his scam as early as 1994, was investigated as early as 1996, but wasn't indicted until 2000. In the interim, the desire to warn the public about persons who have been identified in relation to these schemes pending formal proceedings against the scam artists, outweights the presumption of innocence which the scam artist will ultimately face in his or her criminal trial. Thus, the SEC and the Serious Fraud Office put out warnings, and I (and many others) reprint them for the information and education of the general public so that they are forewarned of these persons' activities.

Having said all that, it is to say the least very interesting that not just one person associated with the Diligizer team has been implicated in prime bank fraud, but that several have. No truly objective or rational person could disagree with that.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 1:09:51 AM

By: Colvin - Diligizer Black List Omission?

The two Australians, Burton and Andre, were placed on the Diligizer black list. However, the Black List links to a Serious Fraud Office press release which leaves the American attorney (Wright) anonymous and provides no description of his role:

This US registered company was controlled by Burton (President, Secretary, Treasurer, sole director and shareholder) and Andre (Vice President) and another person (a US national and resident against whom no charges were brought).

http://www.sfo.gov.uk/news/prout/pr_37.asp?id=37

How convenient! Especially if Renner and other Diligizers had heard Rosalind Wright of the SFO speak in London on March 21, 2002 or reviewed her materials.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/3/2002 11:53:16 PM

By: John Colvin

Sooltauq,
I have been involved in enough white collar criminal cases (as an attorney) to know that prosecutors rarely make public statements when they do not feel there is significant, untainted evidence to back them up. I have, however, seen several serious criminal investigations terminated before charging, as well as a couple of indictments dismissed by the government pre-trial. The truth is not always black and white (that may just be the criminal defense attorney in me - I apologize).
As to Wright's lack of a defense, my guess is that none of the anonymous "Lambaste Lisa Lunatics" knows anything factual regarding Wright's role with the two fraudsters. Wright himself may be constrained to respond because of an investigation of some sort in the US (Having read the UK and Australian accounts of the fraud, I must say it seems exotic enough to attrack the attention of an AUSA or the MD Bar.) Alternatively, there may be an internal investigation at Treasury over Kramer-Wilt's role at Diligizer
While I wouldn't bet against your reading of the evidence so far, I would prefer to wait and see.
-JC


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/3/2002 11:12:11 PM

By: Sooltauq

The statement of Ms. Wright of the Serious Fraud Office that "The company however was simply a vehicle for channelling money through a bank account in Maryland, USA." for me at least rather forcefully belies the suggestion that Wright acted as a mere resident agent, insofar as that was where Wright had his law office in Maryland.

The statement of Ms. Wright is also crystal clear that: "In the USA they met an American attorney called Daniel Wright. He introduced them a scheme known as a high yield investment programme."

I and probably many others would be interested to hear "his side of it". Alas, there has been silence from an otherwise prolific posters, and as was the case with Anthony Bukovich, suggestions that he was not really culpable without any evidence to back it up (thus leading those who suspected misconduct in the first place to finally surmise they were right all along).


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/3/2002 9:38:09 PM

By: John Colvin - More on Wright

The records of Westgage Development Corp in Maryland are consistent with Wright merely setting up corporation in 1996 and not having significant involvement thereafter. (1)The corp was established in August of 1996. (2) A personal property return was not filed when due in April of 1997. (3) The registered agent (Wright?) resigns in October of 1997. Wright may have been stiffed like Burton and Andre's other creditors. It is conceivable that Burton and/or Andre, eager to shift responsibility, are the source of the SFO's understanding that Wright "taught" Burton and Andre about high yield investment programs. While the SFO's public announcement clearly indicated that it had determined that Wright had culpability, referring to Wright as a partner of Buron and Andre and stating that charges could not be brought, there may be another side to the story.


Taxpayer Services Division
Entity Name: WESTGATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Dept. ID #: D04475562

Page 1 of 1
Description Date Filed Time Film Folio Pages View
Document Order
Copies

FORFEITED PROCLAMATION OF THE DEPARTMENT 10/06/1998 08:30-AM 00000 0000 0000
FAILURE TO FILE A PERSONAL PROPERTY RETURN (FORM # 1 ) DUE APRIL 15, 1997.

----------------------------------------------------------------

RESIGNATION OF RESIDENT AGENT 10/01/1997 08:54-AM F3978 1898 0002

----------------------------------------------------------------

ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION 08/13/1996 08:52-AM F3843 2249 0003

----------------------------------------------------------------



Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/3/2002 7:53:51 PM

By: John Colvin

Daniel J. Wright at the address provided in previous post had filed bankruptcy in April 1996 and had a discharge granted in July. According to corporate information in a prior post, Westgate was formed in August of 1996. The PACER summary follows:

Full Case Summary (SSNs redacted by JC)

96-12827 In re: Daniel J. Wright and Heather Abrams Wright
Case type: bk Chapter: 7 Asset: n Vol: v Judge: Paul Mannes

Office: Rockville Fee: p Joint: y Reopen: 0 Reopen date: **/**/**
Filed: 04/16/96 Term: 10/01/96 Reterm: **/**/**
Disp: discharge granted County: 24031
Flags:
Discharged: 07/26/96 Status:
Trustee: Roger Schlossberg City: Hagerstown Phone: (301) 739-8610
Party: 1 : Daniel J. Wright (xxx-xx-xxxx) (db)
Party: 2 : Heather Abrams Wright (xxx-xx-xxxx) (db)
Atty: Michael G. Wolff (301-670-916 Represents party 1: db
Atty: Michael G. Wolff (301-670-916 Represents party 2: db


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 1:52:34 PM

By: Please explain to hunter

Hopefully this exchange will remain civil. As you already know I was surprised about the recent information posted. It appears that you knew for some time about Daniel's past. Also I am under the impression that you were aware of Tony's past. Are those two comments, about Daniel and Tony, correct? If so then is it true that you had no problem with ex-HYIP players assisting with the Diligizer board? If that is true then does it boil down to you didn't approve of some posters recommending the services of others? What exactly do you see wrong with posters at the board recommending others? Do you have any proof that those being recommended took money without providing any services? Do you have any proof that those doing the recommending received compensation? It would be great if you could outline your concerns and what documentation or proof you have to warrant those concerns.

Until your post I wasn't aware that you knew so much about Daniel's past so am now confused about what are the issues. It appears I definitely had the wrong impression that you didn't think ex-HYIP players should be involved in running the board. My bad and will cross that off the list. Also I thought you wanted Tony removed from any involvement with board? Once again I thought that was in part due to his past but I must have misunderstood so will croos that off the list. I am now guessing that you don't want him involved in the board because you don't think he can provide services to investors who have lost funds? Is that correct?

Thanks and hopefully this exchange can remain nice, simple, and civil.

hunter


 

Jump to different Forum... 

We hunt for red flags in high-value, cross-border finance by monitoring offshore and onshore courts, regulatory actions, offering documents, and other sources - and email you the results.

View Recent Digests

Cayman Court Secrecy: A Huge Red Flag for Foreign Investors & Clients
David Marchant
As any fule kno, the biggest enemy of fraud, corruption, money laundering, and other forms of financial crime is transparency, while their best friend is secrecy. That's why the unprecedented mass sealing of cases that's taking place at the Financial Services Division of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands is repugnant to anyone with a genuine concern for financial crime.