Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Madoff: Forfeiture motion in Frank Dipascali case

Madoff: Forfeiture motion in Frank Dipascali case

Ratings: (0)|Views: 450|Likes:
Published by mrspanstreppon
Comprehensive list of Frank Dipascali's assets to be forfeited. Also see three appendixes.
Comprehensive list of Frank Dipascali's assets to be forfeited. Also see three appendixes.

More info:

Published by: mrspanstreppon on Apr 22, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/22/2010

pdf

text

original

 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - xUNITED STATES OF AMERICA- v. -FRANK DIPASCALI, JR.,Defendant.:::09 Cr. 764 (RJS)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’S APPLICATION FOR APRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE (FINAL AS TO THE DEFENDANT)AND FOR APPROVAL OF STIPULATION AND ORDERS AS TO DEFENDANT’SWIFE, CHILDREN, AND SISTER 
The United States of America (the “Government”) respectfully moves the Court for theentry of three orders, which collectively will resolve the Government’s forfeiture claims againstthe defendant, FRANK DIPASCALI, JR., as well as any claims that the DiPascali family mightmake to the forfeited assets, and return assets transferred by DIPASCALI to third parties to theGovernment:1.A Preliminary Order of Forfeiture (Final as to the Defendant) as to DIPASCALI,which is attached hereto as Appendix 1;2.A Stipulation and Order between the United States Attorney’s Office for theSouthern District of New York (the “Office”) and the defendant’s wife, Joanne T.DiPascali, which is attached hereto as Appendix 2; and3.A Stipulation and Order between this Office and the defendant’s sister, alsonamed Joanne DiPascali, which is attached hereto as Appendix 3.
 
2The Government intends to request that the assets forfeited by the defendant and his family pursuant to these agreements be distributed to the victims of his crimes, in accordance with the process of remission set out in Department of Justice regulations. By approving the agreements,the Court will allow the parties to forego expensive and time-consuming litigation and further theGovernment’s goal of distributing to victims, as soon as practicable, the net proceeds from thesale or other disposition of the forfeited assets.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
1.Information 09 Cr. 764 (RJS) (the “Information”), filed August 11, 2009, chargedFRANK DIPASCALI, JR. (“DIPASCALI” or the “defendant”), in ten counts, in connection witha scheme to defraud clients of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities (“BLMIS”), from at leastas early as in or about the 1980s through on or about December 11, 2008, by soliciting billions of dollars of funds under false pretenses, failing to invest investors’ funds as promised, andmisappropriating and converting investors’ funds to Madoff’s and DIPASCALI’s own benefitand the benefit of others without the knowledge or authorization of the investors.2.The Information also contains two forfeiture allegations, the first of whichconcerns the offenses charged in Counts One, Two, Six, and Seven of the Information, whichconstitute “specified unlawful activity” as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1956(c)(7) (the“SUA Offenses”), and which seeks criminal forfeiture, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and28 U.S.C. § 2461, of all property constituting or derived from proceeds traceable to thecommission of the SUA Offenses, including a money judgment in the amount of $170 billion,representing the amount of proceeds traceable to the commission of the SUA Offenses, all property constituting or derived from proceeds traceable to the commission of the SUA Offenses,
 
3and all property traceable to such property, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p) (the “SUA ProceedsForfeiture Allegation”).3.The second forfeiture allegation, concerning the money laundering offensecharged in Count Eight of the Information (the “Money Laundering Offense”), seeks criminalforfeiture, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(1), of all property involved in the Money LaunderingOffense, including a money judgment in the amount of $250 million, representing the propertyinvolved in the Money Laundering Offense, all property traceable to such property, and substituteassets, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p) (the “Money Laundering Forfeiture Allegation”).4.On August 11, 2009, pursuant to the terms of a cooperation agreement with thisOffice, DIPASCALI pleaded guilty to all ten counts in the Information, admitted the forfeitureallegations, and agreed to forfeit to the United States: (i) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C)and 28 U.S.C. § 2461, a sum of money equal to $170 billion, representing the amount of  proceeds traceable to the commission of the SUA Offenses charged in Counts One, Two, Six,and Seven of the Information, and property traceable to such property; and (ii) pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 982, a sum of money equal to $250 million, representing the property involved in theMoney Laundering Offense charged in Count Eight of the Information, and all property traceableto such property, for a total money judgment in the amount of $170.25 billion.
The Related Civil Forfeiture Action
5.On August 24, 2009, within two weeks of the defendant’s guilty plea, theGovernment filed a separate civil action seeking forfeiture of the defendant’s luxury sportfishingyacht and three cars,
United States v. One 2003 Viking 61' Convertible Motor Yacht Known as Dorothy Jo, et al.
, No. 09 Civ. 7434 (RMB). The United States Marshals Service (“USMS”)

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->