Happy 2013 !!!
On December 14th, a Motion was filed in Opposition to the “Motion to Appoint a Representative for Affiliates”. This opposition was made by two attorneys, Ira Sorkin and William R. Terpening, the attorneys for Trudy Gilmond and Kellie King who are also seeking to Intervene and to Dissolve the Receivership. One would think that if this is a coordinated effort between these two groups of Zeek affiliates fighting against Claw Backs amounting in the millions of dollars, there would be a bit more cohesion.
At odds here is Michael Quilling’s motion asking to bea appointed as “Examiner”, quoting case law from his own cases, and asking for this “Examiner” to be paid from the receivership estate, thus reducing some of the legal fees currently racking up for FCU. In the Opposition to appointing a representative, Sorkin and Terpening said:
Mr. Quilling’s position is incorrect as a matter of law. Qualified Affiliates who are net-winners are entitled to intervene in this action irrespective of Section 21(g), and thus Mr. Quilling’s services as an Examiner are unnecessary.
Seems like these two groups do not communicate well, sorta like Craddock saying Zeek will not come back and David Kettner telling people that it will come back. It appears that what Sorkin and Terpening are doing is reasonable, at least in the light that they also see the appointment of an Examiner as unnecessary. I do, however, disagree that the Receivership needs to be dissolved. I also doubt that Motions to Intervene will be granted, if any past Ponzi cases are of any precedence.
I suppose we will find out what will or will not be done once we reach early January 2013, when some of the responses are due as well as the Liquidation Plan. That will certainly let everyone know that claw backs are coming, whether or not people agree with it. Trudy Gilmond took out over $1.3 Million, she has a lot to lose in a claw back litigation. I would hope that she is paying her own legal fees and not taking donations.
Now, we have a communication I received today, purportedly sent by Greg Baker saying:
Hello Zeek Believers,
We will have Attorney Ira Sorkin on the January 3 , 2013 webinar. This will be a very informative call and you don’t want to miss it. Mr Sorkin will answer GENERAL questions about the case, but he will not be able to give legal advice. Please be considerate on this matter when asking questions.
Judge Mullen has entered an ORDER allowing a time extension for the SEC to file their response to the Motion to Intervene by Trudy Gilmond and Kellie King. Keep in mind that Judge Mullen has not yet issued an Order approving famous attorney Ira Sorkin to appear Pro Hac Vice. Until that is done, this is all fairly mute.
|Date Filed||#||Docket Text|
|12/28/2012||100||ORDER granting 96 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 84 MOTION to Intervene and for an Order Dissolving the Appointment of a Temporary Receiver and Memorandum in Support Thereof Responses due by 1/11/2013. Signed by Senior Judge Graham Mullen on 12/27/12. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(mga) (Entered: 12/28/2012)|
In Robert Craddock’s conference call on December 20th, he mentioned those who are “distractions” and how he would deal with them by filing “Police reports” and would also contact his friends in the FDLE to report anyone who he deems as a “distraction”. I am guessing to Craddock, the term “distraction” applies to anyone who has a different opinion than his own, something I believe is protected speech as detailed by the First Amendment.
Over on the PartickPretty blog, he has an editorial about the most important story of 2012 which was the mind numbing attempt by Craddock to silence one of his detractors, K.Chang. Craddock contacted the blog host, HubPages, claiming that Chang has in some manner violated a trademark and that Craddock was representing Zeek Rewards.
This was done solely to silence Mr. Chang and his efforts to expose Zeek for what it actually was, a Ponzi/Pyramid scheme. The only problem was that the parent company, Rex Ventures Group did not own that specific trademark which Craddock claimed had been violated. He did, however, get the KS Chang blog offline for a few days until they figured out the complain was completely bogus and without merit or foundation.
In Craddock’s last call, he mentioned Troy Dooly by name and the object of his disdain. He qualified Dooly as one of the “distractions” and that there were other distractions to be dealt with eventually. Craddock also mentioned a Florida statute that details harassment and cyber stalking, something repeated in a comment on Dooly’s blog by David Kettner, one of the subjects of a Motion to Compel filed by Kenneth Bell. Kettner mentions the return of Zeek Rewards under the direction of Paul Burks, which is in direct contradiction of what Craddock said about Zeek never coming back (Guess they need to talk more often).
Kettner also denied any involvement in OfferHubb but he failed to deny his involvement in BannersBroker or ProfitableSunrise. It seems many of the Zeek top leaders are in many more schemes including Catherine Parker, well-known ASD member, Zeek affiliate and in many other programs.
Months before ASD was closed, Andy Bowdoin went to the Florida Attorney General to complain about what people had said about him and the scam he was running. It turned out that his trip to the AG resulted in them opening an investigation into his dealings, along with the help of several Federal agencies. Some never learn from history and Craddock’s threats to go to law enforcement about what Dooly may or may not have said may end up in a similar manner, the opening of an investigation into Craddock and his involvement.
Let us also not forget the doctrine of Unclean Hands, “which states that a party who is asking for a judgment cannot have the help of the court if he/she has done anything unethical in relation to the subject of the lawsuit. Thus, if a defendant can show the plaintiff had “unclean hands,” the plaintiff’s complaint will be dismissed or the plaintiff will be denied judgment. Unclean hands are a common “affirmative defense” pleaded by defendants and must be proved by the defendant.” I doubt it would be very difficult to prove unclean hands in this instance.
Also extremely notable was the attempt by Craddock to trademark the word “Scam” which was summarily denied. It was another of his plans to silence and otherwise limit what anyone can say if he doesn’t like it.
This is still America, folks. We cannot allow an individual to dictate what we can or cannot say, whether or not he likes or agrees with it. My rights are the same as anyone’s rights; my opinion is as valid as anyone’s as well.
December 24, 2012
Many financial institutions and individuals have asked what should be done with cashier’s checks that the Receiver has not yet presented for payment. I have presented for payment all cashier’s checks in the receivership estate’s possession. A very few financial institutions wrongly returned cashier’s checks which were presented by the receivership estate and/or erroneously refused payment of certain cashier’s checks. Those cashier’s checks that were presented, but remain unpaid, must still be honored and paid by the financial institution under the Uniform Commercial Code and in accordance with the August 30, 2012 Court Order. Therefore, payment of a few cashier’s checks that have been presented, but remain unpaid, are still being sought by the receivership estate. Financial institutions that erroneously returned cashier’s checks presented for payment should contact my team at info@ZeekRewardsReceivership.com to discuss how to rectify the problem.
To the extent that there are outstanding cashier’s checks that have not been presented for payment, financial institutions and individuals are safe to assume that I will not present those cashier’s checks for payment. It is my position that those cashier’s checks may be considered “lost” within the meaning of UCC Section 3-312 and financial institutions may refund the remitters without violating the UCC or the August 30, 2012 Court Order. If you have difficulty getting your financial institution to assist you with your “lost” cashier’s check please have your institution contact me at info@ZeekRewardsReceivership.com.
Kenneth D. Bell
Apparently, Disner and Schweitzer have taken some time away from their involvement in Zeek Rewards to file something in their Appeals case. As some of you might remember, these two Diamond Affiliates in Zeek are seeking to appeal the decision by Judge Rosemary Collyer to dismiss their claims that the Affidavit and Search Warrant that began the ASD Civil forfeiture case was defective and therefore, the entire case was flawed from its onset.
The case, 12-cv-24008, was filed in the Southern District of Florida and presided over by Judge Altonaga. Following many months of flagrant filings and the Judge’s denying of many motions from Schweitzer, the US filed a Motion to Transfer to the DC District, which was granted in late July 2012. To most of us, the transfer to DC made perfect sense; Judge Collyer had presided over the Civil and Criminal case against Andy Bowdoin and ASD and was uniquely familiar with all aspects of the cases.
It goes without saying that this was the very last thing these two wanted to happen, mostly because Judge Collyer does not put up with any BS. Judge Collyer dismissed the ASD Justice case in August, then denied the Motion to Reopen, Set Aside Judgement and a Motion to Recuse herself in October. Within a week of this last denial of motions, an Appeals case was filed.
Disner and Schweitzer have been litigating the case as Pro Se filers for over a year now and seem to be unwilling or unable to accept that their case has no merit and no foundation, as indicated in Judge Collyer’s Opinions. (See Files website for the ASD Justice documents)
Part of the problem here is that “ASD Justice”, just like Fun Club USA, claims they are doing this for all members, not just for themselves. In their filings, Disner and Schweitzer have maintained the defective search warrant, violations of the 4th Amendment, and withholding of Back office information necessary to file their Tax returns. They claimed that information on the ASD servers was Confidential and Secure information because the website began with “HTTPS”, a claim that has no legs. HTTPS means the site uses SSL encryption, not that the information is secure from the eyes of Law Enforcement.
They further claim that without this information, they might have exposure for tax evasion. It makes one wonder why they did not keep their own records along those lines or at a minimum, do periodic printing of the back office information. Disner and Schweitzer had that ability, the mere fact they chose not to utilize it does not make it a case for a Federal court. This same “Back office” line of missives is also present in the Zeek rewards case, where people say they need that back office information for their tax filings.
Record keeping is not a strong point in these types of schemes, it seems.
For a few days now, I have looked into the connections made that indicated Greg Baker, the host of the Robert Craddock calls, was the same Gregory Baker that was a Defendant in the BotFly receivership. It turns out that he is the same Greg Baker and that he was involved in a previous Ponzi scheme. You can read the documents detailing Baker’s settlement with the BotFly Receiver here.
So, it appears that Baker is no stranger to receivership or to schemes that turn out of be called a Ponzi. It has been almost 11 months since Baker signed the Settlement Agreement and now he is also in the midst of another receivership and another scheme believed to be a Ponzi. I wonder if he will come out of this one with such a light settlement amount. He has said that he did very well with Zeek, so he may be in some trouble with that. It may also explain his hosting of the Craddock calls, he is hoping that Craddock is right.
Good luck with that, Mr. Baker
Patrick has a new post up regarding this recent revelation, Baker seems to be going from scheme to scheme:
As some of you might remember, JSS Tripler and Just Been Paid (JBP) all of a sudden morphed into Profit Clicking, all of them allegedly ran by Frederick Mann, the infamous Ponzi Pimp. Now we have Clarence Busby Jr, the former operator of Golden Panda (part of ASD) and a purported minister who was referred to as “Rev. Busby” in Court filings, now slinging yet another scam/scheme. Once more the old ASD member database is being used for recruitment. I am NOT recommending that anyone join this program, not now, not ever!
A number of former members of my company sent me information about this company – Profit Clicking. I was extremely impressed and surprised at my interest. This company has been in business for eight years and have proven that these type of companies can stay in business if done properly. Take a look. I just joined and have been excited about what I have seen and read. They pay 2% daily and have a great website. Again, I never thought I would be involved in another company so much like the one I closed but this is a tremendous improvement and has solved the difficult problems. Also, they give you $10.00 to start the program with THEIR money. So no risk. Also they do everything offshore (IMPORTANT). Take a look and have a Merry, Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays.
I have purposefully remove the link that would place you into Busby’s downline, and I am totally amazed that he would once more tout a program, when the last one he was in almost got him into Federal legal issues. Some people never learn.
I have added these to the Files website.
|Date Filed||#||Docket Text|
|12/21/2012||96||Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Motion to Intervene and for Order Dissolving Appointment of a Temporary Receiver by Receiver for Rex Ventures Group, LLC.Responses due by 1/7/2013 (Orso, Matthew) (Entered: 12/21/2012)|
|12/21/2012||97||MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re: 80 MOTION FOR AN ORDER REQUIRING RELEASE OF FROZEN THIRD-PARTY ASSETS by Receiver for Rex Ventures Group, LLC.Responses due by 1/7/2013 (Orso, Matthew) (Entered: 12/21/2012)|
|12/21/2012||98||ORDER granting 97 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response re 80 MOTION FOR AN ORDER REQUIRING RELEASE OF FROZEN THIRD-PARTY ASSETS ; Responses due by 1/12/2013. Signed by Senior Judge Graham Mullen on 12/21/12. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(bsw) (Entered: 12/21/2012)|
|12/21/2012||99||ORDER granting 94 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response re 84 MOTION to Intervene; Responses due by 1/11/2013. Signed by Senior Judge Graham Mullen on 12/21/12. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(bsw) (Entered: 12/21/2012)|