SK Foods former owner charged with RICO violations

United States Attorney Benjamin B. Wagner announced on February 18, 2010 that a federal grand jury has returned a seven-count indictment charging FREDERICK SCOTT SALYER, 54, of Pebble Beach, with violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), in connection with his direction of various schemes to defraud SK Foods’ corporate customers through bribery and food misbranding and adulteration, and with wire fraud and obstruction of justice.

Additionally, SK Foods former Vice President for Operations STEVEN JAMES KING, 46, of Visalia, was charged this morning with one count of food adulteration and misbranding. He has agreed to plead guilty and to cooperate in the ongoing investigation and prosecution.

These cases are the product of a joint and extensive investigation by the FBI, the IRS-Criminal Investigation, the Food and Drug Administration Office of Criminal Investigations, and the United States Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division.

According to Assistant United States Attorney Sean C. Flynn, who is prosecuting the case with Barbara Nelson and Richard Cohen of the San Francisco Field Office of the Antitrust Division, between 1990 and 2008, SALYER was the owner and served as chief executive officer of SK Foods LP, a grower, processor, and distributor of tomato products and other food products for sale nationwide. SK Foods declared bankruptcy in May 2009, and its assets were purchased by the Singapore-based Olam International.

According to the indictment, SK Foods and its related corporate entities constituted a racketeering enterprise, an organization that SALYER directed, and other SK Foods leaders and employees helped to further through a variety of illicit activities. It is alleged that over a period of 10 years, SALYER orchestrated a number of wide-ranging schemes whereby SK Foods regularly paid bribes to the purchasing managers of many of its customers such as Kraft Foods Inc., Frito-Lay Inc., B&G Foods Inc., and Safeway Inc. to ensure that those customers purchased processed tomato products from SK Foods rather than from its competitors, and that they purchased the product from SK Foods at elevated, above-market prices. The indictment alleges that some bribes were made in order to wrongfully obtain its competitor’s proprietary bid information.

As the racketeering enterprise’s leader and primary decision maker, SALYER is also alleged to have directed a widespread practice of selling and shipping processed tomato product that did not meet contractual specifications, contained mold levels in excess of the thresholds established by the FDA and was thus unsaleable domestically. The indictment alleges that at SALYER’s direction, various individuals at SK Foods falsified both internal and customer-bound documentation to make the product appear as if it were legal and contractually compliant when, in fact, it was not.

SALYER is also charged with obstructing justice by ordering the alteration and falsification of certain SK Foods’ corporate records after the government’s investigation of the company became known. Specifically, the indictment alleges that two weeks after former SK Foods sales broker and Director Randall Lee Rahal pleaded guilty to racketeering, money laundering, and antitrust charges in December 2008, SALYER ordered certain individuals to alter the minutes of a December 14, 2007, SK Foods Board of Directors meeting to eliminate any reference to Rahal as a director of the company.

On February 4, 2010, FBI Special Agents arrested SALYER at Kennedy International Airport in New York City, based on a criminal complaint charging him with 20 counts of mail and wire fraud. According to that complaint, SALYER left the United States in October 2009, following the guilty pleas of several employees of SK Foods and some of its customers, intending to relocate abroad permanently. SALYER had instructed a subordinate to sell many of SALYER’s belongings and had transferred millions of dollars from bank accounts formerly associated with SK Foods entities to bank accounts in the Carribean and Liechtenstein. The complaint alleged that SALYER spoke with a former SK Foods employee about obtaining permanent residence status in Uruguay, Paraguay, Andorra, and France because he believed he would not be extradited from these countries. SALYER had booked a flight back to Europe the next day, February 5, 2010. Instead, SALYER made his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Steven Gold in Brooklyn, N.Y. that afternoon. Judge Gold denied SALYER bail, stating that SALYER’s efforts constituted one of the “most elaborate schemes to flee he had ever seen.”

According to the charges filed against KING, between 1994 and 2009, he served in a variety of positions, most recently as SK Foods’ Vice President for Operations. In that role, he was responsible for overseeing and managing SK Foods production facilities in Williams and Lemoore. He also assisted in managing SK Foods’ inventory of processed tomato and other food products, and arranging for the shipment of those food products to SK Foods customers. KING has agreed to plead guilty to falsifying and directing other SK Foods employees to falsify various SK Foods’ quality control documents and to ship adulterated and misbranded tomato product to various SK Foods customers. He has admitted that his actions were conducted at the express instruction and direction of SALYER, and with the assistance of other senior leaders and directors of SK Foods, and were intended to make it appear to customers as if particular shipments of processed tomato product were compliant with USDA and FDA standards, and with customer specifications, when in fact they were not. KING is expected to appear in U.S. District Court in Sacramento in the near future to enter his guilty plea.

The current charges against SALYER and KING are the latest in the ongoing investigation of conduct at SK Foods. See attached chart for details. That investigation has not yet been concluded.

The maximum statutory penalty on racketeering charges against SALYER is 20 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, and the forfeiture of any interest, property or proceeds acquired or maintained as a result of the racketeering activity. The wire fraud and obstruction charges against SALYER also are punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The food misbranding and adulteration charges against KING carry a three-year maximum sentence. The actual sentences, however, will be determined at the discretion of the court after consideration of any applicable statutory sentencing factors and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, which take into account a number of variables.

The charges are only allegations and the defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

RICO lawsuit against Blackwater dismissed.

On December 30, 2009, a federal judge dismissed criminal charges against five Blackwater guards involved in a shootout in Baghdad in September 2007 during which 14 Iraqis were killed.

US District Court Judge Ricardo Urbina ruled that federal prosecutors improperly used statements the men gave to State Department investigators under a promise of immunity to secure indictments against them.

“In their zeal to bring charges…in this case, the prosecutors and investigators aggressively sought out statements the defendants had been compelled to make to government investigators in the immediate aftermath of the shooting and in the subsequent investigation,” Urbina wrote in a 90-page opinion.

“In so doing, the government’s trial team repeatedly disregarded the warnings of experienced, senior prosecutors, assigned to the case specifically to advise the trial team on [legal] issues, that this course of action threatened the viability of the prosecution. The government used the defendants’ compelled statements to guide its charging decisions, to formulate its theory of the case, to develop investigatory leads, and ultimately to obtain the indictment[s] in the case.”

At the time of the shooting, Blackwater had a contract to provide security to the State Department in Iraq.

Civil RICO suit against Toyota

Greg Webb posted on InjuryBoard.com that a federal judge in Los Angeles has refused to seal a wrongful termination lawsuit filed by Dimitrios Biller, a former in-house attorney for Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc. Biller claims Toyota hid and destroyed evidence in many rollover lawsuits. While Toyota argues the suit violates the confidentiality agreement in Biller’s severance package and will cause the company to suffer more harm if the complaint is not sealed, the judge ruled it would be pointless to seal the complaint since information regarding the lawsuit is already on the Internet. Biller has also filed a wrongful termination suit against the Los Angeles district attorney’s office, where he worked after Toyota, claiming his termination here violated the American’s With Disabilities Act because of diagnosed dyslexia and mental conditions. Though Toyota was not part of this lawsuit, they have been attempting to seal documents from this case as well, claiming Biller divulged confidential information about the automaker that is protected by attorney-client privilege.

From 2003 until his resignation in 2007, Biller was national managing counsel in the legal services group in charge of Toyota's rollover program. His lawsuit alleges Toyota violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), causing him to be wrongfully terminated and intentionally inflicted emotional distress; Biller claims he suffered a mental breakdown and was forced to resign from his position after Toyota attempted to stop his efforts to turn over missing evidence. In response, he received a $3.7 million in severance. Not only did he claim Toyota committed criminal acts in rollover cases, but Biller also claims the automaker engaged in a conspiracy to hide and destroy evidence that he was obligated to turn over to the plaintiff’s attorney. Biller alleges his boss told him not to keep some electronic discovery materials in at least three hundred rollover cases, which was "tantamount to the destruction of evidence and/or concealing evidence, either of which would have amounted to obstruction of justice." Following a 2006 performance review, Biller wrote a twenty-three page memo that outlined Toyota’s "dysfunctional" product liability group and accused his boss of causing the company to break the law. Biller claims this memo, which was signed by his boss, was destroyed.

Justice Should Investigate ACORN For RICO Violations

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, Senator David Vitter argues that ACORN's alleged misdeeds warrant a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) investigation into its business practices. A probe of that magnitude — potentially the most aggressive investigation requested by any ACORN critic to date — would permit investigators exceptional leverage in rooting out any criminal wrongdoing.

"The recent reports and video footage of ACORN workers from various cities and states giving 'how-to' instructions on carrying out crimes, ranging from violating numerous immigration laws to tax fraud, warrants an immediate RICO investigation into ACORN," Vitter said in his letter.

Indian-owned Casinos Developer Sues Lawyers for Racketeering

The Minnesota developer of Indian-owned casinos has alleged that the Milberg law firm and three lawyers, including jailed attorney William Lerach, extorted an $18 million settlement from the firm in a 2000 securities class action.

The suit, filed March 23 in the Minnesota district court, alleged that Lerach, along with his former firm Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes & Lerach, engaged in a racketeering conspiracy to force a securities class settlement from Stratosphere Corp. and Grand Lakes Inc., in a 2000 Nevada class action.

The suit alleges former Milberg Weiss expert, John B. Torkelsen, supplied inflated damage estimates that helped prompt an $18 million settlement. In exchange, Torkelsen allegedly received pay based on successful results in the class case. Lakes Entertainment, Inc., v. Milberg, 09-cv-677PAM (Dist. Minn.)
Torkelsen, a damages expert in hundreds of class actions for law firms between 1985 and 2003, was sentenced in September to 18 months in prison after pleading guilty to lying to a federal judge in 1999 about how he was paid.

Eck alleged in the Minnesota suit that Torkelsen's contingent fee arrangement "undermined his objectivity and credibility."

The lawsuit seeks not only $18 million in compensatory damages, but also a tripling of the damages suffered by Lakes for the alleged racketeering activities.
 

ING Bank claims racketeering by real estate professionals and borrowers

ING Bank, the nation’s second-largest thrift, is seeking more than $6 million from a group it alleges engaged in a conspiracy to obtain fraudulent mortgage loans. This unusual racketeering lawsuit was filed in federal court in Seattle, alleging a criminal conspiracy by an escrow agent, a mortgage broker and 10 couples to defraud the bank of at least $6 million through falsified mortgages.
 

The bank, an arm of the Netherlands-based ING Group, is also seeking a court order to foreclose on eight properties in King, Snohomish, Pierce and Grant counties because the borrowers have failed to pay their interest-only, adjustable-rate mortgages on time and allegedly made false statements in their loan applications.
 

Some of the borrowers received between $1,500 and $12,500 in cash from the loan proceeds, court documents filed by the bank suggest.
 

And ING contends two of the borrowers never lived in the houses they bought with the loans.
For their part, the borrowers, all Eastern European immigrants, say they are victims of the alleged fraud as well.
 

Legal experts said the suit may be one of the first in the nation in which a bank — unable to recoup its losses by selling the loans or the collateral properties — uses the racketeering law to collect money from borrowers and the real-estate professionals who helped them buy a house.
 

More Arrests Possible in the Racketeering Investigation of Assisted Suicide Network

As part of an investigation into suspicions that the 2008 death of 58-year-old John Celmer was an assisted suicide, Georgia Bureau of Investigation set up a sting operation at a Decatur residence aimed at members of the Final Exit Network. Members of Final Exit, known as “Exit Guides” were believed to provide assistance with helium-induced suicides using methods that were confirmed by GBI agents during the sting operation.
 

Agents arrested 76-year-old Claire Blehr or Atlanta and 63-year-old Thomas Goodwin of Punta Gorda and Kennesaw Wednesday. Warrants were also issued for Dr. Lawrence Egbert, 81, and Nicholas Alec Sheridan, 60, of Baltimore, who turned themselves in to authorities in Forsyth County Monday afternoon. All four individuals are charged with Assisted Suicide, Tampering with Evidence, and violation of the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. All four individuals have posted bond. If convicted on all counts, each could face up to 18 years in prison.
 

Following the arrests in Georgia, the GBI is assisting law enforcement from other states, including Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, Missouri, Colorado, and Montana, who began executing search warrants and conducting interviews to gather further evidence in the Final Exit Network investigation. The GBI states that as the investigation continues, other arrests are possible.
 

Time for bankers to face gangsters' RICO laws?

Brian Mann posted the following interesting article on The In Box Blog today. Here it is.

For nearly thirty years, Federal prosecutors have wielded a powerful tool for clamping down on organized crime.

The "RICO" law -- the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act -- has devastated criminal operations ranging from the Hells Angels to the Gambino crime family.

Maybe it's time to dust off RICO and use it against America's financiers? It now appears that many banking executives were simply robbing their corporations, their shareholders and the taxpayers.

Consider this dispatch from the Wall Street Journal:

As bad as 2008 was for Merrill Lynch & Co., it was very good for Andrea Orcel, the firm's top investment banker. Although Merrill's net loss ballooned to $27.6 billion last year, Mr. Orcel, 45 years old, was paid $33.8 million in cash and stock, just shy of his pay in 2007.

While Merrill staggered, 11 top executives were paid more than $10 million in cash and stock last year, say people familiar with the situation. An additional 149 received $3 million or more.

Meanwhile, former executives from Countrywide Financial -- the geniuses who helped inflate the devastating housing bubble -- are now profiting from the implosion. Here are the details from the New York Times.

Stanford L. Kurland, Countrywide’s former president, and his team have been buying up delinquent home mortgages that the government took over from other failed banks, sometimes for pennies on the dollar. They get a piece of what they can collect.
“It has been very successful — very strong,” John Lawrence, the company’s head of loan servicing, told Mr. Kurland one recent morning in a glass-walled boardroom here at PennyMac’s spacious headquarters, opened last year in the same Los Angeles suburb where Countrywide once flourished.
“In fact, it’s off-the-charts good,” he told Mr. Kurland, who was leaning back comfortably in his leather boardroom chair, even as the financial markets in New York were plunging.

Is profiteering criminal? Probably not.

But the RICO laws give prosecutors wide leeway to seize assets built through the commission of dozens of federal and state crimes, including bankruptcy fraud, embezzlement, racketeering, insider trading, and money laundering.

As we pour billions in taxpayer dollars into the financial system, the Feds need to move aggressively to identify and punish those who behaved criminally.

Good job, Brian!
 

RICO lawsuit filed against doctors for asbestos screening scheme

An embattled West Virginia radiologist, his son and others have been sued in Mississippi on racketeering and other charges related to an alleged scheme involving asbestos screenings for lawsuits across the nation.

Ray Harrron and Andrew Harron are two of the defendants named in a lawsuit filed Feb. 9 in Holmes County Circuit Court by National Service Industries, also known as North Brothers.

"The primary cause of this action is a widespread unlawful enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity across state lines and a conspiracy to engage in racketeering activity involving numerous RICO (the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) predicate acts for at least the past 10 calendar years," the complaint states. "The predicate acts include mail fraud and wire fraud ..."

Since 1995, the defendants "have schemed to generate false medical test results, false medical reports and false diagnoses to substantiate tens of thousands of personal injury cases filed against plaintiff and other similarly situated companies or bankruptcy trusts involving allegations of asbestos related disease."

NSI says the defendants engaged in this "unlawful scheme for the purpose of monetary gain by creating fraudulent medical documentation to make the individuals that they recruited and 'screened' appear to suffer from asbestos-related disease to extract money from plaintiff and others through the court system and/or claims settlements."

NSI describes the acts of Harron and the other defendants as "mass assembly-line screenings of persons suspected of work-related exposure to products containing asbestos."

Others defendants named are N&M Inc., Charlie Heath Mason, Molly Ruth Netherland, Christopher Linn Taylor and yet unnamed John Doe defendants 1-20.

The defendants' screenings typically included the generation of exposure histories, chest x-rays, accompanying reads by physicians, physical exams, pulmonary function tests and diagnoses by Harron and other defendants for personal injury law firms.

"These law firms then used this purported "medical evidence" to file and/or settle thousands of asbestos-related injury claims," the complaint states. "Defendants' screenings were massive recruitment programs carried out for personal injury law firms and attorneys on targeted populations of current and former industrial and construction workers with the sole purpose of generating a phenomenal volume of potential claimants as clients for these law firms."

The lawsuit says the defendants spent more than $1.5 million "aggressively marketing" their screening services to their law firm and attorney "customers" and on mass advertisements soliciting individual subjects for screening.
 

New York investors sue Madoff.

Bloomberg News(12/31, Larson) reports, "Bernard Madoff, the financial adviser who allegedly admitted to running a $50 billion fraud, was sued by three New York investors who say he should be barred from distributing money to family and friends." They say that he "should have his assets permanently frozen and be prevented from continuing the alleged fraud." The suit was "filed by Anthony, Maria, and Toni Sciremammano, all residents of Massapequa Park, NY. The trio started investing with Madoff in 1995 and had a total of about $2 million invested as of September, they said." The case is Anthony Sciremammano v. Bernard L. Madoff, 08- cv-11332, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

Trial by Association - An Interpretation of RICO

RICO or the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, the federal law that allows the prosecution of criminal acts performed by individuals as part of a mob or criminal organization, is used to fight against organized crime and its adverse effects on legitimate business activities. The law states that “It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering", a statement that is easily misinterpreted by those not familiar with the intricacies of the law.

The reason for this confusion arises because, according to the rules of RICO, any individual who has been proven to belong to a criminal organization is liable for prosecution just by association. This means that if any member of said organization has been found guilty of a serious offense like murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery or bribery, other persons who are known to belong to the same organization can be prosecuted for a pattern of crimes (two or more of 8 state crimes and 16 federal crimes) that have been found to be the organization’s handiwork, even if they are not directly or indirectly responsible for the crime that the defendant has been found guilty of.

The law has been framed this way to get at the entire organization rather than just one or two members. But the ambiguity of the word “association” gets people asking the question – am I liable to be prosecuted if law enforcement officers saw me engaged in an innocent conversation with the defendant in a murder trial? Does the word association extend even to casual relationships where there is no knowledge that one person (the defendant) is engaged in illegal activities? The RICO law allows only for the prosecution of conspirators, people who have knowledge of the crime committed and have supported it in some form or the other. So while the cops do have the option of acquiring a warrant to search your home and office if they suspect you of association with a criminal organization, they cannot book you until they find proof of your involvement.

RICO violations are punishable with up to 20 years of imprisonment.

By-line:

This post was contributed by Kelly Kilpatrick, who writes on the subject of the criminal justice schools. She invites your feedback at kellykilpatrick24 at gmail dot com.

Mel Weiss Sentenced in Racketeering Case

 Melvyn Weiss, the plaintiffs’ lawyer who pioneered a controversial and lucrative area of law suing corporations on behalf of shareholders, was sentenced on June 2nd in federal court in Los Angeles to 30 months in prison. Weiss pleaded guilty in March to racketeering conspiracy in connection with his former law firm’s alleged improper payments of kickbacks to class-action clients.

Quizno's franchisor accused of violating RICO

The Franchise Opportunity WebLog posted the following report on August 16, 2007:

Quizno’s might have been one of the first chains in the country to market toasted subs, but it’s the franchisees who are feeling toasted right now. A class action suit has been filed in U.S. District Court in Colorado against Quizno’s.

The class action lawsuit was announced in a press release by the Toasted Subs Franchisee Association, Inc.. Their class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of an estimated 5,000 Quizno's franchisees across the country according to the press release. The franchisees have alleged that Quinzo’s has violated a collection of five different laws.

These charges allege that they have broken laws such as statutory and common law fraud and violated both federal and state antitrust laws. Allegations also include that Quizno's violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO Act). Franchisees are also claiming that Quizno’s is guilty of breach of contract, along with violating Colorado’s franchise and consumer protection laws.

Feds Plan New Vick Indictment and Other Sports News

Federal prosecutors announced they plan to seek a "superseding" indictment soon, meaning more charges and defendants are possible and that additional details about the case could become public. Word has it that the new indictment will include charges of violations of RICO. RICO Law Blog predicts that Vick and associates will also be facing civil RICO in the not to distant future. Although the civil RICO cases will be hard to make because of the requirement that the plaintiff suffer injury to his business or property by reason of the violations of RICO. Since betting on dog fights is illegal, the losing gamblers would not likely find a sympathetic judge’s ear in federal court.

However, much more likely, are civil RICO lawsuits against the NBA and Tim Doughty, the alleged fixer referee who may owe the Columbo family big bucks.

Conrad Black guilty of fraud, but not racketeering

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reported this morning that --

. . . the jury in the Conrad Black trial has found the fallen media baron guilty on four of the 13 charges brought against him. He was convicted on three counts of mail fraud and one count of obstruction of justice, but the jury acquitted him of wire fraud, racketeering and several other counts.

The jury of nine men and three women delivered their verdict after deliberating 11 days following 14 weeks of testimony. Black, 62, a member of the British House of Lords, faces a maximum of 35 years in prison for the offenses the jury convicted him of, plus a maximum penalty of $1 million.

Black’s three co-defendants were all found guilty of three counts of mail fraud. They are former Hollinger International vice presidents John Boultbee, Peter Y. Atkinson and Chicago attorney Mark Kipnis.

State Farm sued for Racketeering

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reported yesterday that Dickie Scruggs sued State Farm in federal court in Mississippi, accusing the company of engaging in a “pattern of racketeering” by manipulating engineering reports on Hurricane Katrina damage so the company could deny policyholder claims. Scruggs is already pursuing litigation against the company, but this is the first lawsuit alleging violations of the civil Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization Act, or RICO.  See the WSJ Blog site for a link to the 101-page complaint.

Third Circuit allows RICO claims against insurers

The Journal of the American Association for Justice reported in its June 2007 issue that the Third Circuit ruled that policyholders can bring federal racketeering suits against insurers in New Jersey despite the state’s lack of provisions for private rights of action.

The decision in Weiss v. First Unum Life Ins. Co., 2007 WL 968391 (3d Cir. Apr. 3, 2007) overturned a lower court’s reverse preemption ruling and held that RICO claims are not barred by the McCarran-Ferguson Act, which prohibits any federal law that would “invalidate, impair, or supersede” state insurance law unless it specifically relates to the business of insurance.

“There is nothing in the regulatory scheme that indicates that allowing other remedies as part of its regulation of insurance would frustrate or interfere with New Jersey’s insurance regime,” Judge Marjorie Rendell wrote, concluding that RICO augments, rather than impairs, the state’s insurance law.

Richard Weiss, a former investment banker, was disabled in 2001 after a heart attack left him with permanent left ventricular dysfunction and extremely low blood pressure. He had short- and long-term disability benefits provided by First Unum through his employer at the time, Tucker Anthony Sutro. The insurer paid Weiss short-term disability benefits and then approved long-term benefits of more than $11,000 a month, but it discontinued payments after three months.

Weiss, who initially sued to recover losses under state law, added the RICO claim when First Unum moved the case to federal court, alleging that the state law claims were preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Weiss argued that the insurer violated RICO by discontinuing his disability payments as part of its racketeering scheme to stop paying expensive claims.

The ruling expanded on the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Humana, Inc. v. Forsyth, in which the justices held that RICO claims would not frustrate the goals of Nevada’s insurance law. (525 U.S. 299 (1999).) The defense argued that unlike in Nevada, New Jersey insurance law neither allows a statutory private right of action for nonpayment of benefits nor specifically makes punitive damages available in these cases.

But the Third Circuit found that the remedies established in the state’s Insurance Trade Practices Act (ITPA) “are not intended to be exclusive.”