BERNARD "BERNIE" MADOFF - Ties Relationship To J.P. Morgan Chase Bank (Ponzi Scheme)


Published on

BERNARD "BERNIE" MADOFF - Ties Relationship To J.P. Morgan Chase Bank (Ponzi Scheme)
It appears that Bernie Madoff was one of J.P. Morgan Chase Bank's TOP/MAJOR Clients.
J.P. Morgan Chase Bank is a TOP/MAJOR Client of Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz
Provides information as to the REASONS why the FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, JUDICIAL COMPLAINTS and CONGRESSIONAL COMPLAINTS Filed by Vogel Denise Newsome are being OBSTRUCTED from being PROSECUTED!
Garretson Resolution Group appears to be FRONTING Firm for United States President Barack Obama and Legal Counsel/Advisor (Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz) which has submitted a SLAPP Complaint to in efforts of PREVENTING the PUBLIC/WORLD from knowing of its and President Barack Obama's ROLE in CONSPIRACIES leveled against Vogel Denise Newsome in EXPOSING the TRUTH behind the 911 DOMESTIC TERRORIST ATTACKS, COLLAPSE OF THE WORLD ECONOMY, EMPLOYMENT violations and other crimes of United States Government Officials. Information that United States President Barack Obama, The Garretson Resolution Group, Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, and United States Congress, etc. do NOT want the PUBLIC/WORLD to see. Information of PUBLIC Interest!

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

BERNARD "BERNIE" MADOFF - Ties Relationship To J.P. Morgan Chase Bank (Ponzi Scheme)

  1. 1. FROM: accordance with Federal Laws provided For Educational and Information Purposes – i.e. of PUBLIC InterestTrustee: J.P. Morgan Abetted MadoffBy MICHAEL ROTHFELDJ.P. Morgan Chase & Co. ignored or dismissed warning signs about the Madoff fraud even as it earned hundreds ofmillions of dollars from its relationship with his firm, according to a lawsuit unsealed Thursday.J.P. Morgan Chase stood "at the very center" of Bernard Madoffs fraud, according to a lawsuit unsealed Thursday.Michael Rothfeld has details.The $6.4 billion lawsuit, filed in federal bankruptcy court, claims that bankers at J.P. Morgan discussed thepossibility that Bernard Madoff was operating a Ponzi scheme, worried that a firm of such size was audited by astorefront accountant and called his returns "too good to be true.""While numerous financial institutions enabled Madoffs fraud, JPMC was at the very center of that fraud, andthoroughly complicit in it," according to the 115-page lawsuit, filed under seal in December by Irving Picard, thetrustee seeking to recover money for Mr. Madoffs victims and made public on Thursday.J.P. Morgan said in a statement that the lawsuit "is meritless and is based on distortions of both the relevant factsand the governing law." The bank said it "did not know about or in any way become a party to the fraudorchestrated by Bernard Madoff."The complaint seeks the return of nearly $1 billion in J.P. Morgans profits and fees, and $5.4 billion in damages. Itgoes into great detail about the banks alleged efforts, starting in about 2006, to make money by offering productstied to Mr. Madoff through investment funds that fed money to him.
  2. 2. Bloomberg NewsIrving Picard, the trustee liquidating Bernard Madoffs investment firmJ.P. Morgan only reported its suspicions of Mr. Madoff to British authorities in late October 2008, two monthsbefore he surrendered, the lawsuit said. In a suspicious activity report filed with Britains Serious Organised CrimeAgency, the bank said the performance of Mr. Madoffs investments appeared to be "too good to be true—meaningthat it probably is."The Madoff Case: A TimelineView InteractiveKey events in the case of disgraced financier Bernard Madoff.Even that warning was made in passing, the lawsuit said. It came after a London employee of J.P. Morgan wasthreatened while trying to redeem the banks money from a Madoff-related fund by a fund employee whomentioned having "Colombian friends" who could "cause havoc," adding, "we know where to find you."Towards the end of 2008, J.P. Morgan pulled out about $276 million it had invested in funds that channeled moneyto Mr. Madoff—and asked those funds to keep the move quiet, according to the lawsuit.
  3. 3. The lawsuit offers a detailed account of the more than two decade relationship between J.P. Morgan and Mr.Madoff. In 2006, when J.P. Morgan started to consider structuring products involving funds that channeled moneyto Mr. Madoff, it began to take a look at the feeder funds and other entities related to his business.The lawsuit claims that the bank didnt pay attention to billions of dollars passing through the Madoff firms mainJ.P. Morgan account, much of it by hand-written check, or to discrepancies in the account balance and unreportedobligations—including a $95 million loan made in 2005."They had, legally, an obligation to make inquiry, and they didnt," said David Sheehan, an attorney for Mr. Picard."Youre literally seeing millions of dollars going in and out on a daily basis, and not one phone call is being made."In response, the bank said in its statement Thursday that Mr. Madoffs firm "was not an important or significantcustomer" in the scheme of its overall commercial banking business.The trustees suit claims that the bank collected an estimated half a billion dollars in fee and interest payments.Read the DocumentView DocumentVarious J.P. Morgan employees raised questions about Mr. Madoffs credibility, but the concerns went nowhere,the suit alleges. As its Equity Exotics & Hybrids Desk began exploring investments tied to Madoff feeder funds,the suit says, it found that the fund managers didnt know the names of Mr. Madoffs counterparties, had no inputor control over his trading activity, and hadnt even been able to see his operations.While bankers sought to create products tied to Mr. Madoffs firm, its risk managers had a conversation with himin March 2007, where he informed them that he wasnt willing to engage in "full due diligence," according to thelawsuit.On more than one occasion, the suit alleges, bankers expressed concern about the fact that a firm of such a largesize was audited by a small suburban firm. One wrote in an email, "Lets go see (auditors) Friehling and Horowitzthe next time were in see that the address isnt a car wash at least," according to the lawsuit, referring tothe accountants.In 2007, an employee said he had heard from a colleague over lunch that "there is a well-known cloud over thehead of Madoff and that his returns are speculated to be part of a [P]onzi scheme—he said if we google the guy wecan see the articles for ourselves—Pls do that and let us know what you find."According to the lawsuit, the bank looked at Mr. Madoffs firm more exhaustively in 2008, after its troubledacquisition of Bear Stearns.
  4. 4. As part of that review, bank employees allegedly met with Sonja Kohn, the head of Bank Medici, whom Mr.Picard has separately accused of being an accomplice of Mr. Madoff by funneling money into his operation, andwith an executive at the Fairfield Greenwich Group, which also operated feeder funds.Afterwards, an employee told colleagues that Mr. Madoffs business associates knew very little about him, andseemed "scared" to push him for answers, the suit says."Fairfield claims to have seen the 19th floor," the center of Mr. Madoffs trading operations, the employee wrote,"but…I am not entirely convinced that Madoff allowed them to actually enter the trading area."The bankers at J.P. Morgan concluded that the feeder funds had only a faxed confirmation from Mr. Madoff thattrades were occurring, but couldnt verify it."Its almost a cult [Madoff] seems to have fostered," the employee wrote.