Hundreds of examples of fraud by Trump and his family, corporations

#401
#401
volinbham said:
you are saying that prosecutor behavior cannot be used in court? hmmmm

who was damaged - what were the damages
Click to expand...

You might be looking a $1 judgment kind of thing, of course, I'm not sure how you prove fraud without damages.

Unless the banks didn't do due diligence or were lied to in some other way than what the petition says, this one is kind of tough other than liquid assets part.
 
#402
#402
Septic said:
No, it's been pointed out repeatedly. You don't have to like it, or even agree - but it's not hard to spot the damages if he indeed intentionally committed the crimes of which he is accused.

As was noted previously, insurance fraud in many cases doesn't even need to result in demonstrable damages in order to violate the law.

I don't know how well this translates to NY law but I suspect it isn't much difference:

Fraud occurs when someone knowingly lies to obtain a benefit or advantage to which they are not otherwise entitled or someone knowingly denies a benefit that is due and to which someone is entitled. According to the law, the crime of insurance fraud can be prosecuted when:
  • The suspect had the intent to defraud. Insurance fraud is a "specific" intent crime. This means a prosecutor must prove that the person involved knowingly committed an act to defraud.
  • An act is completed. Simply making a misrepresentation (written or oral) to an insurer with knowledge that is untrue is sufficient.
  • The act and intent must come together. One without the other is not a crime.
  • Actual monetary loss is not necessary as long as the suspect has committed an act and had the intent to commit the crime.
Click to expand...

So why did they file a civil lawsuit and not charge him with a crime? Like I said, who is the victim here? In my eyes it's Trump for this endless attack against him fishing for anything they can find to arrest him. In 7 freaking years, they haven't found one thing to indict him over. This never ending attack against a former president is not going to end well for this country.
 
#403
#403
LSU-SIU said:
You might be looking a $1 judgment kind of thing, of course, I'm not sure how you prove fraud without damages.
Click to expand...

I'm still trying to figure out if the banks/insurance companies are the ones that allegedly damaged but they chose not to bring suit can the state bring civil charges on their behalf?

If the suit prevails does the cash penalty get distributed to the banks/insurance companies or is the state planning to keep it? If companies suffered the damages shouldn't they be the ones who get the award?

Is the suit claiming the state of NY was the victim and suffered the damage?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolTookie, LSU-SIU, hog88 and 2 others
#404
#404
volinbham said:
I'm still trying to figure out if the banks/insurance companies are the ones that allegedly damaged but they chose not to bring suit can the state bring civil charges on their behalf?

If the suit prevails does the cash penalty get distributed to the banks/insurance companies or is the state planning to keep it? If companies suffered the damages shouldn't they be the ones who get the award?

Is the suit claiming the state of NY was the victim and suffered the damage?
Click to expand...
I know in the valuations placed on my house by various entities, that the insurance company was by far the highest. Of course, they charge by the valuation. The only benefit Trump could have by over valuing his property is if he burned it down, as far as I know none of his "over valued" properties ever caught fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LSU-SIU and McDad
#405
#405
VolStrom said:
So why did they file a civil lawsuit and not charge him with a crime? Like I said, who is the victim here? In my eyes it's Trump for this endless attack against him fishing for anything they can find to arrest him. In 7 freaking years, they haven't found one thing to indict him over. This never ending attack against a former president is not going to end well for this country.
Click to expand...

This is what is so mind boggling to me. Why keep after him? If they would have just ignored him, he would have shown up at some rallies but most people would have moved on. He would most likely would have left politics and went back to promoting his "brand" with the added benefit of being a former President. Instead, the left has kept him front a center, kept him as a leading political figure, and kept his previous voters engaged in his defense. That's why so many call it TDS.
 
#406
#406
volinbham said:
hate to be the broken record but you are posting criminal law again

I do not know that the "doesn't even need to result in demonstrable damages in order to violate the law" applies if it's not a criminal charge.
Click to expand...

I mean - civil fraud probably has a lower burden of proof. So I'm not sure why you're splitting that hair.

I am simply posting what the elements of "insurance fraud" are and I've already expressed that I do not know how or what the distinctions are between civil and criminal are, how they are prosecuted or by whom.

It does fascinate me that so many arm chair lawyers seem to think they all have the golden defense against charges brought by State AG's and the DOJ, especially with a layman's understanding of not only the law, but the States specific laws or how they're applied within specific circumstances.. As I stated, my guess is that the AG (even if she's biased) isn't bringing a complaint on this stage to a courtroom if it has zero merit. If she is, even Trumps Dollar Store attorney's should make mincemeat out of her.
 
#407
#407
to clarify - I'm not making any claim of whether or not Trump committed fraud.

I'm critiquing the particular suit brought by James against Trump & Co. None of the companies that were allegedly defrauded brought suit. The choice of civil charges brings a host of unanswered questions and conflation with criminal charges which do not exist (at this time).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens and hog88
#408
#408
Septic said:
No, it's been pointed out repeatedly. You don't have to like it, or even agree - but it's not hard to spot the damages if he indeed intentionally committed the crimes of which he is accused.

As was noted previously, insurance fraud in many cases doesn't even need to result in demonstrable damages in order to violate the law.

I don't know how well this translates to NY law but I suspect it isn't much difference:

Fraud occurs when someone knowingly lies to obtain a benefit or advantage to which they are not otherwise entitled or someone knowingly denies a benefit that is due and to which someone is entitled. According to the law, the crime of insurance fraud can be prosecuted when:
  • The suspect had the intent to defraud. Insurance fraud is a "specific" intent crime. This means a prosecutor must prove that the person involved knowingly committed an act to defraud.
  • An act is completed. Simply making a misrepresentation (written or oral) to an insurer with knowledge that is untrue is sufficient.
  • The act and intent must come together. One without the other is not a crime.
  • Actual monetary loss is not necessary as long as the suspect has committed an act and had the intent to commit the crime.
Click to expand...

But who exactly did he defraud? I haven't read the lawsuit so if that is in there excuse me.
 
#409
#409
Septic said:
I mean - civil fraud probably has a lower burden of proof. So I'm not sure why you're splitting that hair.

I am simply posting what the elements of "insurance fraud" are and I've already expressed that I do not know how or what the distinctions are between civil and criminal are, how they are prosecuted or by whom.

It does fascinate me that so many arm chair lawyers seem to think they all have the golden defense against charges brought by State AG's and the DOJ, especially with a layman's understanding of not only the law, but the States specific laws or how they're applied within specific circumstances.. As I stated, my guess is that the AG (even if she's biased) isn't bringing a complaint on this stage to a courtroom if it has zero merit. If she is, even Trumps Dollar Store attorney's should make mincemeat out of her.
Click to expand...
Who is the victim? Simple question that you can't answer.
 
#410
#410
VolStrom said:
So why did they file a civil lawsuit and not charge him with a crime? Like I said, who is the victim here? In my eyes it's Trump for this endless attack against him fishing for anything they can find to arrest him. In 7 freaking years, they haven't found one thing to indict him over. This never ending attack against a former president is not going to end well for this country.
Click to expand...

The evidence was turned over to the criminal folks, they can decide to charge or not when and if they feel like it. That they don't happen simultaneously or on your preferred timeline clearly isn't a factor in the NY's AG decision to go forward with her case.

You're letting outside factors interfere with a focused discussion of the merits of the current complaint.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IluvdoubleD's
#413
#413
Septic said:
I mean - civil fraud probably has a lower burden of proof. So I'm not sure why you're splitting that hair.

I am simply posting what the elements of "insurance fraud" are and I've already expressed that I do not know how or what the distinctions are between civil and criminal are, how they are prosecuted or by whom.

It does fascinate me that so many arm chair lawyers seem to think they all have the golden defense against charges brought by State AG's and the DOJ, especially with a layman's understanding of not only the law, but the States specific laws or how they're applied within specific circumstances.. As I stated, my guess is that the AG (even if she's biased) isn't bringing a complaint on this stage to a courtroom if it has zero merit. If she is, even Trumps Dollar Store attorney's should make mincemeat out of her.
Click to expand...

It may have a lower burden of proof - what I'm saying is that you are pointing out that damages may not be required in criminal insurance fraud. I simply do not know and can't assume that the absence of damages is also a characteristic of civil insurance fraud. So far no code has been presented that shows this is the case in civil insurance fraud and all code to support the claim is criminal code.

You are engaging in arm chair lawyering as well. There are many unanswered questions about the civil nature of the charges and I'm just pointing those out and seeking clarification. There's as much conflation of criminal and civil here as there is a "golden defense" argument.

I don't care if the case wins or loses - I'm just trying to separate what is from what people say is or hope to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#414
#414
Septic said:
I mean - civil fraud probably has a lower burden of proof. So I'm not sure why you're splitting that hair.

I am simply posting what the elements of "insurance fraud" are and I've already expressed that I do not know how or what the distinctions are between civil and criminal are, how they are prosecuted or by whom.

It does fascinate me that so many arm chair lawyers seem to think they all have the golden defense against charges brought by State AG's and the DOJ, especially with a layman's understanding of not only the law, but the States specific laws or how they're applied within specific circumstances.. As I stated, my guess is that the AG (even if she's biased) isn't bringing a complaint on this stage to a courtroom if it has zero merit. If she is, even Trumps Dollar Store attorney's should make mincemeat out of her.
Click to expand...

I'm not a lawyer so maybe that's why I have a hard time understanding the states standing to file a civil suit for fraud. Without a specific injured party how does the state have standing to file suit? Criminal charges I could understand but not a civil suit.
 
#415
#415
hog88 said:
But who exactly did he defraud? I haven't read the lawsuit so if that is in there excuse me.
Click to expand...

The complaint alleges both lending institutions as well as insurance companies relied on his assertions (appraisals/financials etc) that were not accurate. The AG seems to suggest that the sheer number of cited examples of misrepresentations implies intent.
 
#417
#417
Septic said:
I've answered a number of times. Stop being lazy and go back read.
Click to expand...
You've spent more time telling me to go back and read, I want you to give me one sentence about who the victim is. Sorry, but I'm not going to read this entire thread to try and dissect what you interpret as a victim.
 
#418
#418
hog88 said:
I'm not a lawyer so maybe that's why I have a hard time understanding the states standing to file a civil suit for fraud. Without a specific injured party how does the state have standing to file suit? Criminal charges I could understand but not a civil suit.
Click to expand...

I wonder that as well - State departments of financial services often have prosecutor influence in both civil and criminal arenas.
 
#419
#419
Septic said:
The complaint alleges both lending institutions as well as insurance companies relied on his assertions (appraisals/financials etc) that were not accurate. The AG seems to suggest that the sheer number of cited examples of misrepresentations implies intent.
Click to expand...

So the state isn't naming anyone or entity specifically?
 
#420
#420
McDad said:
What say ye, SCV?
Click to expand...
Well I did say the tax appraisal, but now I think I have to go with the Insurance. Probably because if the place burned down that is what you would get for it. Other than that... I have no clue, so edumacate me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#423
#423
VolStrom said:
You've spent more time telling me to go back and read, I want you to give me one sentence about who the victim is. Sorry, but I'm not going to read this entire thread to try and dissect what you interpret as a victim.
Click to expand...

You certainly have that option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IluvdoubleD's
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top