Nov 24 for re-mention of BM's case

It seems most people missed both Bat$'s post detailing the charges, and Owen's post detailing the law... thank you both for your properly researched posts.

Part of the money laundering law relates to illegal deposit taking, and the Marsdens have been charged with this.

The fact remains that they took money from people illegally (yes they did, they were not properly licensed, regardless of what they were intending to do with the money), and then some of that money was moved into their own personal accounts.

It is much easier for BNM to prove this laundering and illegal deposit taking than it is to prove the whole PIPS "fraud", as proving his intentions with the money is much harder.

That said, they may will still do that, but once he is behind bars. Then again, he may get a sufficient sentance to satisfy BNM and they may not bother.

I met Brian and Sharon at the Bistro, which was for real and served real food.
I also visited the fashion designers who were for real and had some very nice clothes. His main concern was, and i paraphrase, that the big boys would do all they could to stop him. enough said!!!
There is a well known saying "The rich get rich and the poor get poorer. When bankers and financiers are paid many millions in annual bonuses over and above their oft inflated salaries why would they want to allow any to muscle in on their domain.
I am fortunate to have found 3 programmes that are solid so life goes on
anyone interested pm me
jeff

just apply occam's razor here


"British national Bryan John Marsden, 58, and his Malaysian wife Phan Sew Ken, 50, were accused of a further seven counts of money laundering at the Session Court here yesterday.
They allegedly received money that were proceeds of unlawful activities between Jan 4 and June 14 last year. "

does this mean 1.

"that BM recieved money that came from illegal activities like some other entitiy was doing illegal activities and sent money to pips?"

or does it mean ..2

"As there seems to be a little confusion over what constitutes "money laundering," perhaps this will help:

Money laundering is the practice of engaging in specific financial transactions in order to conceal the identity, source and/or destination of money. In the past, the term "money laundering" was applied only to financial transactions related to organised crime. Today, its definition is expanded by government regulators to encompass any financial transaction which generates an asset, or a value, as the result of an illegal act, which may involve actions such as false accounting.
By the strictest definition of the term, anyone who assists in concealing the proceeds gained from his transactions is considered a money launderer.

There are two relevant statutes upon the Malaysian law books relating to Bank Negara Malaysia in this respect:

1.Anti-Money Laundering Act 2001 (Act 613)

The AMLA, which came into force on 15 January 2002 criminalises money laundering of proceeds from the predicate offences and provides for suspicious transaction reporting, record-keeping and the functions of a financial intelligence unit.

2.Essential (Protection of Depositors) Regulations 1986
These Acts give the Central Bank the powers to investigate the affairs of any person it suspects or has reason to believe is a deposit-taker. It empowers the Bank freeze the properties of the deposit-taker and other persons associated with the deposit taker, assume control over the deposit-taker, and to appoint receivers and managers. These Acts also enumerate the powers of the Managers, provisions on priority of payment and cost."

"If you want facts, I could write a book on legal precedents revolving around money laundering, fraud and illegal activity, as in operating a ponzi, but you won't understand any of it, this is obvious. Bryan was moving funds illegally through financial systems so it appears to be legally aquired. As in our money was extracted under false and misleading information of being invested, when in fact it wasn't. This is FRAUD, this is MONEY LAUNDERING."

"Again,

Money laundering is fraud, what is it you are missing about this fact. It is not me saying it, it is every legal statute in the world saying it. Money laundering is simply an all inclusive charge which encompasses fraud in a broad term, but it is indeed FRAUD.

You mention 200K members, and only 101 charges, if it was as simply as you want to make it sound, then yes, there could be 200K charges, but this just proves we are not talking about the same thing, now doesn't it?

The charges of money laundering have nothing to do with OUR money being sent to Byran, it has to do with how many transactions were uncovered where he moved money illegally into his personal accounts from Newmark, and PICPay, amoung others I am sure. Now if you want to consider this as salary, and legal, then you just don't understand the charges. If it were payroll salary, it would have stated so on check or draft and certainly in books, but then again, there were no books. After a year of investigation, do you really think BN would know the difference between a scheduled payroll check as salary vs. unrecorded electronic transfers."

"The facts relating to the charges laid against the Marsdens to date are that they transferred monies from the account of Newmark into their own personal accounts. In old fashioned terms that would have been a fraudulent transfer in view of the amounts owing to the creditors of Pips et al, but now can be referred to as "money laundering." So far, there have been no charges forthcoming relating to Pips or Pic-pay, both of which are still under investigation.
These are facts which have not been twisted - they are just facts."

-----------------------------------

Again ...if you want us to believe that BM was charged with money laundering becuase he took money out of his own company....then how can he launder money from himself?....he was the founder / CEO ..he had absolute power in his own company..if he wanted to take any amount of money he would have just took it and wrote a check to himself....he didnt have to take it and cover up the fact that he took it....ITS HIS COMPANY....there is nothing illegal with the CEO saying "my salary is...yada yada yada"....he didnt have to hide what he took from his company or anyone else....besides...didnt Owen say that PIPS was "still" under investigation....(which the only source of this info seems to come from him) ...but if they are still under investigation...and if certian people would have us believe that BM was charged with money laundering, which that from thier perspective means that he took money from his own company and hide that he did it...(which thats what embezzelment does too..for i havent heared of an embezzeler taking money and making it known that they took it"......if pips is still under investigation...then wouldnt that mean that charges to BM would come ONLY after the investigation of PIPS is done...since we are suppose to believe that BM's charges are taking money from his own company (which by defintion is embezzelment) which we are to believe that pips is a big ponzi ..(notice that "ponzi" hasnt been mentioned no where in the malaysian news articles)

fact is...if pips is not done being investigated then i dont think it can be used as evidence in court since they are supposidly still finding out info thier thier investigation....according to Owen they havent finished investigating PIPS so how can the article be refering to PIPS being illegal activities if they havent concluded the investigation of pips?.....if they are charging BM with "illegal deposit taking" then there should be over 200,000 charges...NOT 101 charges...or are you saying that out of 200,000 deposit taking that only 101 were illegal? ..and therefore the procecution's case is thrown out the window.....or .....the proceeds from illegal activities is NOT from the pips company as TGs finest would have us believe ..which is embezzelment anyway...NOT money laundering.....but that the proceeds came from somewhere outside of pips and BM all togehter.....thats probaly why there are only 101 charges (which could mean 101 withdrawals he made from the salary he pays himself which BM has said many times..but who knows)...or there should have been over 200,000 charges of money laundering (as OP and Offshore counts as money laundering) as we are to believe that he is being charged with taking money from pipsters in the pips company (which is still under investigation and makes the procecution's case shaky"


actualy im glad that im starting to understand more of this..and seeing the holes threw all of this

either they have charged BM with the wrong charge...and will lose the case....or are relying on evidence that hasnt even been finished being collected (since pips is supposidly STILL under investigation) ...which the case is shot anyway....

It seems like either way...BM wins....

Dare I ask if the three "solid" programmes provide their clients with a set of audited accounts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jeffc

I met Brian and Sharon at the Bistro, which was for real and served real food.
I also visited the fashion designers who were for real and had some very nice clothes. His main concern was, and i paraphrase, that the big boys would do all they could to stop him. enough said!!!
There is a well known saying "The rich get rich and the poor get poorer. When bankers and financiers are paid many millions in annual bonuses over and above their oft inflated salaries why would they want to allow any to muscle in on their domain.
I am fortunate to have found 3 programmes that are solid so life goes on
anyone interested pm me
jeff

---

So Jeff,

Are you talking about BM or PIPS? I've read your post twice and please forgive me if I say that it doesn't say anything except to PM you about your solid program. Here is what I expected someone who has been in the Bistro to comment.

The Bistro is over priced for locals to patronise. It served real food alright but it was certainly expensive. My hamburger and fries cost RM$16++ which is much more than a local would pay. Btw a Mcd sells its Value meal Large for about RM$9 this includes a Big Mac, Large Fries and Large Coke. Would you patronise it when Mcdonalds is around the corner and you get free refills? :biggrin:

Heck! A plate of Char Koay Teow from any stalls nearby can be had for RM3!

What I am saying is that things only look good but in fact NOT making any revenue. My buddy Nej said to this effect and I repeat. That area (where the bistro is) is like a ghost town. You've been there, right? Not much traffic, cars or people alike.

Again at the fashion house, you would have noticed the lack of foot traffic. Of course the clothes look nice but seeing that nobody comes, how many does it sell per day? Lot 10 maybe a prime location 10years ago but since superceded by Mid-Valley Megamall which is on the way being usurped by One Utama which is battling the new megaplex at Putrajaya!

So, how's BM going to make us escape the clutches of the "haves"? I am questioning his business sense.

I take it PIPS isn't one of your so called "solid programs"?

theBat$

Lapcus - take my advice and don't become a lawyer or an accountant!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Owen Platt

Lapcus - take my advice and don't become a lawyer or an accountant!

---

lol...point taken..dont like lawyers anyway...they are a neccessary evil..but then again if i took your advice i guess i should stay poor and be content with it...lol.."the ambition of the people is the scorn of the kings"..lol..right?..and also...long ago...on the Talk gold forums....i remeber you replied to my post about being a 2-bit writer.....i wanted to say that i wasnt talking about you Owen...i was talking about that mole from alaska...

you actualy sound like you at least have all your ducks in a row...lol....this dude form alaska reminded me of the Russian ambassador during the cold war "WE WILL BURY YOU"...LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lapcus

actualy im glad that im starting to understand more of this..and seeing the holes threw all of this

either they have charged BM with the wrong charge...and will lose the case....or are relying on evidence that hasnt even been finished being collected (since pips is supposidly STILL under investigation) ...which the case is shot anyway....

It seems like either way...BM wins....

---

But will that mean we get our money back? Is the investment still growing? Mine should be over a million by now!!!!

theBat$

*1 million in ringgit! Forgot to add that. I don't want anyone to misunderstand. 1mil USD = 3.7mil ringgit :tongue:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jeffc

I met Brian and Sharon at the Bistro, which was for real and served real food.
I also visited the fashion designers who were for real and had some very nice clothes. His main concern was, and i paraphrase, that the big boys would do all they could to stop him. enough said!!!
There is a well known saying "The rich get rich and the poor get poorer. When bankers and financiers are paid many millions in annual bonuses over and above their oft inflated salaries why would they want to allow any to muscle in on their domain.
I am fortunate to have found 3 programmes that are solid so life goes on
anyone interested pm me
jeff

---

Hmmm, it is indeed nice to reminisce those early and hopeful days with wishful thoughts that helps one glamorise the future prospects however, as the months begins to surge with little compromise for those GREAT expected payouts...it began tasting and making most feel bitter...:blueh:


Sad case of bitter facts.... hard to absorb or drink since then...:biggrin:


YB. - cheers nonetheless for a better apetite next time round!:beer:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebat$

But will that mean we get our money back? Is the investment still growing? Mine should be over a million by now!!!!

theBat$

---

time will tell my batty friend....time will tell