RSS Feed
New York City - Prosecutors Reduce Madoff's Ponzi Scheme Total to $13B |
|
| |
Text Size
|
Madoff entered court under watchful eye, and he is in now Manhattans Correctional Center (bottom left). Soon, it may be off to a medium-security federal prison such as Otisville Correctional Facility (bottom right).
Prosecutors said in a memorandum filed in Manhattan Federal Court in anticipation of Madoff's June 29 fraud sentencing the new estimate is based on newly discovered microfilm records dating to 1979.
They were found by the special trustee handling the investment company's bankruptcy, Irving Picard, who has been reviewing records to reconstruct customer losses and find assets to pay them back.
Picard "has identified approximately 1,341 [Madoff] account holders who, through Dec. 11, 2008, collectively suffered estimated losses exceeding $13 billion," prosecutors said in their filing.
Because of the complexity of the investigation, prosecutors are asking Judge Denny Chin to postpone the sentencing proceeding dealing with Madoff's restitution, but to sentence him on schedule June 29. He faces 150 years in prison.
Ira Sorkin, Madoff's defense attorney, said Friday night he had not seen the government filing and wouldn't comment.
An investigator who did not want to be named said the latest government estimate is likely to grow over time to about $21 billion as more records are analyzed.
Madoff pleaded guilty in March to running a giant scheme started in the 1990s. Prosecutors are asking he surrender all his assets to pay customers. But it won't come close to a significant payment.
More of today's headlines
“New York, NY - The state is looking to renovate the section of the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway major near Brooklyn Heights over the next 10 years, but locals are...”
New York, NY - Brooklyn Heights Braces For BQE Renovation
New York - NY Times Reporter Held Hostage By Taliban For 7 Months Escapes
Total16
Read Comments (16) — Post Yours »
1
Jun 20, 2009 at 10:53 PM cool masmid Says:
Why is it hard for them to come up with a real number (amount of billions that were lost) - first it was 35 bil, than it went down, then up to 50 bil, and then up again to 65 bil - and now its down to 35 and as the article says it may go up to 21 bil........ These are huge numbers how cold such huge amounts have such discrepencies- can anyone explain please.
2
Jun 20, 2009 at 10:23 PM Anonymous Says:
Even if its only $13 billion, by now the damage has been done and everyone thinks all yiddeshe bankers are a bunch of ganovim.
3
Jun 20, 2009 at 10:59 PM No Wonder Says:
Now you can understand how he was able to pull this off under the Government's nose. If they can't add up the numbers how are they able to prevent Wall Street fraud! They're CLUELESS.
4
Jun 20, 2009 at 11:17 PM Smart$$ Says:
The problem is that the people who are smart enough to figure out all the numbers, and trace all the money, are too smart to get a government job on government salary, they are making much more money elsewhere on wall st, the losers that cannot make it on wall st end up working for the government and they cannot figure out the numbers....
5
Jun 21, 2009 at 07:37 AM logician Says:
“ Why is it hard for them to come up with a real number (amount of billions that were lost) - first it was 35 bil, than it went down, then up to 50 bil, and then up again to 65 bil - and now its down to 35 and as the article says it may go up to 21 bil........ These are huge numbers how cold such huge amounts have such discrepencies- can anyone explain please. ”
It's possible that a large part of the original numbers, 50-65bil, we're including the supposed interest that people were owed. As opposed to now where they are calculating what was actually taken.
6
Jun 21, 2009 at 06:37 AM every story 2 sides Says:
We still will find out if they would let him out he could of make them still profit of 13 billion what do you accomplish by locking him up give him a chance to make back some money the answer is the government dose not like competition they are the crooks like him
7
Jun 21, 2009 at 06:35 AM Anonymous Says:
it is $13bil. i? whre is the rest off the money ? muz zyn az der govenment hut gamysert..... soon it is going to 6 bil. and then 3 bil. give another 6 monts.... dervyl mysrert mn for zech
8
Jun 21, 2009 at 06:34 AM Richard Friedman Says:
There are two very different numbers from the point of view of both SIPC and investors. There is the amount that Picard, the Trustee of SIPC, has arbitrarily decided to pay investors, limited to the $500,000 ceiling, and the amount the investors are supposed to be paid, also subject to the $500,000 ceiling that is according to the SIPA (Securities Investor Protection Act) that Picard is legally required to follow. I have not yet read any article as to which number this $13 billion represents. The $13 billion sounds like it is Picard's number because a 1979 piece of microfilm would not have any affect on the balance of the 11/30/08 statements, the balance of which SIPA states investors must be paid, subject to the $500,000 limit.
9
Jun 21, 2009 at 06:18 AM Anonymous Says:
Madoff losses quite simple:
The original REPORTED loss OF $50 billion was the amount people said they lost. So for example if i invested $1 mill. 15 years ago and my Madoff statement now said i had $4 million i would have reported a loss of $4 million, which is the amount i thought i had lost.
they are now saying that the losses are limited to peoples original investment. so it is much easier to determine what all the investors had on their current monthly statemnts.
it is much more complicated to go back 25 years and determine what people originally invested and how much they took out and reinvested over that time.
10
Jun 21, 2009 at 01:45 AM cool masmid Says:
“ Why is it hard for them to come up with a real number (amount of billions that were lost) - first it was 35 bil, than it went down, then up to 50 bil, and then up again to 65 bil - and now its down to 35 and as the article says it may go up to 21 bil........ These are huge numbers how cold such huge amounts have such discrepencies- can anyone explain please. ”
Just to correct myself.... that now its actually 13 bil, and my point is that what made those numbers change so drastically. But also Mr Maddoff himself surely knows how much it is that he stole and you would think that if they were so wrong about the amount he ows (which seems to be the case) you would think that his attorney would say something to make him look a little better.
11
Jun 21, 2009 at 08:09 AM Anonymous Says:
So now that he is found innocent who's going to give him his life back, huh?
12
Jun 21, 2009 at 08:25 AM AuthenticSatmar Says:
While the losses are only 13B the fraud was 40B. 13B represents investors capital, and 40B represents the total as per the printed false statements.
13
Jun 21, 2009 at 01:46 AM CPA Says:
“ Why is it hard for them to come up with a real number (amount of billions that were lost) - first it was 35 bil, than it went down, then up to 50 bil, and then up again to 65 bil - and now its down to 35 and as the article says it may go up to 21 bil........ These are huge numbers how cold such huge amounts have such discrepencies- can anyone explain please. ”
The reason it is diffiuclt to come up with a number is because you're not sure what to count. Do you only count actual dollars that went in OR do you count the money that went around in a circle? The same dollar of "profit" was reinvested - does that count as one dollar or two? Not an easy task to figure out - even for a CPA!
14
Jun 21, 2009 at 12:31 PM Milhouse Says:
“ So now that he is found innocent who's going to give him his life back, huh? ”
Huh? When was he found innocent?
15
Jun 21, 2009 at 09:38 PM Innocent Says:
“ Huh? When was he found innocent? ”
When someone is accused of stealing 50 Bil and then they found out its only 13 Bil 43 Billion less so that means that he didn't foil his clients clients that much their return was not supposed to be so high
16
Jun 22, 2009 at 12:45 AM Milhouse Says:
“ When someone is accused of stealing 50 Bil and then they found out its only 13 Bil 43 Billion less so that means that he didn't foil his clients clients that much their return was not supposed to be so high ”
Try again, this time in English. Explain how this story means that he's been found innocent of anything.