No criminal charges pending against Krassenstein brothers
Two days ago I became aware of an asset seizure related to a property owned by Edward and Brian Krassenstein.
The brothers are the owners of the now closed Ponzi promotion platforms, MoneyMakerGroup and TalkGold.
In their forfeiture complaint, filed August 21st, the DOJ accused the Krassenstein brothers of conspiring to commit wire fraud. This strongly implied that the Krassenstein brothers were facing a wire fraud case of their own.
A number of related cases have been filed under seal which, along with information previously not on the public record, reveals the DOJ are not pursuing criminal charges against the Krassensteins.
Following publication of BehindMLM’s initial article covering the Krassenstein forfeiture, Edward Krassenstein reached out to us.
Krassenstein explains the asset forfeiture is in relation to
Homeland Security (having) probable cause to believe we had information on a group of scammers or that we were working directly with a particular group of scammers.
The property seized was a rental property in Cape Coral. Krassenstein claims he and his brother continue to live in two other homes in the area.
Other assets seized, including those in the September 2016 raid, have since been returned.
As per an undated settlement between the DOJ and the Krasssenstein brothers,
The United States Attorney also agrees not to seek any additional forfeitures, civil or criminal, arising from any federal offense at the time of the execution of this agreement.
To the extent they have not already been turned over to the Krassensteins, the United States agrees to return all items seized during the execution of Federal search warrants at the Krassensteins’ residences within 30 days of this agreement being fully executed.
An undated letter from Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Blanco, representing the DOJ’s Organized Crime and Gang Section, states that as at the time the letter was sent to the Krassensteins’ attorney;
The Organized Crime and Gang Section of the U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division, agrees not to charge Brian Krassenstein with committing any federal offense known tot he Criminal Division at the time of the execution of this agreement related to the alleged conspiracy to commit wire fraud and substantive wire fraud.
Please note that this agreement is limited to the Organized Crime and Gang Section fo the U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division, and cannot bind any other federal, state, or local prosecuting authorities, although this office will bring Brian Krassenstein’s cooperation, if any, to the attention of other prosecuting officer or others, if requested.
The extent of Brian Krassenstein’s cooperation and in what regard are at this point in time not public knowledge.
Unfortunately the cases the DOJ are investigating that are tied to the seized proceeds of the Krassensteins’ rental property are also under seal.
I’m not sure if it’s any indication as to who or what the DOJ are investigating, but specific scams referenced in the forfeiture notice include
- Leopard Fund (2005) – owner David Prince was convicted of five counts of wire fraud following an FBI investigation
- PanaMoney (2008) – 2.8% daily ROI Ponzi scheme, bought advertising on TalkGold and MoneyMakerGroup
- CSMFinance (2009) – 1.7% daily ROI Ponzi scheme, forum thread on TalkGold was used to distribute virus that granted CSMFinance direct access to investor’s Liberty Reserve accounts
- ReproFinance (2010) – 1.9% daily ROI Ponzi scheme
- Safe Depositary (2010) – 2.3% daily ROI Ponzi scheme
- Technocash Inc (2009) – tied to Profitable Sunrise HYIP via an SEC investigation, funds received from TechnoCash were used to purchase the Krassensteins’ seized property
Whether the DOJ are building a case against the Krassenstein brothers outside of the cases related to the forfeiture are unknown.
Edward Krassenstein maintains neither he or his brother “have ever broken the law in our lives”.
Edward insists that his providing of a platform for discussion of HYIP scams makes him no different to ‘Google, Facebook, and just about every other major website on the net‘.
There is NO case against us. There was never any criminal charges or case brought by the DOJ against us, and there never will be. There was never a court hearing, nor will there be.
There is no crime in selling ads to a third party. The First Amendment clearly protects Facebook as well as us.
The fact remains however that at least one asset belonging to the Krassensteins has been linked to the proceeds of suspected wire fraud.
The DOJ also differentiate TalkGold and MoneyMakerGroup from sites like Facebook by defining the forums as “websites devoted to the promotion of fraudulent HYIPs”.
In response to why he and his brother consented to forfeiture of their rental property if they believed they hadn’t committed a crime, Edward replied;
This was an agreement we made with the government because the cost of fighting the civil complaint would have likely cost us more money/stress than what the government was requesting via the forfeiture.
We both have new born children and couldn’t keep dragging this civil matter on any longer, as attorney fees were quickly adding up.
This is why civil forfeiture is such a hotly debated topic in America.
Assets were seized without any criminal charges ever being brought and then it was up to us to spend 100’s of thousands of dollars on attorneys to fight for those assets back.
We decided to give up a small portion of our assets, and move on.
The DOJ maintain that if challenged, they had enough evidence to ‘establish reasonable cause (to) meet (their) burden of proof at trial‘.
With respect to the MoneyMakerGroup and Talk Gold forums being simultaneously shut down within 24 hours of the DOJ’s forfeiture complaint being filed, Edward explains
We decided to take the sites down as we no longer wanted to be a part of them as it’s not worth the possibility of getting sued and having to defend ourselves yet again.
Additionally the websites were costing money to run.
At the time of publication both the MoneyMakerGroup and TalkGold website domains remain in the possession of the Krassenstein brothers through E&B Advertising.
uh, no, no it does not.
I think he’s thinking DMCA Safe Harbor provisions. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
in an article in 2009, brian krassenstein introduced talkgold.com as:
wiki says an HYIP is:
the krassenstein brothers were Knowingly taking ad revenue from ponzi schemes and moderating the forum discussions about them, thereby encouraging them.
millions or even billions may have been invested in HYIP programs advertised and encouraged on MMG and talkgold, so im wondering how these brothers seem to have gotten away scott free! maybe they shared important information with the DOJ to earn their freedom?
things are fuzzy around the scope of the internet, and law and regulations have not kept up with the endless possibilities the net provides.
recently in the US, in relation to the investigation into russian interference in the US elections, facebook, google, twitter etc have been asked to moderate content and ads better.
the first amendment is not an unlimited free pass and is not freedom from accountability.
today FB, google etc are being nudged to self regulate, in the future they may be held accountable by regulators if they dont.
today they are being nudged over matters relating to national security, tomorrow they can be nudged over providing a free playground for financial fraud. it seems like a logical progression of regulation to me.
the krassenteins probably just got away because the internet is not properly regulated yet, and they made a grey-area escape. IMO, they are guilty as hell for causing huge investor losses via ponzi schemes they knowingly promoted on their sites.
SEC.gov’s definition of HYIP is different and I would say would hold more legal standing in the courts. If you use the SEC’s definition then no, selling ads to “HYIPs” is no different then selling an ad to a pet food store.
Besides most HYIPs don’t advertise an HYIP but rather an investment which is completely legal. These ads are all over google so why should these brother be held to a higher standard then Google, Facebook, Yahoo, etc.? They shouldn’t and that’s why the Dprobably knew they had no case.
See SEC definition:
HYIP = Ponzi scheme.
The SEC had nothing to do with the complaint, it was a DOJ action. And being knee-deep in HYIP monitoring is a bit more than selling advertising space.
Running a forum is not the same as accepting ad revenue. In a moderated forum, when the owner/moderators take an active role in the discussion, and especially when they delete posts that express views opposed to scams and when they block posters who speak against what turn out to be fraudulent investment scams, they take on more legal responsibility for the content that they leave, protect and encourage.
If you provide a place to talk about scams, its one thing, but when you take sides, you become liable for the position you take, even if you take that position solely by controlling what you allow others to say.
Actually Gregg, according to the law and to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), it is the same, and a website owner who run a form is no different as long as they didn’t directly promote a scam (i.e. saying, “This is a great investment, and you should invest”).
Publishing a third party banner advertisement or text ad, completely written by a 3rd party is protected by CDA 230 and also the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
There are many cases where forum owners and website owners have been sued or brought charges again, only to have a judge rule it down due to both 1A and CDA 230. CDA 230 also specifically has been upheld in cases of forum owners moderating forms.
There is a great article here: olenderfeldman.com/how-can-they-post-that-understanding-the-communication-decency-act/
It explains all this to a T. Unless the Krassensteins directly promoted investments that they absolutely knew was a scam (not just the fact that one can say 99% of online investments are scams or that anything that calls themselves an HYIP is scam), there is nothing there criminally.
Unless a scammer said to them, “I am running a scam, can I purchase an ad on your site to scam people”, then CDA 230 would protect them just like it protects Facebook and Google for the exact same ads.
^^ The DOJ allege the Krassensteins ran several HYIP monitoring sites.
Considering HYIP == Ponzi scheme and a HYIP monitoring site exists solely to encourage investment in scams, that puts the Krassensteins above and beyond mere advertisers.
IMHO, If one chooses to invest in an HYIP & loses their shirt, that’s on the foolish investor & not the Krassensteins UNLESS they broke the law & trolled for the foolish investor.
I agree, they were never charged, after the law confiscated their property & went over it with forensic eagerness to uncover, discover, charge, & prosecute, because there was nothing there to prosecute.
I find the fact that the Krassensteins lost their property to confiscation for a crime they didn’t commit appalling. That seems like the crime that WAS committed. That law needs to change.
Perhaps the Krassensteins should consider a harassment/false investigation/ruined reputation claim to get their lost/appropriated property/monetary loss covered.
Running HYIP monitoring sites that encourages others to invest is promotion of Ponzi schemes.
Promoting Ponzi schemes is illegal in the US.
Oh, to be as intellectually superior as you, Lois.
In my opinion, the only reason the DOJ got involved, and began the investigation, was due to the brothers harsh words, & constant top posting on trumps social media accounts.
trump was pissed & once again, used our Govt to pursue those he calls his “enemies”.
It was all simply a way to silence the Krassenstein brothers. It is that simple.
The raid took place in September 2016, two months before Trump’s election. Not withstanding the investigation leading up to the raid began even earlier.
But uh yeah, tRuMp ConSpIrAcY!
The DOJ got involved because the Krassentein brothers were running a forum that facilitated fraud. It’s that simple.