Is Lorraine Brown’s “Six-Year Scheme” Of “Mail & Wire Fraud” Still Running?
By now, everyone has heard the story about DocX / LPS and the indictment of Lorraine Brown who plead guilty to Mail & Wire Fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1343 for “preparing and filing more than 1 million fraudulently signed and notarized mortgage-related documents with property recorders’ offices throughout the United States.”
On the heels of Brown’s sentencing, LPS and the largest servicers entered the infamous National Mortgage Settlement promising to remediate and rectify their shoddy practices. It has always amazed me how the top law enforcement officials (50 State Attorney Generals) would demand formal “remediation” without requiring LPS to record “corrective” or “rescission” documents for each of the 1 million fraudulent documents it recorded rather than allowing them to remain intact in the title records. That would have been a true fix to the problem. That is called “remediation.”
Instead, homeowners received $300 checks on average while these known fraudulent documents were allowed to float around in commerce like nuclear fallout, and are continuing to be utilized and relied upon by the servicers, title companies, and law firms as the basis to which they claim their alleged foreclosure and title rights. How can that be? Can these turds simply be spun into gold after the consent judgment(s) expire? I personally don’t think so. The parties who continue to utilize these documents in courtrooms across the U.S. are very much aware of their fraudulent origins, yet knowingly advance and push these documents into court via wire and mail for purposes of obtaining judgments and profit. How is this not a continuation of the original “six-year scheme” of Mail & Wire Fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1343? Is it only a violation if mailed or wired once? If there was a conviction against the person who mailed or wired it the first time, does it mean others are free to recirculate it with a standing “Get Out Of Jail Free Pass?” I have posited this issue in a formal complaint to the Oregon Department of Justice and will follow up once a response is received.
Clearly this scheme did not end with Brown’s indictment, as countless others, including many lawyers, have chosen to run and carry the fraud baton like an Olympic Torch.
18 U.S.C. 1343—Elements of Wire Fraud
The elements of wire fraud under Section 1343 directly parallel those of the mail fraud statute, but require the use of an interstate telephone call or electronic communication made in furtherance of the scheme. United States v. Briscoe, 65 F.3d 576, 583 (7th Cir. 1995) (citing United States v. Ames Sintering Co., 927 F.2d 232, 234 (6th Cir. 1990) (per curiam)); United States v. Frey, 42 F.3d 795, 797 (3d Cir. 1994) (wire fraud is identical to mail fraud statute except that it speaks of communications transmitted by wire); see also, e.g., United States v. Profit, 49 F.3d 404, 406 n. 1 (8th Cir.) (the four essential elements of the crime of wire fraud are: (1) that the defendant voluntarily and intentionally devised or participated in a scheme to defraud another out of money; (2) that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud; (3) that it was reasonably foreseeable that interstate wire communications would be used; and (4) that interstate wire communications were in fact used) (citing Manual of Model Criminal Jury Instructions for the District Courts of the Eighth Circuit 6.18.1341 (West 1994)), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 2289 (1995); United States v. Hanson, 41 F.3d 580, 583 (10th Cir. 1994) (two elements comprise the crime of wire fraud: (1) a scheme or artifice to defraud; and (2) use of interstate wire communication to facilitate that scheme); United States v. Faulkner, 17 F.3d 745, 771 (5th Cir. 1994) (essential elements of wire fraud are: (1) a scheme to defraud and (2) the use of, or causing the use of, interstate wire communications to execute the scheme), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 193 (1995); United States v. Cassiere, 4 F.3d 1006 (1st Cir. 1993) (to prove wire fraud government must show (1) scheme to defraud by means of false pretenses, (2) defendant’s knowing and willful participation in scheme with intent to defraud, and (3) use of interstate wire communications in furtherance of scheme); United States v. Maxwell, 920 F.2d 1028, 1035 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (“Wire fraud requires proof of (1) a scheme to defraud; and (2) the use of an interstate wire communication to further the scheme.”).
UPDATE – 4/9/2020
Within 48-hrs of submitting my complaint to the Oregon Department of Justice regarding this issue, I received the following response. My response to this is beneath to which to which there has been no response.
“We reviewed the information you provided and determined that the issues raised by your complaint are outside our authority. Therefore, with this letter, we are closing our file. The information you provided will remain on file as a public record.
Below is a list of additional resources that you may find helpful:
Finding a Lawyer
Oregon State Bar Lawyer Referral Service and Modest Means Program
www.osbar.org
(800) 452-7636
Oregon Legal Aid
Online Directory and Legal Information
www.oregonlawhelp.org
Filing a Small Claim
Oregon Judicial Department
Self-Help Center and Court Directory
www.courts.oregon.gov/help
Complaints About a State Agency
Governor’s Constituent Services Office
www.oregon.gov/gov
(503) 378-4582
Reporting Scams
IRS Imposter Fraud
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
www.tigta.gov
Internet Scams
Federal Bureau of Investigation
www.ic3.gov
International Scams
International Consumer Protection & Enforcement Network
www.econsumer.gov
Reporting Identity Theft
Federal Trade Commission
Report and develop a recovery plan
www.identitytheft.gov
Reporting Discrimination
Bureau of Labor & Industries
Civil Rights Division
www.oregon.gov/BOLI/CRD
(971) 673-0764
Reporting Unwanted Calls and Emails
Unwanted Emails (Spam)
Federal Trade Commission
Send spam to: spam@uce.gov
Robocalls and Caller ID Spoofing
Federal Communications Commission
www.consumercomplaints.fcc.gov
Unwanted Calls
National Do Not Call Registry
www.complaints.donotcall.gov
Reporting Business-to-Business Fraud
Federal Trade Commission
https://www.ftccomplaintassist
Landlord-Tenant Issues
Community Alliance of Tenants
Renters Rights Hotline (Portland Metro)
www.oregoncat.org
(503) 288-0130
Housing and Community Services
Manufactured Community Resources
www.oregon.gov/ohcs
(800) 453-5511
Oregon State Bar Legal Topics
Landlord Tenant Law in Oregon
www.osbar.org/public/legalinfo
Social Services
Reporting abuse or neglect
Department of Human Services
www.oregon.gov/dhs/abuse
(855) 503-7233
Reporting public benefits fraud
Department of Human Services Fraud Hotline
(888) 372-8301
Referrals to state and local resources
Dial 211
If you have questions about your rights, we encourage you to promptly consult with a lawyer.
Thank you again for contacting us.
If you need to contact us about your complaint, please write to me and note your file number: FF1796-20, or contact me by phone at 503-934-4400 or e-mail at mailto:heather.j.mcfarlanemart
Heather McFarlane-Martinez
Enforcement Officer
Financial Fraud/Consumer Protection Section
Oregon Department of Justice”
My Response – April 3, 2020:
Bill Paatalo
Oregon Private Investigator – OR PSID# 49411
Bill.bpia@gmail.com
Leave a Reply