Ponzi Scheme agents jailed 4 years for money laundering

Ponzi Scheme agents Aubrey Norton and his wife Martina Seepersaud have been convicted of money laundering and sentenced to four years imprisonment.

The sentencing was handed down on Friday by Magistrate Rushell Liverpool at Sparendaam Magistrates Court.

The money laundering charge against them was first instituted in 2021 by the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU).

SOCU’s investigation found that the duo were agents of Accelerated Capital Firm Inc, an unlicensed company performing functions of a financial securities company.

SOCU found that the company hired Norton and Seepersaud to illegally solicit clients to invest in forex trading in exchange for commission.

In 2021, SOCU arrested Norton and Seepersaud and they were charged with money laundering for transferring the sum of GD$53.5 million, being part payment for the purchase of property, situated at La Bonne Intention, East Coast Demerara (ECD), with the aim of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the funds.

The prosecution’s case was one that combined evidence from investors, cash collections, evidence of large cash property transactions, income records, and employment records.

SOCU adduced evidence to show that Norton and his wife purchased the property for $70M, paying $53.5M as an initial down-payment. Evidence was also adduced to show that the defendants were agents of Accelerated Capital Firm Inc, securing investors at a 10% Commission whilst earning a combined monthly salary of $175,000.

The defendants were called to lead their defence, and gave sworn evidence and called witnesses. The case for the defendants was one of a bare or complete denial, contending that they were never employed by Accelerated Capital Firm Inc., they did not have the means, nor were they ever apart of an agreement to purchase the property situate at LBI for $GD53.5M.

The Court opined that it was untenable for the defence to suggest that the Court should reject the consistent independent evidence of multiple witnesses, including legal representatives, who all testified to the myriad arrangement between the defendants and other witnesses.

Essentially, the court considered several issues, namely: (i) Whether the defendants converted or transferred property, within the meaning of section 3(1)(A) of the AMLCFT Act; (ii) Has the prosecution proved that $53.5M represented the proceeds of crime; (iii) Did the defendants know or have reasonable grounds to believe the money were the proceeds of crime, (iv) Was the transfer done with the aim of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the money.

Magistrate Liverpool found that SOCU had amassed an overwhelming amount of credible, cogent, coherent, and circumstantial evidence that clearly pointed to the Defendants being guilty of the Money laundering offence.

The Court, in finding that all the elements of the offence was satisfied, stated that in the context of money laundering, the movements of large, unexplained cash into real estate was a classic method by which illicit funds were converted into an ostensibly legitimate asset, thereby disguising the origin.

The Court rejected the defence’s case of a complete denial, stating that it was unable to accept that the numerous witnesses testified to handing over cash to the defendants, to invest collectively, fabricated their evidence, or causally invoked the defendant’s name without any foundation. Hence, there was no evidential basis upon which the Court could reasonably conclude that all of the Prosecution’s witnesses, independently and coincidentally, chose to falsely implicate the defendants.

Magistrate Liverpool, therefore, found that when the Prosecution’s evidence was assessed as a whole, the Prosecution’s case remained overwhelming. This resulted in the Court finding that the prosecution had proven beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants transferred $53.5M, as part payment for the LBI property, and that the said money represented proceeds of crime, that the defendants knew or had reasonable grounds to believe that it was proceeds of crime and that the transfer was done with the aim of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the money.

Consequently, Magistrate Liverpool found the defendants guilty and sentenced them to four years imprisonment.

The matter was prosecuted by Attorney-at-Law David Brathwaite, Prosecutors Aaron Daniels and Neville Jeffers from SOCU, and Attorney-at-Law Latchmie Rahamat represented the defendants.