Attorney General Marty Jackley says the five felony charges he has brought against former EB-5 czar Joop Bollen are “initial” charges based on new information discovered on December 23, 2015. With what else might he charge Aberdeen’s Lying Dutchman?
Perhaps Jackley will revisit the evidence we had in 2014 of chargeable violations of a variety of state laws and rules. Let’s review my list (renumbered to reflect specific charges and with updated links) published September 2014:
- Bollen privatized his own state job in 2008, signing a contract between his state agency and his own new private company. That contract probably violated South Dakota’s conflict of interest law.
- Bollen’s privatization of his EB-5 activities may have denied the state general fund well over a hundred million dollars. That privatization probably violated Board of Regents policy (Bollen worked for Northern State University).
- When a California company sued the state agency Bollen directed in 2008, Bollen concealed the lawsuit from his superiors and wrote his own legal response to the court. Pretending to represent the state in that court case violated more state law and good sense.
- Bollen’s private company functioned like a bank, but did not obtain a lending license or pay bank franchise tax [Cory Allen Heidelberger, “The Scandal Evolves,” South Dakota Magazine, 2014.09.17].
Conflict of interest law, Board of Regents policy, unauthorized lawyering, and tax evasion—and those are just the state-level violations, all well within our Attorney General’s jurisdiction, not problems that can only be addressed by federal oversight (the 2014 red herring that Mike Rounds is recycling). We’re waiting, Marty….
This could get interesting. Marty Jackley possibly embarrassing the stalwarts of the South Dakota Republican party. I may have to take back some of the things that I have been thinking about Marty. Mark Mickelson, make me take back some of the things that I have been saying about you.
One thing I don’t understand is why there is not common theft charges rather than disposition of property subject to a security interest. Isn’t there still at least $45,000 missing?
How did he not break the law when he executed contracts on behalf of the state in his favor?
How do you get away with not disclosing a lawsuit against the state and then fraudulently appearing in court to defend the lawsuit without state authority?
As I think Ror pointed out, there has to be some cover up going on to have all of these things going on and not have repercussions. Bosworth had the book thrown at her for basically a false oath which arguably did not harm anyone. Bollen has been a free man for four years after all of this? Wow!
Will Jackley prosecute or blah blah blah.
@Darin The most obvious of reasons is because those are significant felony charges with significant penalties associated with them. As telegraphed so far, current charges are a slap on the wrist that will not cause Mr Bollen to come clean about who was involved and who knew what when.
Compared to how Marty Jackley unleashed an onslaught of DCI agents on Bosworth and the misdemeanor failing to attribute a website address to a robocall “crime?” The dilatory and minimally selective prosecution of the brazen EB5 corruption, is telling.
They weren’t bothered that Bollen still has his passport because he has substantial financial assets close by. Riiiight,and if they keep track of those assets the way they keep track of state monies,Bollen is probably waving at Jackley from Timbuktu already.
On a lighter note,maybe Bollen will plead poverty and ask for legal representation.
Ask any lawyer (or competent law enforcement officer):
Selling an asset out of trust (or in this case disposition of secured property) opens one up to a lot more problems than common theft. These are far from a slap on the wrist.
Troy, if what you just said was true than why is he only charged with Class 6 felonies?
SDCL 22-30A-17. Grand theft–Felony. Grand theft is a Class 6 felony, if the property stolen:
(1) Exceeds one thousand dollars in value but is less than or equal to two thousand five hundred dollars;
(2) Is a firearm with a value of less than or equal to two thousand five hundred dollars;
(3) Is taken from the person of another with a value of less than or equal to two thousand five hundred dollars; or
(4) The property stolen is cattle, horses, mules, sheep, goats, buffalo, or captive nondomestic elk with a value of less than or equal to two thousand five hundred dollars.
Grand theft is a Class 5 felony if the value of the property is more than two thousand five hundred dollars but less than or equal to five thousand dollars.
Grand theft is a Class 4 felony if the value of the property is more than five thousand dollars but less than or equal to one hundred thousand dollars.
Grand theft is a Class 3 felony if the value of the property is more than one hundred thousand dollars but less than or equal to five hundred thousand dollars.
Or why isn’t he charged with:
SDCL 22-30A-17.1. Aggravated grand theft–Felony. Theft is aggravated grand theft, if the value of the property stolen exceeds five hundred thousand dollars. Aggravated grand theft is a Class 2 felony.
I’m speculating that he had rights to possess the money on behalf of his corporation, but if he misappropriated those funds then that would constitute theft. Maybe you can’t aggregate the amounts, so they would be separate counts of grand theft. But he had multiple transfers over $100,000 that would be Class 3 felonies if proven. That is a lot more serious than a Class 6 as any attorney will tell you Troy.
And the Rounds attempt to pass the buck to the Feds is still stuck in my craw and interfering with the positive vibes from the USD women’s WNIT win!
How do give a huge state administered program to a private individual and not do any state government oversight and then blame the feds for what your friend did?
I would think the Federal Government could get involved any time now, I would start looking into mail fraud. Not saying there was any mail fraud, but it would be interesting to look at any information mailed to prospective investors and see how that lines up with the truth.
@Darin experienced law enforcement officers not beholding to establishment corrupt politics (like me), and experienced prosecuting attorneys, will tell you that it is normal and proper prosecutorial strategy to charge ALL the highest and most serious crimes known in order to encourage subjects to cooperate in exchange for reduction/combining of charges which in return facilitates successful prosecution of the initial subject and facilitates identification and successful prosecutions of accomplices and secondary targets.
Mr. Nelson, that was very interesting how they sent the entire “A” team with dogs and everything to go and arrest that pretty young Dr. Bosworth who swindled old people out of many thousands of dollars they could have used to buy food. And who sold fake lottery tickets to people. That is the sort of thing that might get some people upset enough to pull them close and tell them how to pound sand. You like to tell people how to pound sand, don’t you?
Stace, I agree with you that it is typical and proper prosecutorial strategy to charge the most serious crimes that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I’ll reserve judgment on whether this was a whitewash until we see what else Jackley comes up with.
If the wheels of justice moved any slower here, my granny on a rascal could outrun justice.
@Grids Now if they went after her for those crimes in a timely fashion, before the ’14 primary? That would have complicated the Rounds election strategy.
We will all wait for further comments till you are able to get to your safe zone.
everyone know joop intended to f the coop. get to it marty. no one that smart is just playin’ by the rules. less than 1% can even understand the game. where are our watchdog A. G.’s? and i mean Johnson?
@Darin I would disagree only slightly with your semantics. But your points and Mr H’s are well made. One doesn’t have to be an accomplished law enforcement professional or a veteran prosecutor to see that there’s obvious serious criminal activity that hasn’t been charged.
Selling an asset out of trust (or in this case disposition of secured property) opens one up to a lot more problems than common theft. These are far from a slap on the wrist.
Provided that the people in charge of administering justice had any desire to administer justice. Jackley doesn’t fill that bill particularly well,imho.
All the Federales say
They could have had him any day
They only let him slip away
Out of kindness, I suppose
The whole thing smells like an ongoing cover up by Jackley and Rounds. If the Feds do get more involved I imagine that people still in power will be running for cover.
Here is what I know from experience (never on the side of the pursued) remembering I’m not an attorney but one who has procured them and observed them:
When there is a suspicion of fraud (hard case to prove), the first question asked by the attorney is “do you have evidence of conversion (broad term that encompasses this charge)?” The reason they ask it is it is relatively easy to prove and opens up the party to civil exposure that approximates what they would face with fraud. This gets the attention of the accused and puts them in catch-22: Lay down on these charges taking what ever the pursuer (prosecutor or the plaintiff attorney if it is still mostly being pursued as a civil matter) or fight the charges which gives the pursuer greater latitude to gather information to prove greater charges.
I totally agree with Darin’s comment that it is “typical and proper prosecutorial strategy to charge the most serious crimes that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” As I said before, conversion is easy to prove on facts alone with almost little reliance on matters like intent (harder to prove) which are more relevant factors in theft and especially fraud.
Thus, while not as serious as theft (as Darin pointed out) or fraud, conversion charges are very serious and are relatively easier to prove. And, most importantly, they make it easier for the pursuer (in this case Attorney General) to get judges (remember Bollen still has his Constitutional rights) to force Bollen to provide information which can make proving more serious charges easier.
It is my guess that what the “new facts that just came available” were confirmation of suspicion of this conversion. They just came available because the State had to go through a process to “call” on its rights under the guaranty/indemnity fund (don’t remember formal moniker) which probably gave a right to forensically audit the fund(s). And the reason they pursued this time consuming process is it gives them the “vise” to gather information for more serious charges.
@Mr Jones, The state had ample mechanisms to start an in depth investigation into this from the onset. The theft of state records from the college,and the refusal to return them, opened up a cornucopia of opportunities, and avenues, 4+ years ago. The tepid and dilatory response to obvious malfeasances, in which numerous state politicians are involved, may have been part of the investigative plan; however, it clearly wasn’t designed to benefit the thorough investigation of criminal activity and those involved. Time is the sworn enemy of any investigation, embracing it as they did here? Raises logical and appropriate criticism and concerns.
Are LEO’s investigators merely pawns of their republican elected handful of overlords in SD? if relevant evidence was exposed by competent investigators with decades of experience and integrity, where is?
Mr. Nelson,
The odds of a conspiracy being plausible is inversely proportional to the number of required co-conspirators. I guess I don’t think the supposed to conspirators are so talented to pull-off what you imply. Further, I defer to the integrity and professionalism of law enforcement.
I’m a bit surprised by your confidence in the skills of these alleged co-conspirators and the lack of integrity by both state and federal law enforcement.
Of course, Troy, I’m sure Stace, with his years of LE investigative work, has seen the dishonest side of what people are capable of doing.
I’m sure as a liberal I disagree with most of Stace’s stances, but he would be a republican I would vote for b/c of his compassion to fight state corruption.
Ms. Jenny, I am seriously considering giving Mr. Nelson the grudznick stamp of endorsement but you need to realize his history of chest thumping and shouting and threatening is what makes him so ineffective. If he can control himself and behave like a senator he might make some headway. I guess that is yet to be seen.
I doubt the inverse proportionality, Troy. Just ask any wingnut and I’m sure they will blame Obama for everything wrong. He has been busy for all the obstruction that has been foisted on his mighty black shoulders.
Stace has seen the dishonest side of people for sure. N when he speaks of internal politics (aka tepid and dilatory response) within law enforcement, as affected by lawmakers, he also knows what he’s talking about. Large financial programs under the guise of “economic development” often are rife with technical issues (You Mr. Jones, know that well) that are left to legal or policy interpretation. So law enforcement agencies(including prosecutors) are not always engaged until affected parties or public outcry generate reaction.
Pat Duffy said “follow the money”
My bad….I forgot Mr. Rounds said it is Obamas fault.
@Mr Jones, After so many years of being proven wrong on every matter of contention of corruption charges in SD, it never ceases to amaze me at your dedicated defense of indefensible establishment corruption.
Would you like to review the long list of corrupt actions that you defended and assailed me for pointing out, each of which I was shown to be correct?
I digress. Is it naïveté or willful blindness to be neck deep in establishment corruption, with identified wide-spread documented (and admitted) conspirator involvement, and still claim inadvertent criminal misconduct?
I have personally experienced Marty Jackley’s selective enforcement of the law and been subject to his abuses of the criminal justice system as a political weapon. My opinion of him is not suitable for print.
Political appointees and politicians have no law enforcement integrity. The decisions in this matter have not been in impartial law enforcement hands. They have been solely in the hands of a politician with a self-serving conflict of interest.
The irony? It doesnt take an acknowledged law enforcement expert like me, to point out the obvious facts, and that your defense of the indefensible is hollow as always.
@Jenny Sadly, you are correct. Even at the federal level agents have to wade through the muck of politics injected into investigations. The worst headaches of my career came from some of the best work I did on hundreds of cases out of the NCIS office in the US Embassy in Manila, where we were recovering millions of dollars of taxpayer monies.
Mr. Nelson, were your experiences with Mr. Jackley when you did the robocalling and then lied about it?
@GRIDS, I have a long distinguished record of calling scumbags “scumbags” in person and in public. Happy to dub you so personally and publicly any time you manage to find the stones for such a conversation.
Trying to blame me for the free-speech of others may make for useful corrupt political contrived scandals, but it doesn’t change the facts. Even when they coerced a grand jury witness to perjure himself? They still couldn’t contrive your BS narrative.
That being said, I would like to again cordially invite you to pound sand and am happy to pass along those sincere sentiments in person, if you should be so bold as to lobby me on an issue.
Thank you Mr. Nelson. I have heard you thump your chest and threaten old men before but it continues to amuse me. You may continue.
Stace.
When the EB-5 scandal broke and Cory started provided coverage no other media would provide, I started having numerous discussions with Troy, some of them pretty heated.
What I arrived at is Troy is the Minister in-chief of Explaining” in an attempt to distract from core issues of the scandal.
If anything even remotely seems to be like a republican scandal, Troy will find a way to explain it so that the scandal isn’t a scandal at all.
In Troy’s eyes it is an impossibility for a republican do anything criminal
Except for Dr. Bos. She was found guilty of criminal things and she’s a Republican, if not a bit of a RINO. My friend Bob would agree.
@GRIDS I bet you’re scared of chalked names on the ground and consider them a threat too. You go ahead and get to your safe zone so you don’t see chalk threats everywhere.
@Roger His loyalty is not ideological, it is to power and those in the establishment that weild it. The only Republican principle I have seen him dedicated to is being antiabortion, and that is optional in his support of establishment “Republicans.”
Stace and Darin opened with that vexing comparison to the Bosworth prosecution. I will quibble with Stace’s portrayal of an “onslaught” of DCI agents. That phrase smells of Bosworth’s black-van fantasies about jackbooted thugs terrorizing the Hutterites when it was in fact pretty standard, polite visits from a couple agents. We don’t know how many agents have been crawling into Bollen’s business, or how polite they’ve been.
Bosworth’s crimes and Bollen’s are also notably different. The crime that hung Bosworth, swearing a false oath, took place on a public document and was supported by public evidence. The basic facts came to my attention within a couple hours of the beginning of the crowdsourced review of her petition. That crime was far more straightforward and obvious than either the five transactions that have Bollen in court right now or the business dealings that underpin the four charges I lay above. For that matter, Bosworth’s unforced error on her petitions was similarly more straightforward, obvious, and easy to prove in court that the wealth of other improper activities I’ve documented on this blog (raffles, violation of professional ethics, Chad’s real-estate scam in Utah, etc.).
Two months passed between the time that I brought evidence of Bosworth’s petition fraud to light and the time that Jackley arrested her. Three months and a week passed between the time that Agent Bierne found the bank records that established criminal activity with IF#2 and the time that Jackley arrested Bollen. I don’t think I’d base charges of selective prosecution on that time difference.
I would base charges of selective prosecution on the three years since the feds came knocking in Pierre with subpoenas that we’ve had to wait for anyone besides Benda to face charges.
@CAH The perch, and the view, from whence we compare these cases is a little different and explains our differences of perception.
I am not a sympathetic ear to Annette’s petition violations and I am not forwarding any idea that she was a victim in this matter.
Looking at the investigative responses, to actionable material, in a couple known cases varying in large degrees of seriousness, give us a telling comparison.
The most telling is the amount and priority of resources known to have been expanded in a misdemeanor failure to disclose a website address case, Bosworth’s minor felony violations, and a high profile major “fraud” investigation that involves a mysterious death of a major named subject and major witness in a multi-million dollar crime tied to major political players.
In the minor cases? The director of DCI, and this the whole weight of the agency, personally directing the investigations. Expedited investigations, maximum charging, priority prosecution, and over the top publicity by the AG. Now compare that to how the EB5 corruption has been handled.
So my question was, have and do LEOs like the “director of DCI” subjugate their “empirical analysis in criminal justice policy decision making at the state level and…. values … based on the principles of integrity and professionalism” to the political whims of daugaard, jackley, rounds, tidemann, regents, NSU and Banking Commission, and the majority republican constituency, in fraud investigations involving murder of entire SD families, arson and suicides of cabinet members and croney criminals?
just wondering if this is normal policy and procedure in SD? do LEOs with years of experience and training stand around with their hands in their pockets, apparently as lifeless as the democratic party is blamed to be, after you are finished with blaming Obama?
http://dci.sd.gov/TheOffice.aspx
http://www.jrsa.org/about/index.html
I am looking for professional accountability
the evidence is in the file. investigators are competent despite their minders. have coffee with one agent. leak copies to the press.
flowery response unnecessary
@Leslie whether paper or electronic, access to the information be limited and investigative work compartmentalized. Additionally, the culture that has been cultivated (interjecting and controlling the DCI Director’s actions in political investigations) has effectively extended that position as a political (strong) arm, destroyed any illusions of impartiality, and ensured establishment influence.