Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 243 posts

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#101

Post by dragonwriter »

pc86 wrote: post #85
TheArcane wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the Secret Service supposed to protect the president?

They were a part of the Treasury Department until 2003 (now DHS) and deal with counterfeiting and other financial crimes. I don't know for sure that fraud like this would land in the Secret Service queue and not the FBI but it's certainly plausible. It mostly depends on which specific statute(s) you're being investigated for as to which agency(ies) do the investigating.

> They are a part of the Treasury Department officially

Used to be; but now they are part of Homeland Security.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#102

Post by pktgen »

adekok wrote: post #51

The article doesn't way why he was found not guilty, but I'll make my guess. He did nothing to defraud the bank or mislead it. He simply had access to a large line of credit, and used it. If the bank wants it's money back, that's a civil matter, not a criminal one. It's their responsibility to ask for it back. This reeks of incompetence on the part of the bank, followed by outright malice. They put an innocent guy in…

> He did nothing to defraud the bank or mislead it. He simply had access to a large line of credit, and used it. If the bank wants it's money back, that's a civil matter, not a criminal one. It's their responsibility to ask for it back.

He was drawing on this line of credit, which he knew he was legally obligated to pay back, without ever intending to pay it back. That sure seems like fraud to me.

There is a difference between taking out a loan with the intention of paying it back, but not being able to pay it back due to some circumstance (you lost your job, had a medical emergency, business failed, or something like that), and taking out a loan without ever intending to pay it back. One is a civil breach of contract; the other (at least in the US) is criminal fraud.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#103

Post by pc86 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #101
pc86 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were a part of the Treasury Department until 2003 (now DHS) and deal with counterfeiting and other financial crimes. I don't know for sure that fraud like this would land in the Secret Service queue and not the FBI but it's certainly plausible. It mostly depends on which specific statute(s) you're being investigated for as to which agency(ies) do the investigating.

> They are a part of the Treasury Department officially Used to be; but now they are part of Homeland Security.

You are correct, thank you. Edited to fix.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#104

Post by scotty79 »

pktgen wrote: post #102
adekok wrote: post #51

The article doesn't way why he was found not guilty, but I'll make my guess. He did nothing to defraud the bank or mislead it. He simply had access to a large line of credit, and used it. If the bank wants it's money back, that's a civil matter, not a criminal one. It's their responsibility to ask for it back. This reeks of incompetence on the part of the bank, followed by outright malice. They put an innocent guy in…

> He did nothing to defraud the bank or mislead it. He simply had access to a large line of credit, and used it. If the bank wants it's money back, that's a civil matter, not a criminal one. It's their responsibility to ask for it back. He was drawing on this line of credit, which he knew he was legally obligated to pay back, without ever intending to pay it back. That sure seems like fraud to me. There is a differen…

> without ever intending to pay it back

How can you know that? He himself writes that he was waiting for the bank to ask for some money back and intended to deal with it when it comes.

Lack of detailed planning for something isn't the same as lack of intention to do something when it happens.

Lots of people take loans without precisely knowing where they'll find money to pay them back.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#105

Post by benmmurphy »

adekok wrote: post #51

The article doesn't way why he was found not guilty, but I'll make my guess. He did nothing to defraud the bank or mislead it. He simply had access to a large line of credit, and used it. If the bank wants it's money back, that's a civil matter, not a criminal one. It's their responsibility to ask for it back. This reeks of incompetence on the part of the bank, followed by outright malice. They put an innocent guy in…

In some countries (not sure about Australia) it is a crime to take on a loan with no intention of paying it back. This is probably why at the start of the article he says: 'It seems unbelievable but my intention was never to take all the money from the St George Bank and not pay it back.'. Obviously it is very difficult to prove that someone has no intention of paying back a loan.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#106

Post by rayiner »

selectodude wrote: post #31
rayiner wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, you have to disclose every arrest, criminal proceedings, etc. along with all debts, so this would come out. And they can can deny you for things that aren't convictions. That said bar examiners like a good human interest story as much as anyone else. A former bank robber got admitted to the Washington bar last year after he started doing Supreme Court appellate work while behind bars.

If he had committed a crime, that would be one thing. Taking advantage of a free spigot of money though, that would get him fast tracked as far as the bar is concerned.

Bar examiners are among the most humorless people you'll meet. They hate attempts to "lawyer out of" culpability.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#107

Post by 1024core »

benmmurphy wrote: post #105
adekok wrote: post #51

The article doesn't way why he was found not guilty, but I'll make my guess. He did nothing to defraud the bank or mislead it. He simply had access to a large line of credit, and used it. If the bank wants it's money back, that's a civil matter, not a criminal one. It's their responsibility to ask for it back. This reeks of incompetence on the part of the bank, followed by outright malice. They put an innocent guy in…

In some countries (not sure about Australia) it is a crime to take on a loan with no intention of paying it back. This is probably why at the start of the article he says: 'It seems unbelievable but my intention was never to take all the money from the St George Bank and not pay it back.'. Obviously it is very difficult to prove that someone has no intention of paying back a loan.

But he didn't take out a loan. The bank kept giving him money whenever he wanted to withdraw it. That is not a loan. A loan requires explicit agreement and a fixed amount.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#108

Post by concernedmale »

dgreensp wrote: post #59

> I was just unlucky I guess that it happened to me. People like this who have no sense of personal responsibility are an evil in the world. He spends millions of dollars of other people's money, declares bankruptcy (presumably), and when his actions are deemed dishonest and immoral, though not technically illegal, he acts like that's just name-calling and gets right back up on his high horse. Remind you of any Presi…

"Remind you of any Presidents-elect?" - you mean he knowingly committed fraud and then said it wasn't fraud? More reminds me of the loser of the election. ;)

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#109

Post by scotty79 »

mikeash wrote: post #65
dgreensp wrote: post #59

> I was just unlucky I guess that it happened to me. People like this who have no sense of personal responsibility are an evil in the world. He spends millions of dollars of other people's money, declares bankruptcy (presumably), and when his actions are deemed dishonest and immoral, though not technically illegal, he acts like that's just name-calling and gets right back up on his high horse. Remind you of any Presi…

Seriously, what an asshole. He "was just unlucky"? No, there was not a single piece of bad luck for him in this whole affair. Something strange happened to him, but it was easy to handle without screwing anything up: just tell the bank they messed up, or even just ignore it. Deciding to start spending the money like crazy was not bad luck, it was bad judgment. The bank was clearly in the wrong as well. They shouldn't…

I wonder what would be your take on the whole case if he used the funds to build successful company that paid all the funds back, and paid for strippers and cocaine.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#110

Post by eip »

IshKebab wrote: post #28
jlebrech wrote: post #5

they weren't charging him interest? if so, why waste money on things that don't yield a return on investment. you could day trade and just put it back in the account. and that way you probably wouldn't get arrested.

I'd buy some gold bars, hide them and say I spent it on strippers and drugs. It's not like you'd keep receipts for that.

I would have yolo'd it all on SPY calls. My December 30th calls are up like 300% right now. Could have cleared $4M and paid back the loan in full.
Post reply on HN