Al Parish cuts deal in investment-fraud caseThe Post and Courier
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Al Parish cuts deal in investment-fraud case Al Parish, the former high-flying Charleston Southern University economist who burned through millions of investors' dollars to fund a lavish lifestyle of gold watches, custom cars and pens, confessed to his crimes Friday. In a plea deal that reduces the number of criminal charges from 11 to three, Parish admitted guilt in a massive case of investment fraud. He said little during his one-hour appearance inside the federal courthouse in Charleston. But an FBI agent said the con was simple: Investors were lured by promises of stellar returns, only to see their money pay for his extravagance. 
Brad Nettles Wearing an understated business suit, Al Parish approaches the federal courthouse in Charleston on Friday with his lawyer, Andy Savage, (left) and his brother, Johnny Parish. Al Parish admitted guilt to investment fraud. Cash accounts that showed huge holdings and bullish, market-beating returns later were "proven to be fictitious," special agent Frank Worrell said. Parish squandered nearly $90 million from about 460 investors in what the government called a massive Ponzi scheme. His personal wardrobe alone was valued at $2 million. His chartered-jet travel bills ran as high as $1 million, authorities said. On Friday, Parish wore a business suit to court, abandoning for the first time the garish colors and ornate patterns that were his calling card as a forecaster in Charleston's business community. "I'm changing my plea on three of the charges, from not guilty to guilty," Parish acknowledged to U.S. District Judge David Norton. "Got any second thoughts?" Norton asked Parish, 50. He said he did not. Parish pleaded to two counts of mail fraud, which draw a maximum 20-year sentence each plus fines of $250,000. Those charges stem from false account statements that he sent to investors that far overstated their earnings. He also confessed to one count of providing false information to the Securities and Exchange Commission, giving it "manufactured" investment accounts totals, a five-year felony. In exchange for his plea, the other eight fraud charges were dropped by the U.S. Attorney's Office. Even with the total number of counts being reduced, Parish still faces significant jail time, prosecutors contend. Norton will consider all of Parish's criminal fraud dealings at his sentencing, which probably won't take place until early 2008. Estimates suggest that Parish could receive a jail term of 15 years or higher in a federal prison, based on the government's sentencing guidelines. The exact amount of the victims' loss will be determined later. He'll also have to pay restitution, although it is highly doubtful the losses can be repaid in full. Friday's developmentsWhat: Former Charleston Southern University economist Albert E. Parish Jr. pleaded guilty to two counts of mail fraud and one count of making a false statement to the Securities and Exchange Commission surrounding his collapsed investment pools. The deal: In exchange for the guilty plea, prosecutors dropped eight other charges. Possible penalties: Parish could be fined up to $250,000 and imprisoned for up to 20 years for each of the mail fraud counts, and could face five years and a fine of $250,000 for the false statement charge. A former federal prosecutor told The Post and Courier this week that Parish probably is looking at about 15 1/2 years in prison. Paying back investors: Parish also is required to make restitution, but an attorney collecting Parish's assets said investors could receive less than 20 cents on the dollar for the money they entrusted to him. Sentencing: Likely early next year. "He's going to be held accountable for every dollar lost," Assistant U.S. Attorney Charlie Bourne said. In the meantime, Parish remains free on bond, staying with his family in Hollywood. Friday's sentencing drew several angry investors who said Parish's deal is far too lenient. "Let him get a year for every million dollars he stole; that would be fair," said Louis Hooffstetter, who together with his mother lost $330,000 to Parish, most of which was his mother's life savings. Hooffstetter questioned the need for a plea. "The case is a slam dunk," he said. Parish was arrested in April after federal investigators began looking into his offerings of unregistered investment "pools." The pools were purported to invest in futures, bonds, stocks and hard assets, though Parish did little trading and put most of the deposits in a private account. Clients included friends, family and even the savings of his employer, CSU. Outside the courthouse, Parish's lawyer, Andy Savage, said his client was ready to accept responsibility. "The plea represents the truth," he said. "Al has always been interested in being fair — fair to himself, fair to his family and fair to all the people involved in this." Parish still is being treated for amnesia, which he said he suffered from as investigators moved in. While the push to turn Parish's remaining seized assets into cash continues, investigators said they probably will return less than 20 cents on the dollar to each investor. About $2.8 million has been collected so far, but six homes and condominiums have yet to be sold, as are a number of valuable coins, animation art, pens and furniture pieces, primarily because they are rare and select items that need special markets. "Our hope is that we will be cutting checks by this time next year," said David Dantlzer, an attorney for the receiver that is tracing and collecting Parish's wealth. Selling the homes might prove fruitless for investors because of the depressed market and the large amount of mortgage debt they are carrying, Dantzler added. "There's not going to be a happy ending for anybody," he said. Reach Schuyler Kropf at 937-5551 or skropf@postandcourier.com. |
Article tools
Sponsored Links |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our Web site. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 26 comment(s)
|
Posted by formercharlestonianinduluth on October 6, 2007 at 2:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Is anyone surprised? Here is a con-artist that steals millions, ruins lives and he walks away with 15 years. I will be surprised if he does that.
Also, what is with Judge Norton purchasing cufflinks at the big sale this past summer. I read he purchased more than $700 worth. Where I come from, this is a conflict of interest and very unethical.
Guess it is true! An attorney I worked for in Charleston many, many years ago said, "if you have enough money, you can get away with anything in Charleston."
So, Al, you keep smiling for the cameras, going to St. Matthew's Church every Sunday with your family (looks so good) and enjoy your few years in a cozy federal prison. If you come to Minnesota, maybe I will stop by and say "Hi". I would like to ask how you can look at yourself in the mirror much less walk the streets of Charleston and see all the people you defrauded! You are a pathetic excuse of a human.
Posted by Neponset on October 6, 2007 at 3:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This man is guilty of "grand breach of trust". Why is there not a simple statue on the books that addresses this crime with very stiff punishment for the same, instead of having to resort to charges of mail fraud etc.? There is a lot of this going on and it needs to be written into the laws (at both state and fed. levels).
Lets hope Norton wears those cuff links on the day of sentencing and gives Al a stiff one that sends a clear message to all the folks who are intrusted with other peoples money.
Al doesn't look so good in a plain business suit.
Posted by whalernut on October 6, 2007 at 6:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hang him in the market.
Did this slug pay taxes?
Where is that money?
He should be in jail right now.
Posted by Mayor on October 6, 2007 at 6:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The only person to come out of this ok is the one who bought the life insurance policies on Al.
Posted by idennis on October 6, 2007 at 7:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So did simple greed impede these extremely well off people to want more and more money or did ole Al twist their vitual arms with his smooth talking ways???
Second point... why is it surprizing to find Flashy Al buying his way to a short "vacation" paid for by the normal (not well off) taxpayers???
Personally I think ole Al is a flashy high dollar con man but I find it hard in my heart to feel true sorrow for a man with 30 mil to invest 29 of it so he can have 90 mil and happens to loose it. Just how much does it take to live extremely comfortable in this life.
But it does make for a good P and C story for those of us who can scrape up the price of a newspaper...
But thats just my humble dollarnaire opinion...
Posted by postman01 on October 6, 2007 at 7:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I went to Porter Gaud with Al and I can sssure everyone here of the following: Most of us never really liked him as he always had other things to do, such as not hanging with us socially. Speaking for myself, I never thought he was quite right although he was extremely bright and made good grades. To see him misuse his brains and the A+++ education he received from PG as well as his later studies in this manner enrages me and also confirms my judgment from all those years ago.
Posted by sjmehlhose on October 6, 2007 at 7:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So, what happened to his pimp outfit?
Posted by SomeTruthPlease on October 6, 2007 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I have always heard good things about his parents from the Hollywood/Ravenel area...my father said they are some of the nicest people you could ever hope to meet. I think it's not only horrible the way he swindled so many people, but I doubt that he was ever prepared for the trauma he was putting his parents through. Their golden years are not so golden anymore, I'm sure their ages will prevent them from being able to visit him in a federal prison, nor will they be able to prepare themselves for what you have to go through just to be able to visit. I'm hoping that Al is haunted by the faces of not just the people that fell victim to him, but of his parents as well, that gave him everything he wanted just to leave him wanting more.
Posted by jammer on October 6, 2007 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
so why was it no one actually checked up on thier money all this time, until he got busted?
I'll get a statement later, or back to you later over and over just wasn't a smart thing for all those investors to allow
IMHO all those investors should have been paying better attention all the while...
all those that lost money to this con need their own sign handed to them
and a plea deal? why exactly was that needed when they had a locked case? ahhh crowded jails, that's right
Posted by seneca264 on October 6, 2007 at 10:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This man is a vile piece of filth. Don't forget that many investors are now void of their retirement money. This "white collar" crime should be viewed in a different light. This man caused a lot of pain to a lot of people. This pig should be given a mandantory life sentence as a minimum. This is why these crooks keep doing this type of crime. To them, crime pays.
Posted by idennis on October 6, 2007 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sorry seneca... I think Al is crap but can't bring myself to feel for someone who had 30 million trying to get 90 million and only has a million left ....
Posted by Tulane75 on October 6, 2007 at 11:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Anyone who believes that a sentence has already been set is wrong. The AMOUNT of the loss will play a significant role in determining the sentencing guideline, which at present, is only advisory, whatever that means. The number of victims will also be important. The number of charges to which he pleads guilty is most probably less important than the loss amount.
The comments of the guy from Duluth are anger driven and misleading. In his career on the Bench, Judge Norton has treated this type of case (like all others) very seriously, which means that he will follow the law and give an appropriate sentence. People who deserve “breaks” get them and people who don’t deserve a break…don’t.Either way, Judge Norton makes every effort to give a sentence that follows the law, which these days, isn't so easy since the law of sentencing changes like the the tides.
Duluth is acting like congress by attacking a federal judge for no reason other than to impress someone, he included.
Why don't you wait until the case plays out instead of imagining things about which to complain or attack people unfairly? (I am not talking about the Defendant here; Say whatever you want.)
Posted by kerwin1959 on October 6, 2007 at 11:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
OK, so he cut a deal with the feds. They mention the few millions that were spent on clothes and chartered jets, but people, what in the h**l did he do with the other $87 million?
Years ago, we had an employee embezzle almost $200,000, and the frustration we had was that they were not forced to account for where every last dime of the money was taken. We're still convinced it is hidden somewhere, except for the $954 we've received as restitution.
Big Al has probably done the same thing..........hidden his money somewhere. He'll be sentenced to around 15 years, serve 3-5, and then be free to come home and do it again.
Posted by jeffyoung007 on October 6, 2007 at 12:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There is not going to be a happy ending for anybody...except Dantzler and his pack of wolves.
Posted by Neponset on October 6, 2007 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
kerwin1959
Early investors who cashed in got a lot of the money - think about it, Al reported big gains, but had little or no gain, so when investors took their money off the table, he had to dip into the pot.
Posted by trying2understand on October 6, 2007 at 12:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hhhmmm???
Property crime = jail time.
Violent offenses against people = probation!
Go figure?
Posted by Reader on October 6, 2007 at 12:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What was unethical about Judge Norton's buying a pair of cufflinks at a public auction, Duluth? How would having made the winning bid lead him to change his treatment of Al? How would that even lead to a possible appearance of impropriety? I don't get it.
Posted by Charlestonman on October 6, 2007 at 1:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
obviously this guy is a scumbag, but what's with the fat jokes? "Big Al?" what does his size have to do with his crimes? I love how fat people are the last group of people it is acceptable to discriminate against. If Al was black and people posted "dark-faced Al," there would be an uproar
Posted by libertarian on October 6, 2007 at 1:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just a comment on the tone of some posters here....
Wealth envy is not becoming.
It is true that some of Al's 'investors' were quite wealthy. I personally know some who weren't. Who put in 10,000 or so in hopes of bettering their retirement or to send the kids to a better school. Al was an equal opportunity thief. He took from anyone who crossed his path, from college presidents to secretaries and everyone in between.
Should his 'investors' have asked more questions about his improbable rates of return. Absolutely. Were they motivated (at least somewhat) by greed? Absolutely.
But does that mitigate his guilt? Not at all. Stealing is stealing, whether it is taking a million from the South of Broad crowd, or a thousand from the janitor.
Shame on those who enjoy seeing people with more money than them getting taken. It says more about them than Al.
That said, 40 years jail would not be enough, much less 15.
Posted by SuzieQJones on October 6, 2007 at 4:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
1. Al Parish & Yolanda Yoder's company paid satisfied clients for years before all of this happened. There was no reason not to believe in Parish Economics. 2. Who are these people that were told they would earn 30 or 40% on their investments? The investors that I know of were only told 9 or 10%. Perhaps those who earned 30 or 40% could share... 3. Hays LLC is supposed to be one of the best of its kind. The Receivership has handled this case according to what the law dictates. 4. The Parish/Yoder's have done so much damage, some of these people will never recover. A terrible thing.
Posted by lillycollette on October 6, 2007 at 5:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, now that Parish is down to sentencing maybe now the A.G. can get on to -- other -- fraud cases still waiting in the wings (hint, hint).
Posted by kennyt on October 6, 2007 at 6:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"He's going to be held accountable for every dollar lost," Assistant U.S. Attorney Charlie Bourne said
He'll also have to pay restitution, although it is highly doubtful the losses can be repaid in full.
Both of these statements are in this article so which one is true?
I thought for anybody to make money in the market someone either had to lose money and you get it or someone might buy the products and thats makes you money as for me I will not take that risk there are too many crooks in the stock market and Al was one of them. A few years back Hillary Clinton played the market and invested 1 hundred and got back 10 thousand and then she got out, so I know someone lost 10 thousand that day.
Posted by Perspective on October 7, 2007 at 10:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I see someone said"Big Al" and someone took offense to this as not being politically correct and a discriminatory statement against "persons who are excessively weight challenged". Guess what? Big Al is a fat glutton who got that way off of money stolen from from a variety of people including little old ladies. At least people who sell crack are selling it to people who know they are buying crack. This guy deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison on a diet with no personally owned possessions. Parole should not even be considered until every victim has been re-imbursed and agree to his release. I am sure some of his investors were greedy and should have known better, but many were merely people that he knowingly deceived. It isn't about Big Al being fat - but he is - so get over it.
Posted by Two_Sheds on October 8, 2007 at 11:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
They ought to fry him in his own fat. 'Nuff said.
Posted by nana666 on October 8, 2007 at 1:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Does Andy Savage just think we are all really stupid-Al has always been interested in being fair-Is there something wrong with that statement? Asst. U.S. Attorney Bourne said he is going to be held accountable for every dollar lost, does that mean he's going to be monitored after he comes out of prison to make sure he doesn't get to live the rest of his life off the money that he has hidden?
Posted by NCWT on October 8, 2007 at 6:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Can someone please explain the following:
1) Why is Yolanda Yoder not under indictment? She clearly benefited from Parrish's massive theft. According to court filings and this newspaper, she directed an employee to make transfers to avoid detection by federal authorities? Not only has she not been indicted, she has been able, with the court's permission, to use thousands of dollars of stolen investor funds to support herself and her children.
2) Who does a plea including imaginary, never to be paid restitution benefit other than Parrish and Yoder?
3) Finally, what sense does it make to spend what little remains of the stolen investor funds to pay attorneys and accountants to catalog the theft?