IBJNews

Feds say wiretaps show evidence of financial plot

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A federal judge in Indianapolis refused to throw out wiretap evidence in the $200 million fraud trial of a former Indiana businessman as the government outlined a case largely based on those recordings.

U.S. District Court Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on Monday rejected arguments for the defense that the FBI had failed to show probable cause before obtaining permission for the wiretaps.

Transcripts of about a dozen of the wiretaps included in a brief filed Friday by the government show financier Tim Durham and his business partners discussing how to hide from investors that Fair Finance was running out of money in 2009, prosecutors said. Meanwhile the partners were raiding the company to finance their lavish lifestyles and unsuccessful businesses, prosecutors said.

Magnus-Stinson's rejection marked the second time in the past month that Durham's attorneys have come up short in getting the wiretap evidence thrown out.

In a phone conversation on Nov. 9, 2009, Durham and partner James F. Cochran agreed to close the Ohio offices of Fair Finance with no advance notice, using Veterans Day as an excuse. According to the government filing, they were really trying to conceal the fact that there wasn't enough money to pay customers when their investments came due.

"So we're going to buy a day," Cochran told Durham in a phone call, according to the transcripts. "And I told (a Fair Finance employee) ... make sure you don't tell customers in advance."

"Why?" Durham asked.

"He said 'cause they will run in on Tuesday," Cochran said.

"Oh yeah, good story," Durham said, according to the transcript.

In yet another recorded phone call, Durham recommended to another partner, Rick D. Snow, that they overwhelm an Ohio securities official with paperwork to get regulators to approve $250 million in investment certificates.

"My guess is the guy at the State of Ohio isn't a financial genius," Durham said, according to the transcript.

"Yeah, no, I think you're right," Snow said.

"And I think if we absorb, eh, you know, overwhelm him with stuff, that may be the better approach," Durham said. "What do you think?"

"Yeah, I don't know. I ..." Snow said.

"You know: lists and lists and lists of investments," Durham said, according to the transcript.

Durham's lawyer, John L. Tompkins, called the wiretap transcripts misleading in an interview with The Indianapolis Star on Monday. He said the FBI recorded more than 1,800 phone conversations but filed transcripts of only 19 conversations.

"We're confident that when people hear the full conversations, not just the government's excerpts of some of the conversations, it will be clear there is no conspiracy to commit any kind of fraud," Tompkins said.

"They know the filings that they make are going to be read by the press," Tompkins told The Associated Press on Tuesday. "And I think what they want to do is exactly what they did ... get four sentences ... on the front page of the newspaper."

Tompkins said he disagreed with the order rejecting the motion to suppress the wiretaps, but added, "I think the judge did a good, thorough job going through everything we presented."

Durham, Cochran and Snow, were indicted last year on 10 counts of wire fraud, one count of securities fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit wire and securities fraud. Their trial is scheduled for June 8.

Magnus-Stinson last month rejected Durham's request that she dismiss the charges against him because he said the wiretaps were illegal.

Attorneys for Cochran and Snow did not return phone calls seeking comment Tuesday.

All of IBJ's coverage of the Durham case can be found here.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. RKW's comments read like a modern "Chicken Little". As a Raintree resident for many years, "Yes, I'm ready for this." Matter of fact, I welcome The Farm because it's a development that compliments our town, brings new and desirable shopping & dining closer (specialty grocer, upscale shops, micro brew pub, etc), offers upscale condos for empty nesters who want to stay in Zionsville, is being planned and constructed by local, well-reputed firms and, of course, provides desirable non property tax benefits. We all knew the Pittman's were going to develop their property sooner than later. That one of the Pittman's will continue to live on the property helps assure The Farm will be everything promised. This also sets a standard for other developers as to the quality of future developments - which should keep an ugly Walmart at bay for decades. As we've no meglomaniac mayor, I seriously doubt Zionsville would ever aspire to over-priced statues or subsidized retail rents. And we already have a very nice public theater, the Zionsville Performing Arts Center, that meets our cultural needs quite nicely.

  2. Do we add (or subtract) these from the bounty we recieve from RTWFL, Daylight Savings Time, corporate tax giveaways, and the crack job IEDC is doing?? Or is Mike going to blame these on Mitch?

  3. Who makes Tater Tots? They would be a good sponsor, because $3 Million for the alleged "Greatest Spectacle In Racing" is taters. Tiny, tiny taters. But at least they are making up something of the losses accumulated over the years in this dying sport. Buttock in seat is certainly not doing it, nor eyeball on TV, as evidenced by the lack of both.

  4. We loved lakehouse and think the Arbor Village would be a great location. It is less than 2 miles from over 1000 rooftops in the 225,000 to over 1 million range. Many people could use the great fishers trail system to bike or walk there. Just an idea Scotty -- but maybe something closer to 3 Wiseman would good. The only microbrew in area is Ram (boring)

  5. True, it's an ESPN production, but ESPN is just another name for ABC Sports, or what used to be ABC Sports since ABC Sports no longer exists as a name. ESPN=ABC Sports= ESPN. ESPN is, according to Forbes "the world's most valuable media property" worth $40 billion. Despite that, they fired 400 people this week.

ADVERTISEMENT