US says accused Apple manager should forfeit $1M in kickbacks
Prosecutors for the U.S. government have argued that Paul Devine, the Apple global supply manager charged in a massive kickback scheme, should forfeit all of the more than $1 million he is believed to have received in exchange for company secrets.
According to Bloomberg, prosecutors are seeking the forfeiture of about $950,000 investigators have seized from as many as six different bank accounts, though they are still tracing funds. They are also looking to obtain a Porsche Cayenne -- a vehicle that starts at nearly $50,000.
Devine was granted bail in September, when he posted a $440,000 lien against his mother's home. He also paid more than $600,000 from overseas bank accounts owned by him and his wife.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michelle Kane told U.S. District Judge James Ware that the government needs more time to analyze computers seized from Devine. Tracking the money has been difficult, but investigators have accused Devine of accepting more than $1 million in kickbacks.
Devine, who worked for Apple since 2005, is also facing a civil suit from his employer. The company also alleges that he received more than $1 million in bribes and payments for his assistance to overseas suppliers.
The 37-year-old manager has been charged with wire fraud, kickbacks and money laundering. In all, he faces 23 counts, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Prosecutors said that each count of wire fraud, wire-fraud conspiracy and money laundering carries a 20-year prison sentence. They have alleged that Devine used his security clearance to sell confidential information to overseas suppliers, and the companies then allegedly used that knowledge to negotiate favorable contracts with Apple.
According to Bloomberg, prosecutors are seeking the forfeiture of about $950,000 investigators have seized from as many as six different bank accounts, though they are still tracing funds. They are also looking to obtain a Porsche Cayenne -- a vehicle that starts at nearly $50,000.
Devine was granted bail in September, when he posted a $440,000 lien against his mother's home. He also paid more than $600,000 from overseas bank accounts owned by him and his wife.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michelle Kane told U.S. District Judge James Ware that the government needs more time to analyze computers seized from Devine. Tracking the money has been difficult, but investigators have accused Devine of accepting more than $1 million in kickbacks.
Devine, who worked for Apple since 2005, is also facing a civil suit from his employer. The company also alleges that he received more than $1 million in bribes and payments for his assistance to overseas suppliers.
The 37-year-old manager has been charged with wire fraud, kickbacks and money laundering. In all, he faces 23 counts, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Prosecutors said that each count of wire fraud, wire-fraud conspiracy and money laundering carries a 20-year prison sentence. They have alleged that Devine used his security clearance to sell confidential information to overseas suppliers, and the companies then allegedly used that knowledge to negotiate favorable contracts with Apple.
Comments
The 37-year-old manager has ben charged with wire fraud, kickbacks and money laundering. In all, he faces 23 counts, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Who's ben?
Proof reading wtf
So does Apple get the forfeited $1M?
You must be kidding - with the good ole US Govt. typically forfeitures are kept be the govt to "help fight crime" cough-cough. I read about all the seizures of goods that a made and the govt almost always gets the proceeds unless they "victim" can show a loss. I suspect that is what Apple's civil lawsuit is all about. The govt won't want be voluntarily giving any money to anybody in a case like this - its is where part of the feds crime fighting budget comes from (there is an incentive for them to catch the big drug guys with the cash, etc.).
Try getting something back that was seized also - I have a relative that purchased a boat in Florida from a US Coast Guard auction in the 80's. It had apparently been used as a smuggling boat for pot and still had a few seeds in the lower compartment. The Coast Guard came thru about 2-3 days after the purchase and was doing "random" searches. They found pot seeds (surprise) - well this was in the good ole ZERO tolerance days so the Coast Guard said they had to seize the boat. When he said he could produce papers to show that it was purchased from them if given a few hours he was given a sarcastic reply of "sure". When they papers were produced later the same day the Coast Guard officer explained that he "heard that all the time" so he didn't buy it - the boat had been seized and they would have to file the paperwork to get it back. He did same and 2 years and a couple months later was finally notified that the boat was able to be released to him - after he paid a rather large impound fee. The vessel had not been stored properly and had lost about half its value (total of $65K US) so he let it go back to auction and cut his losses. No apology no nothing - no Apple wan't be getting any money from the govt.
You must be kidding - with the good ole US Govt. typically forfeitures are kept be the govt to "help fight crime" cough-cough. I read about all the seizures of goods that a made and the govt almost always gets the proceeds unless they "victim" can show a loss. I suspect that is what Apple's civil lawsuit is all about. The govt won't want be voluntarily giving any money to anybody in a case like this - its is where part of the feds crime fighting budget comes from (there is an incentive for them to catch the big drug guys with the cash, etc.).
.
So is it not a given that this guy will lose the money? I mean why the debate? I always thought that if you earned the money through illegal means the govt. kept it if you got caught - and that was the law.
Why are the prosecutors asking permission from the courts?
Thanks
JDS
So is it not a given that this guy will lose the money? I mean why the debate? I always thought that if you earned the money through illegal means the govt. kept it if you got caught - and that was the law.
Why are the prosecutors asking permission from the courts?
Thanks
JDS
IMHO I suspect its cause you tend to have to ask for everything, e.g., a recommendation as a part of the record if any attempted plea deal were to be worked out. The prosecutor also needs to specify the amount of funds they expect to recover and from where and then the defense gets to say oh that was money he made from his baseball card collection...
Cheers
...Try getting something back that was seized also - I have a relative that purchased a boat in Florida from a US Coast Guard auction in the 80's. It had apparently been used as a smuggling boat for pot and still had a few seeds in the lower compartment....When he said he could produce papers to show that it was purchased from them if given a few hours he was given a sarcastic reply of "sure". When they papers were produced later the same day the Coast Guard officer explained that he "heard that all the time" so he didn't buy it - the boat had been seized and they would have to file the paperwork to get it back. He did same and 2 years and a couple months later ,,,.
WTF. Your relative couldn't find a lawyer in FL?
That's not how it works. USCG/DEA are responsible to make sure the boat is 100% clean when they sell it. Grab documentation, march back over to CG district office w lawyer in tow, demand they clean boat and return with compensation for loss of use and escalate from there. Or, let 'em keep the boat and return the funds from the flawed auction.
...if Apple gave it's credulous customers a refund for the Apple Tax on all the products they've bought over the years. But I don't see that happening.
You don't need to buy Apple products, your choice.
Go for the alternative if you want to pay less, otherwise....
You don't need to buy Apple products, your choice.
Go for the alternative if you want to pay less, otherwise....
***
Oh man, you guys are so easy...
...if Apple gave it's credulous customers a refund for the Apple Tax on all the products they've bought over the years. But I don't see that happening.
Get real.... It's no different then the Bose Tax or the Jaguar Tax or the B&O Tax or the Tiffany Tax or the Rolex Tax or any number of other brands that are known for their exclusive and/or high end reputation.
You want spaghettios instead of pasta primavera then be my guest lots and lots of people in america anyway will likely be quite happy with the same 'can-o-spaghetti' and BTW ... I hear they also sell "cheese in a pressurized can" thats just delightful.
You want spaghettios instead of pasta primavera then be my guest lots and lots of people in america anyway will likely be quite happy with the same 'can-o-spaghetti' and BTW ... I hear they also sell "cheese in a pressurized can" thats just delightful.
CheezWhiz - what a wonderful invention! LOL