Forgery Of Counterfeit Financial Securities
Legal Principles of Forgery of Financial Securities
Definition of Forgery
Forgery refers to the intentional act of creating or altering documents with the intent to deceive others or commit fraud. In the case of financial securities, forgery can involve actions such as:
Creating fake financial instruments (e.g., bonds, promissory notes, stocks).
Altering legitimate financial instruments to change the value or ownership.
Using forged securities to gain access to assets or funds fraudulently.
Elements of Forgery in Financial Securities
Intent to Defraud: The defendant must have had the intent to deceive the victim or to misappropriate funds.
Knowledge of the Forgery: The defendant must know that the instrument is forged or altered, or have been willfully blind to the possibility.
Use of the Forged Instrument: The forged financial instrument must be used in a fraudulent transaction for it to be criminal.
Penalties
Criminal Penalties: Forgery of financial securities is typically classified as a felony, punishable by significant fines and imprisonment.
Civil Liability: In addition to criminal charges, victims of financial securities fraud may also pursue civil remedies for damages.
Global Scope
Forgery of financial securities is a crime that can occur across borders, and there are various international treaties (e.g., UNODC, Interpol) that help address such crimes transnationally.
Case Law Examples
1. United States v. Treadway (1994)
Facts
Defendant: Treadway was involved in forging U.S. Treasury bonds and attempting to sell them to an investor.
He altered the bonds by falsifying signatures and using fake corporate seals in an attempt to pass them off as legitimate U.S. government securities.
Legal Findings
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Treadway's conviction for forgery of financial securities under the U.S. Criminal Code (18 U.S.C. § 514).
The court ruled that the defendant's actions constituted intent to defraud because he had presented the securities with the purpose of gaining financial benefits.
Outcome
Treadway was sentenced to imprisonment and ordered to pay restitution to the victims of the forgery.
Significance
This case illustrates the importance of intent to defraud in proving financial securities forgery and highlights the severity of penalties for such crimes in the U.S.
2. R v. Williams (2002), United Kingdom
Facts
Defendant: Williams, a financial trader, was accused of forging banknotes and stock certificates. He created counterfeit stocks and bonds in an attempt to mislead buyers in an international investment scheme.
The forged securities were purported to represent shares in well-known companies, but upon investigation, they were found to be fraudulent.
Legal Findings
The court ruled that Williams was guilty of forging financial instruments with the intent to defraud. Under the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981, forgery of financial instruments is a criminal offense.
The key issue was whether the securities in question were presented to defraud investors. The court found that the defendant had forged both stock certificates and bonds to misappropriate large sums of money.
Outcome
Williams was convicted and sentenced to prison. Additionally, the court ordered the forfeiture of proceeds obtained through fraudulent activities.
Significance
This case demonstrates how fraudulent securities schemes can have wide-reaching effects on both domestic and international markets, emphasizing the need for rigorous checks in financial transactions.
3. People v. Lopez (2010), California
Facts
Defendant: Lopez, a businessman, created a series of forged checks and bonds in an attempt to defraud investors out of millions of dollars.
Lopez used forged bonds from fictitious government programs to mislead multiple investors into purchasing non-existent financial products.
Legal Findings
The California Court of Appeal affirmed Lopez's conviction for forgery and obtaining money by false pretenses. The court determined that Lopez's actions were intentional and aimed at deceiving victims through the use of counterfeit government bonds.
Outcome
Lopez was sentenced to prison and ordered to pay restitution to the victims of his fraudulent activities.
Significance
This case underscores the significant role of due diligence in financial markets, and how even high-value fraudulent instruments like government bonds can be counterfeited.
4. United States v. Rosenthal (2011)
Facts
Defendant: Rosenthal, a financial executive, orchestrated a Ponzi scheme involving forged stock certificates from nonexistent companies.
The defendant created fake stock certificates and sold them as real to unsuspecting investors, claiming that the funds would be used to purchase shares in legitimate businesses.
Legal Findings
The court held that Rosenthal was guilty of forgery under 18 U.S.C. § 514 for creating and using fake financial securities. The court also found that his actions fit the definition of fraudulent misrepresentation, a separate charge under U.S. law.
Outcome
Rosenthal was sentenced to over 10 years in federal prison for his role in the fraudulent scheme and ordered to pay restitution.
Significance
This case is an example of how corporate fraud can often involve the forging of financial securities, particularly when perpetrators leverage fake stock certificates to deceive investors.
5. The Case of the “Russian Treasury Bonds” (2004)
Facts
Defendants: A group of financial fraudsters operating in Europe. They presented forged Russian treasury bonds to several banks and financial institutions across Europe.
They managed to get millions of dollars in loans by presenting counterfeit Russian government bonds as collateral.
Legal Findings
Investigators discovered that the bonds were forged copies of legitimate Russian treasury securities. The Russian government had never issued such bonds, and the counterfeit securities were intended to pass off as high-value instruments.
The European Court of Justice ruled that the defendants were guilty of forgery of financial securities and fraud.
Outcome
The individuals were convicted and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. They were also ordered to pay restitution to the victims (banks and financial institutions).
Significance
This case highlights the international nature of forging financial securities and the complex legal mechanisms required to tackle such crimes that involve multiple jurisdictions.
6. The “Tokyo Stock Exchange” Forgery Case (2015)
Facts
Defendant: An insider at a large investment firm forged stock certificates representing shares in companies listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange.
The forged certificates were presented to investors in Japan and abroad, and they were used to gain illegal profits through the sale of non-existent shares.
Legal Findings
The Tokyo District Court found the defendant guilty of forgery of financial securities under Japan's Penal Code. The court emphasized the intent to defraud as a key element in the conviction.
Outcome
The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment and the company was required to improve its internal controls to prevent similar forgeries in the future.
Significance
This case demonstrates the significant impact of forgery in financial markets, particularly when insiders exploit their position to forge securities and cause wide-scale market manipulation.
Key Takeaways
Intent to Defraud is a critical element in proving forgery in financial securities cases. Without evidence of fraudulent intent, the defendant may not be found guilty.
Cross-Border Implications: Forgery of financial securities often involves multiple jurisdictions, as seen in cases involving international financial institutions (e.g., in the Russian Treasury Bond case and the Tokyo Stock Exchange case).
Penalties for Forgery: These cases demonstrate that penalties for forging financial instruments can be severe, including imprisonment, restitution, and loss of professional licenses.
Preventive Measures: Corporations and financial institutions must implement rigorous checks and balances to detect forged securities, including authentication protocols for verifying stock certificates, bonds, and other financial instruments.
Reputational Damage: Beyond legal penalties, companies involved in these frauds often suffer reputational damage that can significantly affect their operations.
RELATED Blog
comments