Not sure if this was posted ever...
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
United States of America,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Jeanette B. Wilcher,
Defendant.
No. CR03-1098-PHX-EHC
MOTION IN LIMINE
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I. Factual Overview
Jeanette Wilcher is facing an eight-count indictment for alleged violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343, 1956(a)(1)(A)(i), and 1957. Simply stated, the government alleges that Ms. Wilcher as trustee for Life Foundation Trust (LFT) defrauded Connie Gillaspie out of $3.3 million, and then converted that money to her own purposes. More specifically, the government claims that Ms. Wilcher enlisted an “innocent” third party (Sansea Inc.) to entice Gillaspie into a bogus high yield investment program through a series of misrepresentations about the program.
There are five sets of participants in this case. The first is the alleged victim, Connie Gillaspie. Gillaspie is an 80+ year old woman who contracted with Sansea, Inc., to invest $3.3 million in a high yield investment program. The second is Rex Allen. Mr. Allen is the nephew of Gillaspie. He orchestrated his aunt’s investment with Sansea. The third, Sansea Inc., consists of Robert Ponikvar and J.D. Surber. Sansea contracted with Ms. Gillaspie to invest her money in a high yield investment program. The fourth, Life Foundation Trust (LFT), with Jeanette Wilcher as its trustee, separately contracted with Sansea for investment purposes. The fifth is Carr & Associates/Royalty Products, which consists of Larry Carr and Richard Gonzales. They operate out of Florida and have done previous business with Rex Allen (who brought them into his aunt’s investment with Sansea).
Carr also became involved in Gillaspie’s subsequent efforts to recoup her money. In January 1999, Gillaspie met with Allen, Ponikvar, Surber, Carr, and Gonzales in Phoenix. She signed a contract with Sansea, agreeing to enter their investment program, and subsequently wired $3.3 million to their account in Nevada. Subsequently, the principals of Sansea contracted with LFT/Wilcher for investment purposes and they wired $3.3 million to an LFT account in New Jersey. By May 1999, Gillaspie became dissatisfied with the program and demanded the return of her principal and her expected proceeds generated by the investment. In October 1999, Gillaspie filed a federal civil suit [1] against Sansea, Ponikvar, Surber, LFT, and Ms. Wilcher (Gonzales was later added as a defendant). In November 2001, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) also filed a Complaint [2] in the Central District of California, relating to alleged securities violations involving a company called Hitsgalore.com/Stephen Bradford, and LFT/Wilcher.
It does not appear that the government has filed any Notice [3] of its intent to introduce “bad acts” evidence; however, this motion is filed out of an abundance of caution. The court should preclude evidence relating to these extraneous matters.
[1] On September 11, 1 2003, Gillaspie was awarded judgment against LFT/Wilcher. Previously, Sansea and its principals stipulated to judgment and were dismissed from the case, and Gonzales and his company were dismissed from the case.
[2] On July 29, 2002, the SEC was granted summary judgment and a permanent injunction against LFT/Wilcher. Previously, Hitsgalore.com/Bradford consented to entry of a permanent injunction.
[3] The defense has separately requested specific notice of the Government’s intent to offer “bad acts” evidence under Rule 404(b).
...
C. This Court Should Preclude Any Information Pertaining to Allegations of Uncharged Misconduct As “Other Bad Acts.”
On March 15, 2005, this Court denied the Government’s motion to cross examine Ms. Wilcher, pursuant to F.R.Ev. 608,with uncharged and severed misconduct – specifically, alleged fraud involving Wells Fargo Bank, false identity, and Hitsgalore. [4] Separate pleadings were filed relating to tax information, but defense counsel does not know the outcome of those motions.
No Rule 404(b) Notice has been filed by the government; accordingly, no “bad acts” evidence should be allowed at trial.
[4] The Hitsgalore issues relate to Count 8, which has been severed for a separate trial.
alabamaagainstfraud.com |
