Con man now too poor to pay fines

| 05/03/2012

05.1n021.richdeadbeat2 (215x275).jpg(New York Post): Multimillionaire fraudster Myron Gushlak blew millions of dollars on his Cayman Islands estate, Bentley and Porsche collections and private jet while out on bail — and now claims he doesn’t owe his New York victims and others a dime. Lawyers for the disgraced Canadian money man have already appeared in Brooklyn federal court to claim that he’s too broke to pony up a $25 million fine. Today, they’ll be arguing that victims of his “pump and dump’’ schemes were simply on the wrong end of a bad economy, so they don’t deserve any of the $17.5 million in restitution that the feds are demanding of him.

In 2009, the year before he was scheduled to be sentenced, Gushlak showed his worth at nearly $90 million. He then blew a massive chunk of it while free on bail, according to documents filed in the Cayman Island courts and obtained by The Post. Living in a palatial seafront manse in the Cayman Islands dubbed Casa Coyaba, he jetted around in a Hawker 800 XP executive plane, making lease payments of $15,000 each month, records show.

Go to article
 

Category: World News

Comments (64)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    Don't worry be happy, and every little thing gonna be alll right.  The Cayman will always welcome and harbour crooked guys (politicaly correct put he or she).  This is the nature of this island and Caribbean as well.  There is no loyalty in business, marriage, etc. etc. business as usual (aka SNAFU), one needs to show greens and lawyers and significat democratically elected others will jump backward to accommodate whatever needs substantially-stuffed-regardless-of-source may have.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Just as an aside:   

     

    From Mirriam-Webster, the definition of "manse":

    1.   archaic:  The dwelling of a householder

    2.   The residence of a minister, especially a Presbyterian minister.

    3.   a large imposing residence.   

     

    It IS a large, imposing residence, ergo a manse.  

    • Dick Shaugneary says:

      The Oxford English Dictionary certainly does not include "definition" number 3.  Merriam-Webster is a ghastly source of reference.  Any tome that includes the word "gotten" as a free-standing past participle can be consigned to the bin (or the trash if you really have to prefer).

      • Anonymous says:

        I think that that reflects that it is American usage and the article was in an American newspaper.

      • Bottom says:

        "Gotten" is not bad English, it is old English, used by Shakespeare et al. It has simply slipped out of common usage in the UK, though not in the US.

        • M Ployer says:

          If one of my staff used "gotten" in a letter I would give them a formal warning.  It is ghastly.

          • Anonymous says:

            Then, M Ployer, you is a hidjut!

          • Anonymous says:

            If one of my staff members used the word "ghastly" to describe an archaic (but perfectly acceptable) use of the past participle, I would fire her on the spot.   It is both elitist and a rather irritating exaggeration of the case.

             

            By the by, you should perhaps have written, "…I would give him (or her) a formal warning."  The word "them" is plural, and does not agree with "one".

            • Anonymous says:

              "[T]hem" can agree in this context because it is used in as an objective pronoun in a subjunctive clause.

              • Anonymous says:

                This is only true because the standard historical agreement of "his" to the antecedent has been complicated by modern gender politics.

                 

                In other words, the decision to deviate from what is "correct" is constantly changing, often subjective and subject to common usage.  It would therefore follow that the use of "gotten", from the Middle English, is perfectly acceptable in North America, where such usage is common and has not gone out of style. 

                • Anonymous says:

                  I'm only reading this thread because the place from where (or should that be whence? or which?) I used to steal copies of the Readers Digest no longer has them.

          • Anonymous says:

            And if one of my staff members displayed such condescension toward North Americans, our office would lose the greatest part of its business within a fortnight.  

             

             

      • Anonymous says:

        "Any tome that includes the word "gotten" as a free-standing past participle can be consigned to the bin…"

         

        Any tome…such as the OED?  I've just looked.  It's there.  

        • Anonymous says:

          It only has it in the context of ill-gotten, not as a free standing word.

        • Anonymous says:

          The OED says:

          "gotten". N. Amer. or archaic pas participle of get.

          Usage: As past participles of get, got and gotten both date back to Middle English. The form gotten is not used today in British English (except in the adjective ill-gotten) but it is very common in North American English, though even there it is often regarded as non-standard.  

      • Anonymous says:

        Dick: Give up. You're wrong. Those of us with degrees in English usually support your rants about punctuation and grammar and other usage but on this one you are dead wrong. Capitulate. But I get a thrill reading your words "free standing past participle". I haven't had a goose bump attack like that since researching the latin grammarians in England of the 18th century who defined the way we should speak: eg "it is I" not "it's me". Have you had a future perfect subjunctive recently?

        • Dick Shaugneary says:

          Dear Anonymous with an English degree from an unidentified institution,

          There is a place for "American English".  That place is America.  As David Bowie said, this is not America. 

           

          • Anonymous says:

            Mr Shaugneary, Mr Bowie must be one of those philologists or etymologists with whose works I am unfamiliar.

          • Anonymous says:

            The article was in the NY Post. Last time I checked New York was in America. Where did you think it was? 

  3. Anonymous says:

    One interesting case that has become a precedent in New Jersey superior Court by a company called SITOGUM HOLDINGS INC.that was incorporated in Delaware to hold funds from an  elderly caymanian that was preyed on in the Cayman islands after the passing of a family member  by Canadians and some known Lawyers.   Read  some of the smart tricks, and illegal underhand to gain Thousands of dollars.  Many of these people are among us yet we don't know – Gushlak  is only one in a million. 

     

  4. Anonymous says:

    I suggest that the US government confinscate all of his assets, sell them and give the money to his victims.  I also suggest that the Cayman Islands Government do everything they can to assist.  Besides the fact that it is the right thing to do, it would help repair our image.

    • Anonymous says:

      We have been cooperating with the U.S. authorities on these matters for decades and it has never improved our image mostly because the international media and populist politicians in the U.S. don't want our image to be improved.    

      • Anonymous says:

        Actually you haven't done jack. All you've done is pass some laws that you have no intention of enforcing.

        • Anonymous says:

          If there is one thing I despise it is malicious ignorance. Here's a quote from the U.S. Government Accountability Office Report 2008:

          "When they have adequate identifying information, U.S. officials can formally request information regarding U.S. persons’ Cayman Islands activities through established channels such as the Tax Information Exchange Agreement (TIEA), which IRS has used a small number of times since it went into effect in 2004 to exchange information related to civil and criminal tax investigations or the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT), which has been used over 200 times since 1990 to exchange information related to criminal violations. Cayman Islands and U.S. officials also have other channels for information sharing, such as coordination among regulatory officials and sharing of financial intelligence information on activities involving U.S. persons. U.S. officials from multiple agencies said that the Cayman Islands government has been cooperative in responding to U.S. requests, and shared useful information at their initiative related to questionable financial activities that involve U.S. connections.

          The U.S. and Cayman Islands governments have taken steps to address instances of U.S. persons’ use of Cayman Islands entities to perpetrate illegal activity, but enforcement challenges exist".

           

           

    • anonymous says:

      The Cayman Islands has been doing that since the MLAT(Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) was agreed in 1986 and signed in 1990. Hundreds of cases and tens and tens of millions have been returned to the US. As long as it is a crime in the US and also here the process exists to cooporate. For those counting that is over 20 years. 

      Our assistance with their crimes does not really matter to the USA, what they want is their "post-tax money". That means that if an American makes a profit on money here, even after paying taxes on the base capital before sending it overseas, the US wants some of that as well. Thats what they are really after. The US is the only country that I know that taxes its citizens no matter where they are resident and does so on thier worldwide income and property.

      However that said, we work very closely with the US Authorities every day of the year and have so for a long time. this case would fall into the remit of the MLAT if the US authorities can prove he broke a law in Cayman and actually has assets here.

  5. Loopy Lou says:

    A "manse"?  When was the minister or vicar living there?  People who don't know the difference between a "manse" and a "mansion" should take up occupations other than those focused on using the written English language.

  6. anonymous says:

    It should also come as no surprise that this  "gentleman" has a residence at the RItz Carlton..

  7. Anonymous says:

    WoW! Are these the investors we are bringing in here without screening? Inward Investing…LOL!   We need to do background checks on everyone that enter these shores, from the very queen down.  Stop giving these people free everything.  That is why our Government is today considered broke.  Why!? because you Free them, you tax us and the established companies….That is just so wrong and unethical.  Now look at the publicity this news story is bringing on us and our Islands.  Negative News once again! XXXX  There will always be reprecussions!

    • The Well Dressed 21st Century Criminal says:

      The thumb race is pretty close on this one to my surprise. Didn't realise so many of the "1 percent"posted on CNS.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Where is his Cayman mansion at?

    • Knot S Smart says:

      Why? You want to buy it?

      I will give you a showing (from outside on the road) – but my finders fee is 10%.

      Same rate as certain other people…

    • Anonymous says:

      His mansion is on the road on the way to Prospect Point

  9. Anonymous says:

    He knows he will only get a slap on the wrist – maybe 5 years and still be wealthy. I am sure he has some money hidden somewhere.

    Its so so wrong, but since he didnt actually have a gun in his hand these blue collar pieces of crap get away so easy. I hope if he has property here are anything of value that the government will seize it or freeze it.

    • Anonymous says:

      A gun or a spliff would have given him 20 years in the cooler – stealing a few hundred million will get him a few years max – nice…

  10. Anonymous says:

     Gushlak’s $19 milllion Cayman home in Old Prospect Rd was recently set for auction with no reserve price but the sale was cancelled at the last minute. Why was it cancel? Just because he had a large amount of funds he was given Cayman resident and no one check out his past history in regards to his funds. Another reason why the Cayman Islands are now going down and not up, supporting crime.We welcome anyone as long as they have LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY. 

    • Anonymous says:

      Anon 13;09

      And let me add to that , he owes a few contractors  for work carried out on his home in Prospect. One contractor is owed over 100,000.00 and was told by Gushlak to take him to court, he could fly in two lawyers and fight the case.

      The problem we face in this  country, is the judicial department, the power to be,  was asked to create a small claims court. but refuse to,reason why refused… so people like the Gushlak can keep  ripping  off the poor people, of the Cayman Islands.

      My only wish is that the USA with such a strong zeal and deligence  for justice, will bring this man to his knees, and make him pay all the people that he stole money from. Im surprised they haven't used that law, where his assets cessed and shared with the Caymanian Government.

      But of course the Judiciary here  never took part.  even when they were notified by the US lagal department, 8 years ago,… of this man being a rogue and dishonest.

      We will now see how prudent and judicious Liechtenstein  is,  that is now  hidding his money for him.

      Is this the same Liechtenstein that is part of the European countries  that formed  that anti money laundering, and tax evasion….my oh my! what a farce bunch.  

      • Anonymous says:

        $100,000 ain't in no small claims court!!

        • Anonymous says:

          Try going to the Cayman Courts to collect that 100,000.00. By the time the Judiciary system gets through with you , it will all end up in the lawyers pocket.

        • Anonymous says:

          I don't know why someone thumbed you down.  It's the truth.  I was scammed by a contractor and told that I would have to get a lawyer but the lawyer would cost about as much as I was owed so I didn't bother.

  11. The Well Dressed 21st Century Criminal says:

    Thank you dear sir for further tarnishing the Cayman Islands reputation. We absolutely love harbouring your kind and the dirty money you represent. We appreciate aswell your smug attitudes towards everyone,friendly people are overated anyway, right! I suspect this is all some misunderstanding, and have confidence that your lawyers will find the right hole to slip you through. As for the victims, I know!, I know!, they just don't understand these technical times, this could have happened to anyone, you know cause of the economy. (wink wink)

     

    • Loopy Lou says:

      Wake up and smell the coffee, the Cayman Islands managed to generate a tarnished reputation a long long time ago.  Building a nation on drug money, money laundering and tax evasion tends to do that.

      • Anonymous says:

        Its our dirty little secret, our "elephant in the room" , our "bread and butter", it also speaks for the corruption we are seeing In the political arena.

         

      • Anonymous says:

        There are those of us who play by the rules, work, live in and love Cayman.  If anyone feels that strongly against the Cayman Islands and choses not to be a part of the solution in making it a better place, perhaps they should find somewhere else to live that suits them better.  you have no reason to stay (if its the money that makes you stay, then you know what that makes you…) I have two young children and cannot think of a better place to raise my family or to live!

      • Anonymous says:

        You sound like you have no love for Cayman. You should be living somewhere else.

  12. Anonymous says:

    I'm sure that the NY Post must be aware that Mr. Gushlak had built his Cayman home many years before 2009 and not while he was out on bail.

    • Anonymous says:

      Gushlak was still bulding this house up untill 2004, with some of the same money he stole from those people. His bail in 2009 means shit.

      He built that house from  ill gotten money, Uncle Sam should confiscate it along with all his other  assets. It wasnt 2009 he started stealing. The US notified Cayman Judiciary as far back as 2001 about his corrupted ways, but they pulled  a blind over their eyes and let him continue. …now Cayman  appares to look like hoarders of thieve, and crooks.

      • Anonymous says:

        It would make Cayman look like a hoarder of thieves and crooks if Cayman allowed him to come in and build while he was up on charges and out on bail.It means a great deal.

        I don't know what you mean by inform the judiciary. That would not be the appropriate channel. If there was evidence of crime or fraud at that point then the first stop should have been CIMA and the police financial crimes unit.   

        • Anonymous says:

          Go check the court's record, it's all there, the court was warned of this Gushlak man long time ago. But he was loaded with alot of cash…so hands off. The CIMA  is a bigger joke , than our Employment Department.

          XXXXX

          • Anonymous says:

            Don't be ridiculous. There cannot be a court record unless proceedings are started against the individual. There are no "warnings to the court" on the court record independent of proceedings.

  13. Cow Itch says:

    What a loser…. 50 lashes with a 10 foot cow cod!!!!

  14. Anonymous says:

    I thought he was one of those new caymanians?

    • Anonymous says:

      He must be one of Mack's investors.

      • anonymous says:

        He came to Cayman during PPMs time just in case you are making it political. Just look at the dates.

        • Anonymous says:

          Please leave the partisan nonsense out of it. Gushlak first relocated to Cayman in 2000 when there was no such thing as PPM or UDP.