Skip to main content

Christopher B. Maselli Was Indicted in Schemes Netting $1.5 Million in Mortgages

PROVIDENCE, RI—A federal grand jury Thursday indicted a North Providence, Rhode Island real estate attorney on charges he falsified bank and federal tax documents, and lied about his income and assets, in obtaining more than $1.5 million in mortgages. U.S. Attorney Peter F. Neronha announced the seven-count indictment on bank fraud charges against Christopher B. Maselli.

Maselli, 38, whose law practice is located in North Providence, resides in Johnston, R.I.

According to the indictment, between December 2007 and March 2009, Maselli, a self-employed attorney, inflated his annual income dating back to 2005; lied about personal assets; and submitted phony and altered bank statements and IRS tax returns when applying for mortgages, a home improvement loan, and an auto loan. Maselli was approved for five mortgages on residential properties in Johnston and North Providence, and an auto loan, totaling approximately $1,525,027.50.

U.S. Attorney Peter F. Neronha commented, “It goes without saying that ensuring the integrity of the mortgage loan application process is of critical importance. The allegations in this indictment are particularly disturbing in that an attorney, who is trusted to provide sound legal advice and to conduct real estate transactions in a fair and honest manner, used his expertise to fraudulently obtain his own mortgages.”

Maselli’s initial appearance in U.S. District Court has not yet been scheduled.

The matter was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of the Inspector General. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Dulce Donovan.

An indictment is merely an allegation and is not evidence of guilt. A defendant is entitled to a fair trial in which it will be the government’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...