Skip to main content

California Man Pleads Guilty to Filing False Liens Against Federal Employees

WASHINGTON – Thanh Viet Jeremy Cao of Rancho Santa Margarita, Calif., pleaded guilty today in Las Vegas before Judge Kent J. Dawson to six counts of filing false liens against employees and officers of the federal government, the Justice Department, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Office of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) announced.
 
According to the plea agreement, Cao was a named defendant in a civil fraud action brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) related to an investment scheme; he was also identified as the owner of an asset seized by the U.S. Secret Service related to this fraud.   Cao was additionally under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California and the U.S. Secret Service for criminal offenses arising from the investment scheme, and also was under investigation by the IRS-Criminal Investigation Division for tax returns he prepared for himself and others that claimed large refunds based upon fictitious tax withholdings.  
 
In response to these proceedings and investigations, Cao filed 22 false liens in the public records of the state of Nevada and Clark County, Nev., against SEC attorneys, U.S. District Court Judges, U.S. District Court Magistrate Judges, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of California, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Secret Service special agents and special agents of the IRS.   Each lien alleged that the lien victims were “debtors” of Cao for hundreds of millions of dollars.   According to the plea agreement, Cao admitted that all 22 liens were false and agreed that the liens should be expunged from the public record.
 
Sentencing is scheduled for Sept. 21, 2011 in Las Vegas.
 
This case was investigated by IRS-Criminal Investigation and TIGTA, and prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Christopher Strauss and Joseph Rillotta of the Department of Justice’s Tax Division.         
 
More information about the Justice Department’s Tax Division and its enforcement efforts can be found at www.usdoj.gov/tax.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

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.
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
3 comments
Read more

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more