Charges might include: (1) criminal tax fraud (2) deliberately misstating income, (3) filing false returns, (4) falsifying official documents, (5) intentionally mislabeling personal expenditures as business expenses, (6) utilizing funds inappropriately, (7) fraudulent use of funds for lavish personal expenditures, (8) fraudulently declaring to the IRS personal expenditures as legitimate business expenses.
That’s a good starter list : )
Unfortunately, all the charges you describe are the income/IRS-related charges, so they are not even "in the eye of the be-HOLDER" or DOJ and won't go anywhere.
I saw the Santelli clip with Koutoulas and was very disappointed. The guy just sounds like a huckster and publicity hound, all bluster and "red-meat" platitudes but very little substance. He is right that Holder and DOJ are covering up for Corzine and want to dismiss the case - that's one reason they didn't want CME's Terry Duffy anywhere near "their investigation" - but that's not exactly news. DOJ is also not the only entity that's investigating the case.
First, there are very few of the "50 states" who would even bother with accepting the lawsuit, or have it kicked out on the grounds of jurisdiction and standing.
Second, if the guy really thinks that he can claim that MF Global / Corzine situation is in any way equal to Peregrine Financial (PFG) / Wasendorf Sr., then he is delusional and Corzine's victims need a better representation.
Wasendorf Sr. perpetuated over 20 years a pure Ponzi scheme, same as Madoff, only on much smaller scale. The only resemblance between PFG and MF Global is that they were both commodity brokerages and it involved (obviously!) segregated customer accounts. That's where the money was at PFG and Wasendorf was looting segregated accounts for years, while Corzine used them in the last few days to shore up the regulators' capital requirements and cover the margin calls while trying to fire-sell the company - it is a crime, but an entirely different one.
Wasendorf is in jail because he pretty much confessed to the crime, just like Madoff. Corzine basically said "Prove it" which can be done, if there is a will to do it.
From a puff-piece, laying the groundwork for opinion, by the Corzine-Obama-Holder-axis-friendly NYT:
No Criminal Case Is Likely in Loss at MF Global - CNBC / NYT-Dealbook, (editor-in-chief Andrew Ross Sorkin) by Azam Ahmed and Ben Protess, 2012 August 15-16
Typically in white-collar cases, investigators start their interviews with lower-level employees and build up to the top executives of a firm. In July, when federal authorities first approached Corzine's lawyers, it was not clear whether he would agree to an interview. But the signs were good. In such cases, if prosecutors have damning information, they often file charges rather than extend an offer for a voluntary interview. Though he is now expected to attend the meeting, questions remain about which government agencies will join. Because Corzine still faces scrutiny from regulators, including the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, their attendance could pose a problem. These agencies, which have a lower bar to proving civil wrongdoing than do criminal authorities, are examining whether top executives misled investors about the firm's health and failed to protect customer money. The C.F.T.C., the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the United States attorney's office in Manhattan declined to comment for this article. As the government's focus shifts away from Corzine, it remains interested in a lower-level employee in the firm's Chicago office, who was known as the "keeper of the books" at MF Global. That employee, Edith O'Brien, oversaw the transfer of customer money during the firm's final week, when the client cash vanished into the hands of banks, clearinghouses and even other customers. O'Brien, an assistant treasurer, has declined to cooperate with authorities without receiving immunity from criminal prosecution. ..... < snip > < snip > ..... With a criminal case unlikely to materialize, the anger over the collapse of MF Global is likely to grow.
They might be afraid to charge O'Brien if they think that she can spill the beans and point the finger at Corzine. If there is substantial evidence that Edith O'Brien has the goods, the Congress can give her limited immunity for testifying, and invite some of the DOJ's and other "investigators" to ask them questions... For instance, whether a crime has been committed at all and, at the very least, what the meaning of the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley law (of which Corzine was one of the main authors when he was in Senate) is?
Then, there is also potential of civil lawsuits from regulators, insurance companies and the civil lawsuit by the victims (hopefully they have more than Koutoulas).
Interesting bit from Trustee in suit vs. MF execs - NYP, by Kaja Whitehouse, 2012 August 16
Trustee James Giddens yesterday said he will join litigation brought by spurned customers, which is already in place, against Corzine, CFO Henri Steenkamp, COO Bradley Abelow and General Counsel Laurie Ferber. The trustee responsible for recouping money for burned MF Global customers penned an agreement yesterday to join forces in suing former executives of the company, including fallen CEO Jon Corzine.
As part of the cooperation agreement, Giddens will turn over all the documents he uncovered in his investigation and all the money recovered in the lawsuit will go to the wronged MFG customers. The hearing on cooperation agreement will take place on September 5, 2012. If not approved, Giddens will file separate lawsuits against MFG execs, which is what he planned to do originally (June 04, 2012). Of course, he also has vested interest - trustee of Madoff case, Picard, already accrued more than a quarter of a billion dollars in compensation for his "recovery efforts."
A bit of sanity here: From MF Global and the 'Missing' Funds - WSJ, by Holman Jenkins, 2012 August 03
If our own experience is any guide, Louis Freeh can expect anguished emails in response to his failure to melodramatize the plight of MF Global customers, whom he predicted in Senate testimony this week would end up getting 100% of their money back. ..... < snip > ..... He refers in his written testimony to the "alleged" missing money. He says plenty of assets exist to cover customer losses and even to make a dent in what MF owes its unsecured creditors. Let's pause to note MF customers have been wronged, certainly. They had every right to expect their funds to be "segregated" and returned immediately when MF failed, not caught up in the competing claims of a bankruptcy. Inevitably, somebody from pre-bankrupt MF must face criminal charges over so gross a violation. But the money isn't "missing." It's just uncertain now whom it belongs to. Moreover, the greatest threat to its timely and complete return to customers is the trustees themselves. As Mr. Freeh has pointed out, conflict is inevitable when multiple trustees, in the name of multiple claimants, are pursuing a single pot of money. But the pot isn't getting bigger. It's getting smaller, consumed by the trustees' own fees and litigation expenses. In not a perfect world, but just a better one, Messrs. Freeh, Giddens and the trustees for MF's foreign customers would have settled long ago among themselves who is a customer entitled to customer funds. The other, unsecured claimants of MF Global would have been better off too, since litigation would chew up less of the pot. ..... < snip > In a better world, trustees wouldn't be suing each other, and customers would have their money.