After
Hild Guilty Verdict Juror
Tells Inner City Press Of
Devil's Advocates and
Crocodile Tears
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon,
Podcast
Vlog
SDNY EXCLUSIVE,
Jan 21 β Michael
Hild was
arraigned for
fraud on Live
Well
Financial's
reverse
mortgages and
home equity
conversion
mortgages by
U.S. District
Court for the
Southern
District of
New York Judge
Ronnie Abrams
on September
5, 2019. Inner
City Press
covered it, here.
Now,
after the
guilty
verdict, one
of the Hild
jurors
requesting
anonymity has
told Inner
City Press:
"The 3 week
trial was
definitely an
interesting
and wild one
that's for
sure but I'm
happy that
it's finally
coming to a
close after a
year and eight
months since
our verdict.
The background
for me was
easy from
having
experiences
with reverse
mortgages in
the past so
everything
that was
described in
court was
straight
forward. I
thought Hild's
attorney did a
fine job in
representing
him, I think
the evidence
against Hild
was just too
high of a
mountain to
climb and get
out.
"The
most damaging
part of the
case was
obviously the
testimony from
Stumberger and
Rohr. Knowing
that they were
cooperating
with the
government. I
had my doubts
on what they
were saying at
first and
tried to have
an open mind.
But once the
recordings
were played I
think everyone
in that
courtroom all
knew what they
were doing was
wrong. I think
the quote from
Hild on the
recording was
something
along the
lines of the
Scenario... I
forgot the
number... was
a self
generating
money machine.
Between all of
the
recordings,
the
visualizations
of the HECM IO
bonds being
grossly
inflated and
increased
perfectly
which is
something that
would never
happen.
I
think once
they realized
that IDC was
publishing
their pricing
exactly, it
opened up all
of those
opportunities.
I think Hild
testifying
really didn't
do that much
for me. When
he first got
on the stand I
wanted to
believe him
and was
keeping an
open mind with
all of the
evidence
presented
before hand.
But I think
once he got on
the stand I
think he
realized what
he did was
wrong and once
he started
crying on the
stand it
reminded me of
crocodile
tears.
The
final nail in
the coffin was
when Rohr
resigned and
the new exec.
didn't want to
sign the
statements as
they
understood the
walls were
caving in to
the whole plan
and didn't
want to be a
part of it for
how much they
inflated the
portfolio.
Once we went
into
deliberations
that morning,
I think we all
looked at each
other and
within 30
minutes we all
knew that we
were all on
the same page
with a guilty
verdict on all
the counts and
there really
was no doubt
for how well
the government
proved their
case.
That's
the reason why
it only took
us less than
half of the
day to
deliberate,
the evidence
against Hild
was far too
strong for
anyone to get
him out of
that hole. We
went count by
count taking
the evidence
that was
provided and
seeing what
would place a
guilty verdict
for each and
it was clear.
One
or two of us
tried to play
devil's
advocate and
tried to raise
any sort of
doubt in the
government's
evidence but
if any doubt
was made at
one thing
there was a
mountain of
five or six
other things
to back it
up.
Other than
that, I'm
curious to see
what the
court's
sentence is
going to be
next Friday
and love
following you
and your other
cases you
report on."
It was said
Hild's
sentencing
would be on
September 10.
But on
September 3
Hild submitted
an affidavit
trashing his
trial attorney
Dusing, that
he refused to
using funds he
was given for
expert
witnesses, and
"did not cover
the subjects
we have
previously
agreed he
would in my
direct
examination."
In
March 2022,
the Ohio
Supreme Court
joined
Kentucky in
temporarily
suspending
Dusing from
practicing law
after Dusing
threatened two
attorneys in a
profanity-laced
video played
in court.
On
March 7, 2022,
this: "ORDER
as to Michael
Hild. As
discussed with
the parties,
the oral
argument
scheduled for
March 8, 2022
is adjourned
to April 29,
2022 at 2:00
p.m. The Court
shall hold the
argument in
Courtroom 1506
at the U.S.
Courthouse, 40
Foley Square."
Inner City
Press wrote,
Be there or be
square. And
Inner City
Press was
there, see
below.
Now
on January 13,
2023, Hild has
filed his
sentencing
submission -
and he wants
probation, or
"a sentence
below 37
months
imprisonment."
The US's memo
is due next
week. Watch
this site.
Back
on April 29
Hild's new
lawyer argued.
Inner City
Press live
tweeted,
thread here
(vlog here)
Hild's
new lawyer
starts by
saying trial
evidence was
inadequate.
Now against
Dusing on
conflict of
interest "in
his Kentucky
litigation."
Hild's
new lawyer:
Dusing had to
appear in
Kentucky on
May 4 in his
own case so he
shortened the
Hild defense
case. Dusing's
affidavit is
inaccurate and
"stunning."
Hild's
new lawyer:
Dusing then
lied to the
court in
Kentucky, that
they'd be on
trial in NY
until the end
of May. Cites
video of
"unprepared"
lawyer in
Kentucky
Hild's
new lawyer: Mr
Dusing has
since been
suspended, not
only in
Kentucky but
also Ohio.
Now
AUSA says
evidence was
sufficient.
Says Dusing's
was not an
actual
conflict, just
a "scheduling
issue."
Now
Hild's new
lawyer in
reply says
Dusing
violated
ethical rules,
Dusing
threatened to
kill a judge
who then
recused
himself and
called law
enforcement.
Wants to cross
examine
Dusing.
Judge
Abrams: I'll
take it under
advisement
On
April 29,
after Hild
took the
witness stand
and claimed he
was just along
for the ride,
an SDNY jury
in less than
four hours of
deliberation
declared him
guilty on all
counts. "HILD,
46, of
Richmond,
Virginia, was
convicted of
five
counts:
one count of
conspiracy to
commit
securities
fraud; one
count of
conspiracy to
commit wire
and bank
fraud; one
count of
securities
fraud; one
count of wire
fraud; and one
count of bank
fraud." Photo
here.
Hild's
post-trial
motions
include
allegations of
conflict of
interest of
prior counsel.
Judge Abrams
to her credit
put into the
record an
email of May
7, Katy
Lawrence
saying Joe and
Paul joked
about getting
KFC for lunch
one day, so
maybe we can
cater in KFC
for everyone?
With covid
restrictions,
I wasn't sure
if a mailed
package of
some Kentucky
/ Cincinnati
specific items
would be
acceptable
like Skyline
chili or
Graeter's ice
cream (can be
mailed with
dry ice)."
Now
on August 3
from Judge
Abrams, this:
"ORDER as to
Michael Hild:
The
Government's
motion to
permit
Defendant's
prior counsel
to provide
statements
responding to
the
allegations of
ineffective
assistance is
hereby
GRANTED. Dkt.
106. By
separate
order, the
Court will
sign and
docket the
Government's
proposed order
on the matter.
See id.
Defendant also
requests that
the Court
order the
Government to
"disclose...
any
'information'
not previously
disclosed on
which the
government is
relying...
including all
past
communications
with prior
counsel, if
any, regarding
the issues
raised in
defense
counsel's
post-trial
motions, such
as emails,
text messages,
and notes from
telephone
calls." Dkt.
111. The Court
has previously
issued an
order
confirming the
Government's
obligations
pursuant to
Brady v.
Maryland, 373
U.S. 83
(1963), Giglio
v. United
States, 405
U.S. 150
(1972), and
their progeny.
See Dkt. 34.
The Court
presumes that
the Government
remains well
aware of these
obligations
and has, and
will continue
to, comply
with them
fully. The
Clerk of Court
is
respectfully
directed to
terminate the
motions
pending at
docket entries
106, 108 and
111. (Signed
by Judge
Ronnie Abrams
on 8/3/2021)."
Watch this
site
On
May 12,
approval of
new counsel
for Hild, and
a delay in his
sentencing:
"MEMO
ENDORSEMENT as
to Michael
Hild on re:
[68] LETTER
MOTION filed
by Michael
Hild addressed
to Judge
Ronnie Abrams
from Attorney
Brian A.
Jacobs dated
May 12, 2021
re: Extension
of Time For
Post-Trial
Motions and
Sentencing.
ENDORSEMENT:
Application
granted. Mr.
Jacobs is
substituted as
counsel on
behalf of Mr.
Hild. The
deadline to
file
post-trial
motions is
extended until
July 27, 2021.
The sentence
date is
adjourned to
September 10,
2021."
More
than a year
after that, on
December, 7,
2022, Judge
Abrams ruled:
"OPINION &
ORDER as to
Michael Hild.
Hild's motions
are denied.
The Clerk of
Court is
respectfully
directed to
terminate the
motions
pending at
docket entry
102.
Sentencing is
hereby
scheduled for
January 27,
2023 at 4:00
p.m. The
parties shall
refer to the
Rule 10(A)(i)
of the
Individual
Rules and
Practices in
Criminal Cases
for the
appropriate
filing
timeline for
their
sentencing
submissions.
(Signed by
Judge Ronnie
Abrams on
12/7/2022)."
Full Order on
Inner City
Press'
DocumentCloud
here.
On
December 28,
2022, Hild's
lawyer threw a
Hail Mary,
noting that
since Judge
Abrams recused
herself from
the US v.
Bankman-Fried
case due to
her husband's
partnership in
Davis Polk,
why not on
Hild, where
David Polk
represented
Hild victim
Mizuho?
On
January 3,
2023, Judge
Abrams denied
the motion.
From the
docket: "ORDER
as to Michael
Hild.
Defendant Hild
is scheduled
to be
sentenced by
this Court on
January 27,
2023. By
letter dated
December 28,
2022, his
counsel
"ask[s] that
the Court
address
whether
possible
conflicts in
this case
should have
led this Court
to disqualify
itself
pursuant to
Section 455,
Title 28,
United States
Code," and
whether it
should recuse
itself for
purposes of
sentencing.
Dkt. 141.
Without citing
any caselaw,
Hild suggests
that recusal
is appropriate
because the
law firm of
Davis Polk
& Wardwell
LLP, at which
my husband is
a partner,
appears to
have
represented
parties whose
interests are
"potentially
adverse" to
Hild. Id. at
2.
Specifically,
it lists Davis
Polk's
representations
of Mizuho Bank
and Industrial
and Commercial
Bank of China
Limited
(ICBC)---two
of numerous
victims of
Hild's
fraud---and
Intercontinental
Exchange---the
owner of
Interactive
Data Corp.
(IDC), which
the government
contended Hild
"controlled"
to perpetrate
his fraud---as
requiring
recusal in
this action.
The Court was
unaware of
these
representations
until the
filing of
Hild's letter,
and my husband
has had no
involvement
with any
representation
of these
clients. For
the reasons
set forth
below, and
based on
longstanding
interpretations
of Section 455
by both the
Second Circuit
and the
Advisory
Committee on
Judicial
Ethics, the
Court declines
to recuse
itself from
this
action....[***
See this Order
***]... Courts
in this
district have
thus regularly
declined to
recuse
themselves
from
proceedings
wherein
partners at a
spouse's law
firm have
represented an
interested
party. See,
e.g., Couri v.
Pavia, No.
19-cv-5436,
2019 WL
3553357, at *3
(S.D.N.Y. Aug.
5, 2019)
(denying
recusal motion
where the
Court's
husband was a
partner at the
law firm
Proskauer Rose
LLP, to which
plaintiff
claimed to be
an
"adversary");
Six W. Retail
Acquisition,
Inc. v. Sony
Theatre Mgmt.
Corp., No.
97-cv-5499,
2003 WL
282187, at *57
(S.D.N.Y. Feb.
7, 2003)
(denying
recusal motion
where the
Court's
husband was a
partner at the
law firm
Cahill Gordon
& Reindel,
which
represented
interested
parties); see
also Gench v.
Hostgator.com,
LLC, No.
14-cv-3592,
2015 WL
4579147, at *2
(S.D.N.Y. July
29, 2015)
(this Court
denying
recusal motion
where partners
at Davis Polk
may have
represented an
interested
party in an
unrelated
matter).
Accordingly,
the Court
concludes that
recusal in
this matter is
unnecessary.
SO ORDERED.
(Signed by
Judge Ronnie
Abrams on
1/3/2023)."
Watch this
site.
Back
on April 14,
Judge Abrams
started the
trial. Inner
City Press
live tweeted
the morning,
below, and
noted that Hild
worked at
Capital One,
and was
building an
empire in
South Richmond
which some
locals
denounced as
gentrification.
Hild, of
course, has another
story.
And
on April 27,
defendant Hild
took took the
witness stand,
which is rare.
Inner City
Press tweeted,
here:
Hild:
At Capital
One, I worked
to get them
into the
mortgage
industry....
Livewell
Financial was
founded in
2005: he and a
bunch of
papers in my
kitchen.
Hild:
We needed $20
million. We
went to
Customers
Bank. They
said they
could do it,
they had to go
to the credit
committee but
it should be
no problem.
Still, there
would be delay
and we were at
the limit of
our Zenith
Bank warehouse
line. So we
went with
re-po
OK
- defendant
Hild now
continues on
direct
examination
after lunch
break. He
hired people -
who have
testified
against him in
this trial as
cooperators.
This
cross-examination
should be a
doozy.
Watch
this site.
Back
on Saturday,
April 24, the
US filed this:
"Re: United
States v.
Michael Hild,
19 Cr. 602
(RA) Dear
Judge Abrams:
The Government
writes in
advance of the
charge
conference
scheduled for
April 26,
2021, to
propose an
addition to
the Courtβs
jury
instructions.
Given the
testimony and
cross-examination
on the
disclaimer
that Live Well
provided to
IDC (Tr.
153-55,
388-89, 918,
1078-79), the
Government
proposes that
the second
paragraph on
page 28 of the
draft charge
be revised as
follows, with
proposed
additions in
bold: Any
testimony that
you may have
heard from any
witness with
respect to
whether a
particular
fact would or
would not have
been important
to him in
general
reflect that
witnessβs
individual
views.
Although you
may consider
such
testimony, it
is not
controlling.
It is for you
to determine
whether a
particular
fact would
have been
significant to
a reasonable
person in
making an
investment
decision. In
considering
whether a
statement or
omission was
material, let
me caution you
that it is not
a defense if
the material
misrepresentation
or omission
would not have
deceived a
person of
ordinary
intelligence.
Nor does a
disclaimer
regarding the
accuracy of
information
render that
information
immaterial as
a matter of
law." We'll
see...
On
April 15,
cooperator
Darren
Stumberger was
asked on cross
examination
how he
selected when
to tape
record, and
when not. He
tried to
dismiss
selectivity,
tying his
recording to
the "Scenario
14 era."
Simultaneously
on April 15,
in
Stumberger's
separate case
before SDNY
Judge J. Paul
Oetken,
19-cr-608, his
lawyer "asked
the Court to
seal Docket
Number 13."
That's appears
to be an
unnumbered
Minute entry
of a motion
hearing for
withdrawal of
counsel. There
is no item
numbered 13
anymore, not
even "sealed
document
placed in
vault." Why
not? Why now?
On
April 19, as
the trial
continued, the
abrupt closure
of Live Well
was portrayed,
with a lending
who flew from
Detroit to
demand a
meeting to
Hild on the
stand. Hild
had refused to
meet; later
the lender was
told that a
warehouse line
of credit
might be paid
back over
time.
On
April 20, the
US Attorney's
Office asked
Judge Abrams
to "impose a
deadline for
the defendant
to decide
whether he
will waive the
attorney
client
privilege in
support an of
advice- or
presence of
counsel
defense...
prior to the
completion of
the direct
testimony of
Eric Rohr,
Live Well's
form CFO."
There
is Hild's line
that every
business
failure is not
a criminal
act. On this
one, we'll
see. The trial
continue on
April 21.
From
April 14:
Assistant US
Attorney, in
opening, says
it unraveled
in 2018 when
lenders asked
for more info.
$200 million
stolen; the
cooperating
witness are
criminals,
sure, AUSA
says, but they
have accepted
responsibility.
Next
up: Ben
Dusing. And
he's laying it
on thick
[Note: "βIt is
the Yankee
Stadium of
financial
fraud
worldwide,β
Dusing told
Cincinnati ABC
affiliate WCPO
shortly after
his hiring in
March]
[And: Hild has
a website of
his endeavors,
here]
Ben
Dusing: I'm
from Kentucky,
I speak with
an accent,
you're going
to hear it a
lot. My daddy
told me, A
trial is a
search for the
truth. We
begin together
to search for
the truth. And
that's the
exciting
thing. We can
all be proud.
These are
interesting
times
Ben
Dusing: Never
before have I
been confined
by
plexi-glass.
We'll have to
lean over
more, to find
the truth. But
it is a common
purpose. We
haven't seen
any proof
yet. At
the end I will
ask you to
find Mr.
Michael Hild
not guilty
based on the
facts and law
Ben
Dusing: It
will come down
to, did Mr.
Hild intend to
defraud
people. It's
complex.
You're going
to hear about
pre-payment
speed. Truth
is found
within the
complexity,
not despite
it.
Ben
Dusing: This
case is about
throwing
people under
the bus.
Bigger fish. I
thank you for
the sacrifice
you are about
to make.
[Then a 5
minute break,
during which:
Could you tell
them not to
clean the
windows now?
Courtroom 110
is big, with a
lot of
history]
It's
11:25 am and
Judge Abrams
is back with
more jury
instructions:
"You must
follow the law
as I explain
it to you,
whether you
agree with it
or not," etc.
First
government
witness
against
Michael Hild
of Live Well
is a
cooperator,
who previously
worked at
Morgan Stanley
then Goldman
Sach
As
this witness
Darren
Stumberger,
drones on,
Inner City
Press has
looked up
the
transaction
being asked
about: "Ernie
Calabrese and
Vice President
Dan Foster who
will also join
Live Well
alongside
Stumberger.
On
April 13,
Judge Abrams
picked a jury
of 12, with
three
alternates, in
the large Jury
Assembly Room
of the SDNY,
with the
venire in
masks and
individual
chairs,
socially
distanced.
Inner City
Press was
there.
The Juror
Questionnaire
asked about
any links to
or knowledge
of Bank of New
York,
Customers
Bank, First
Bank of
Tennessee,
Flagstar Bank,
ICBC,
International
Data
Corporation
(IDC), Mizuho
Securities,
NRMLA, Nomura,
Republic Bank,
U.S. Bank and
others.
In
the run-up to
the trial,
which starts
on April 14 at
10:15 am and
which Inner
City Press
will cover,
the US
Attorney's
Office filed a
motion in
limine seeking
to preclude
"evidence
suggesting
that IDC or
the lenders
were negligent
or careless in
failing to
stop the
fraud."
Echoes
of the Eaze
trial of US
v. Weigard,
earlier this
year before
Judge Jed S.
Rakoff,
unsealing
order won by
Inner City
Press here.
Again, beyond
mortgage
fraud, we note
for now that
Hild worked at
Capital One,
and was
building an
empire in
South Richmond
which some
locals
denounced as
gentrification.
Hild, of
course, has
another story.
Watch this
site.
The
case is US v
Hild,
19-cr-602
(Abrams). There is
and will be
more on
Patreon, here.
***
Feedback: Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
Box
20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY
NY 10017
Other, earlier Inner
City Press are listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2019 Inner
City Press, Inc. To request reprint or
other permission, e-contact Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com for
|