UPDATED: Mark L. Schifter, PLEADS GUILTY to suspicion of charity fraud

[NicolasKL]

Nicolas,

I found one example; you're right. It was just one thread, but you are correct. I admit I was in the wrong. I thought the OP just wanted to smear ID companies, as was common practice at the time on AVS. I was wrong. It should be known, though, the OP should have probably just asked for his money back right away. He did chose to wait over half a year. Still, I regret accusing him of intentionally smearing AV123. I was in the wrong, and can admit that.

No worries, you see one or two posts that IMO step over the line between enthusiast and "rabid fanboy" and it's easy to believe that that's the modus operandi for that poster when that necessarily isn't the case (although it definitely was the case for some of av123s proponents). I believe you about only one thread, everyone has...not necessarily "bad" days but "different" days or simply "more passionate" days. I remember that one thread, and I most likely lumped you in with a few other prominent av123 posters that did that type of thing on an almost daily basis, so for that I apologize.

 

[NicolasKL]

You can do whatever you want, but I'm not a court of law. I can objectively look at facts and make up my own mind without waiting for a Judge and Jury.

I just wanted to quote this because there are a LOT of people on other forums that are having a LOT of trouble with this concept, and this post from Mr. Dude puts it very succinctly and accurately.

Having said that, please allow me to put it far less succinctly (though hopefully not less accurately).

Yes, in the USA innocence is presumed in a court of law. No one is allowed to be convicted, in a court of law, without a fair trial. That does not even remotely mean that no one is allowed to draw their own personal conclusions with respect to evidence.

Think about how many people in the US (and everywhere) commit crimes without ever even being indicted, let alone convicted. No one is ever allowed to form an opinion about their crimes, even if they have firsthand knowledge, or have seen scads of evidence regarding them? That notion is absolutely ludicrous.

It's pretty easy to make an analogy here. Seven of my neighbors have been burgled (the #7 not chosen at random but chosen without bothering to really check what # would be most appropriate). All seven of them say it's the same guy, perhaps a local crackhead that is easily identifiable by all. The burglar writes a letter, which I PERSONALLY see, saying that he admits to burgling two of the houses. In addition, he is charged with, let's say, destruction of property, for smashing up a house with a baseball bat (which was recorded on video, which we've all seen).

As if public, correlating statements from multiple victims weren't enough, the criminal has actually ADMITTED to two of the burglaries, and one of the crimes has been witnessed by EVERYONE involved in the subsequent discussion.

Yet to some poor, misguided, moronic souls out there, no one is allowed to consider this person guilty of anything, because they haven't been convicted in a court of law. No one is allowed to judge them. No one is allowed to look at the mountain of evidence and draw their own personal conclusions regarding the persons guilt.

That rationale, that conclusion, is just absolutely insane. It's not an ideology that's sprung from critical thinking or evaluation. I can only conclude that it's a rationale that has sprung from pre-existing (obviously fond) notions about the "burglar" and, subsequently, a willingness to defend them that completely tosses logical thought out the window. It just doesn't make any sense. At all.

 

[bandphan]

Group Hug? How about some CORN

http://imod.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/sexy-butt.jpg

I take the time to find a nice arse pic and instert a little thread jack, and it gets changed into a link Next I will just keep it to myself

 

[haraldo]

Good to hear som good'ol sarcasm Alex

 

[Alex2507]

I take the time to find a nice arse pic and instert a little thread jack, and it gets changed into a link Next I will just keep it to myself

NO !!!

 

[Slee_Stack]

I don't take specific issue with anybody's opinion on this subject matter.

With the facts and innuendo as they are, I feel it's not unreasonable to assume guilt upfront in this case. Public opinion doesn't result in jail time or fines anyway.

At the same time, it is also reasonable to presume that additional facts will come to light during the court proceeding. That information could be more damning or perhaps prove alleviating.

While the 'educated man' on another forum might like to call others 'low class' in their persecution of MLS, he could be proven innocent. Keep in mind that very little is IMPOSSIBLE, just IMPROBABLE.

Start with whatever presumption of innocence you like and try to respect others for the same.

That said, I do encourage pointing others that you may feel are ill-informed towards objective evidence so they may form a more educated opinion. Hopefully, most will take time to study some detail before choosing their stance.

To play devil's advocate for the 'educated man':

'Revenge' or 'retribution' is easy to give in to.

Wanting justice is admirable. Simply wishing 'rot in hell' and the like may be a tad extreme. Charities' names were used in vain, but not thieved from directly.

MLS is accused of stealing a tidy sum from 'us', the audio consumer, and destroying a hefty amount of trust and community that many here have shared and enjoyed.

Put MLS in perspective though. He is NOT Bernie Madoff. He is not a terrorist. He is also not a murderer, a child molestor, rapist, or other truly lowest form of human species on the planet type.

Boil it down and what you get is a relatively small time con-man or average thief. In a moral landscape, how does MLS compare to some executives of bailed-out banks for instance? IMO, quite favorably since he only ripped off a SMALL portion of the US.

Let him do his time and pay his restitution. Hope that most get their money back and that Charities get something in the end. Take our lesson learned to heart and move on.

I imagine MLS probably had good intentions at the start and ran down the proverbial road to end up where he is at today.

I am more sad and disappointed than angry. I understand that others closer to the situation will have more anger.

 

[Jed M]

In a moral landscape, how does MLS compare to some executives of bailed-out banks for instance? IMO, quite favorably since he only ripped off a SMALL portion of the US.

I agree with almost everything you said, but I would disagree with this statement. Not all cases of theft can be measured in money. What those CEO's were doing was/is disgusting, but it was a faceless crime to them, numbers on a computer screen. Mark actually fostered relationships and then robbed his victims of a lot more than money. I think Mark is on a lower moral level then some random greedy CEO because Mark made it personal to win confidence among his victims whom he called his friends.

 

[majorloser]

I agree with almost everything you said, but I would disagree with this statement. Not all cases of theft can be measured in money. What those CEO's were doing was/is disgusting, but it was a faceless crime to them, numbers on a computer screen. Mark actually fostered relationships and then robbed his victims of a lot more than money. I think Mark is on a lower moral level then some random greedy CEO because Mark made it personal to win confidence among his victims whom he called his friends.

Agreed

A thief is a thief. It has nothing to do with the amount of money. Just because Mr. Shifter did not reach the levels of Bernie Madoff doesn't mean he wouldn't have if the opportunity had presented itself. Swindling money in the name of a charity is downright dispicable.

And sure, in our society you are inocent until proven guilty. But just remember the same thing was said about O.J. Simpson. I hear O. J. is still out there looking for the killer.

 

[MinusTheBear]

I hear O. J. is still out there looking for the killer.

Not much OJ can do about that now that he is in jail. A whole incident in Vegas surrounding memorabelia is the one that got him.

 

[T2T]

Not much OJ can do about that now that he is in jail. A whole incident in Vegas surrounding memorabelia is the one that got him.

A bit related to OJ ... the Smithsonian museum declined this week to accept the suit OJ was wearing when he was acquitted of the murders. I guess they felt it would be in quite poor taste to accept it.

 

[Chu Gai]

I don't take specific issue with anybody's opinion on this subject matter.

With the facts and innuendo as they are, I feel it's not unreasonable to assume guilt upfront in this case. Public opinion doesn't result in jail time or fines anyway.

At the same time, it is also reasonable to presume that additional facts will come to light during the court proceeding. That information could be more damning or perhaps prove alleviating.

While the 'educated man' on another forum might like to call others 'low class' in their persecution of MLS, he could be proven innocent. Keep in mind that very little is IMPOSSIBLE, just IMPROBABLE.

Start with whatever presumption of innocence you like and try to respect others for the same.

That said, I do encourage pointing others that you may feel are ill-informed towards objective evidence so they may form a more educated opinion. Hopefully, most will take time to study some detail before choosing their stance.

Well there's an awful lot of detail out there but it's not in one single place and not many want to go through page after page in the other thread.

To play devil's advocate for the 'educated man':

'Revenge' or 'retribution' is easy to give in to.

Depending upon the culture you've grown up in, revenge is a perfectly acceptable concept. It's even admired here in certain circumstances. I kind of look at things in the way Doc Holliday did in the movie, Tombstone, "Oh, make no mistake. It's not revenge he's after. It's a reckoning."

Wanting justice is admirable. Simply wishing 'rot in hell' and the like may be a tad extreme. Charities' names were used in vain, but not thieved from directly.

As one who was involved and spoke with the charities, they apologized to me and to the community. I found this strange. I mean, they were victims because their names were used without permission, but apologize? They explained. Whenever such matters occur and come to the public light it hurts the affected charity and other charities. It causes people to think the charities aren't diligent enough. Or that they just don't care enough about how funds are raised. This hurts fundraising because when legitimate fundraisers are held, additional people think it might be a scam and don't donate or participate. For example, if the press picked up on something like fraudulent blood drives conducted by non-professionals, you can bet blood donations would take a downward spike. So, there are unintended consequences and saying their names were used in vain may be too light a way of looking at this.

MLS is accused of stealing a tidy sum from 'us', the audio consumer, and destroying a hefty amount of trust and community that many here have shared and enjoyed.

Put MLS in perspective though. He is NOT Bernie Madoff. He is not a terrorist. He is also not a murderer, a child molestor, rapist, or other truly lowest form of human species on the planet type.

Boil it down and what you get is a relatively small time con-man or average thief. In a moral landscape, how does MLS compare to some executives of bailed-out banks for instance? IMO, quite favorably since he only ripped off a SMALL portion of the US.

While true some may see this as justifying bad behavior by pointing at other bad behavior. He was cold blooded in making friends and then milking them.

Let him do his time and pay his restitution. Hope that most get their money back and that Charities get something in the end. Take our lesson learned to heart and move on.

Yes. Move on indeed. But let's not forget either.

I imagine MLS probably had good intentions at the start and ran down the proverbial road to end up where he is at today.

I am more sad and disappointed than angry. I understand that others closer to the situation will have more anger.

The intentions were never good and when we all discover the intentions and realize the funds taken from the raffle situation was a fraction of matters that fall more under the area of civil law, we'll all come to understand stuff with money was going on a long time ago and even up to the very end.

 

[Jed M]

Not much OJ can do about that now that he is in jail. A whole incident in Vegas surrounding memorabelia is the one that got him.

On the plus side, in all likelihood he has a better chance finding the killer in prison than he does on the Florida and Las Vegas golf courses.

 

[tonygeno]

As one who was involved and spoke with the charities, they apologized to me and to the community. I found this strange. I mean, they were victims because their names were used without permission, but apologize? They explained. Whenever such matters occur and come to the public light it hurts the affected charity and other charities.

This is so true. There are so many good charities that miss out on money that scammers suck out of the system. In addition, the scammers cast a pall on the whole category hurting the good ones. I find this part of the situation the most despicable. If he is found guilty, I am sure that the judge/jury will consider this in the sentencing and it won't be pretty.

 

[Stereodude]

On the plus side, in all likelihood he has a better chance finding the killer in the mirror than he does on the Florida and Las Vegas golf courses.

There, I fixed it for you.

 

[randyb]

Well there's an awful lot of detail out there but it's not in one single place and not many want to go through page after page in the other thread.

Depending upon the culture you've grown up in, revenge is a perfectly acceptable concept. It's even admired here in certain circumstances. I kind of look at things in the way Doc Holliday did in the movie, Tombstone, "Oh, make no mistake. It's not revenge he's after. It's a reckoning."

As one who was involved and spoke with the charities, they apologized to me and to the community. I found this strange. I mean, they were victims because their names were used without permission, but apologize? They explained. Whenever such matters occur and come to the public light it hurts the affected charity and other charities. It causes people to think the charities aren't diligent enough. Or that they just don't care enough about how funds are raised. This hurts fundraising because when legitimate fundraisers are held, additional people think it might be a scam and don't donate or participate. For example, if the press picked up on something like fraudulent blood drives conducted by non-professionals, you can bet blood donations would take a downward spike. So, there are unintended consequences and saying their names were used in vain may be too light a way of looking at this.

While true some may see this as justifying bad behavior by pointing at other bad behavior. He was cold blooded in making friends and then milking them.

Yes. Move on indeed. But let's not forget either.

The intentions were never good and when we all discover the intentions and realize the funds taken from the raffle situation was a fraction of matters that fall more under the area of civil law, we'll all come to understand stuff with money was going on a long time ago and even up to the very end.

Ok, assuming that this all has some kind of closure at some point, I think Chu should write a book and then sell the rights to the movie. Who should play MLS, and who should play Chu?

P.S. Kilmer was great in Tombstone....."I'm your Huckleberry".

 

[drab]

Ok, assuming that this all has some kind of closure at some point, I think Chu should write a book and then sell the rights to the movie. Who should play MLS, and who should play Chu?

P.S. Kilmer was great in Tombstone....."I'm your Huckleberry".

Kevin Smith and Brad Pitt?

 

[MinusTheBear]

Ok, assuming that this all has some kind of closure at some point, I think Chu should write a book and then sell the rights to the movie. Who should play MLS, and who should play Chu?

P.S. Kilmer was great in Tombstone....."I'm your Huckleberry".

Maybe Steve Wozniak can find time between Dancing With The Stars and Apple?

 

[Chu Gai]

You guys are nuts. How's about we all come up with a list of songs that someone can burn to a CD and send him to cheer him up? Only get to pick one song. I'll start.

Folsom Prison Blues by Johnny Cash.

Next?

 

[drab]

Jailbreak by AC/DC. Cause he's gotta have hope...

 

[m-fine]

Dupree's Diamond Blues.