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

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cschang

Audioholic Chief
While I also hope there is some meaningful prison time, I think I am more in line with gonk's thoughts if it will happen or not.

More so, I wonder what he will do post sentencing/prison time. I am willing to bet that he has money hidden away somewhere.
 
H

Hugh-Melody

Audioholic
On 2nd thought, I have no time to debate the points on this subject.

I have lawyer doing that job for me already. :)
Well,

Since you mentioned my name, please educate me as to how you guess/think my viewpoint on this. :)
 
gonk

gonk

Full Audioholic
More so, I wonder what he will do post sentencing/prison time. I am willing to bet that he has money hidden away somewhere.
I've been wondering this very thing ever since they re-opened their forum last year and instituted their crazy moderation policies, as at that point I felt that AV123 was irretrievably screwed. The felony indictments add a new wrinkle to it, though. If he starts a new business, his reputation is a toxic presence that will be almost impossible to overcome. Opening his own forum would be a recipe for disaster, and third-party forums would be no better. Plus what publications will risk reviewing his gear after the wreckage he's left behind? If he is at all honest with himself, starting a new company is a bad idea.

As for the money, there is a tremendous amount of cash that went out the window over the last five or six years (or more). Some was surely squandered and is now lost. How much is tucked away, though? Curious question...
 
gonk

gonk

Full Audioholic
He sent out an email last spring to a number of people stating that he'd had some form of heart surgery and was recovering at home. Unfortunately, I don't have a note from the doctor to verify that, so I just don't know.

Of course, there's also the Grinch's heart problem - that it was two sizes too small - which would certainly fit with using charities (including people he called "friends") as bait for fraud.
 
Papajin

Papajin

Audiophyte
Could have just been another stall tactic though. I doubt anyone here would be shocked if that ended up being the case -- not that we'll likely ever know for sure. At this point, there's very little I'd take that he's said at face value without good reason to believe it's true.
 
C

Chu Gai

Audioholic Samurai
How about community service? He could go around helping people set up their HT systems. Maybe put on lectures on the pitfalls of using Bose. Or how about lectures on business ethics?
Yes, he can help folks set up their systems. Just like this guy who he visited in California and FWIW, and also owes money to!





 
C

cschang

Audioholic Chief
I've been wondering this very thing ever since they re-opened their forum last year and instituted their crazy moderation policies, as at that point I felt that AV123 was irretrievably screwed. The felony indictments add a new wrinkle to it, though. If he starts a new business, his reputation is a toxic presence that will be almost impossible to overcome. Opening his own forum would be a recipe for disaster, and third-party forums would be no better. Plus what publications will risk reviewing his gear after the wreckage he's left behind? If he is at all honest with himself, starting a new company is a bad idea.

As for the money, there is a tremendous amount of cash that went out the window over the last five or six years (or more). Some was surely squandered and is now lost. How much is tucked away, though? Curious question...
He had a negative reputation before with many in the audio industry, but was able to get around that reputation by dealing with smaller/newer companies that didn't have the history or contacts. Yes, next time around will be tougher...but you know the saying, "there's a sucker born every minute". For instance, there was someone that pre-ordered the Rocket G2's....right?

As for a publication reviewing his gear? First, there are the forums, and we all know how the buzz can work through them. Also, there are at least a few shady online publications that I am sure can be sweet talked into reviewing something....or hey maybe a subwoofer ranking list. :)
 
Last edited:
Stereodude

Stereodude

Senior Audioholic
What amazes me is all the people over on TCA who are just not going to fill the thing out. I guess they want to enable MLS to screw the charities a second time by excluding the amount he kept from the charities from the raffles (on their behalf) during the initial screwing from the court ordered restitution amount that could go to them. Incredible!!!
 
S

Sevenfeet

Enthusiast
What amazes me is all the people over on TCA who are just not going to fill the thing out. I guess they want to enable MLS to screw the charities a second time by excluding the amount he kept from the charities from the raffles during the initial screwing the from the court ordered restitution amount. Incredible!!!
Who are you referring to? I read the same thread and I didn't get the vibe from "everyone" that it was a waste of time to contact the Colorado AG's office. We all got the email today and everyone has to make that decision on their own, including myself. It's unrealistic that everyone is going to respond to the email inquiry.
 
S

Sevenfeet

Enthusiast
On 2nd thought, I have no time to debate the points on this subject.

I have lawyer doing that job for me already. :)
I was just guessing based on second and third hand information. Looks like I guessed well. :)
 
Stereodude

Stereodude

Senior Audioholic
Who are you referring to?
Well, Skullguise, jephdood, & etcarroll have all basically said they won't fill it out. There are several other people (loophead, lonewolf, cburbs, skeeter) who didn't say either way, but seem to have a problem with it or don't understand what it's for.

I guess they don't want Mark to have to pay restitution on the money they contributed that he kept.
 
Last edited:
S

skeeter99

Junior Audioholic
Well, Skullguise, jephdood, & etcarroll have all basically said they won't fill it out. There are several other people (loophead, lonewolf, cburbs, skeeter) who didn't say either way, but seem to have a problem with it or don't understand what it's for.
Seth don't loop me into any generalization. This is exactly what I said:

"I got it too, no explanation. Must be the entire mailing list."

Sure doesn't sound to me like I don't understand what its for. I simply said it may have been sent to the whole mailing list before I read who was getting it. Nothing more to say beyond that and please don't think that a lack of exploding my opinion all over the net is a lack of action.
 
S

Sevenfeet

Enthusiast
I have no idea but if people choose to do nothing, that would increase the odds of leniency in the sentencing with respect to any incarceration and its duration. If you feel that leniency is warranted, then do nothing. There have been other cases the CO AG has prosecuted that involved people obtaining money under false pretenses and those individuals did or are doing jail time. As to him not having a previous criminal record, I cannot comment on it because I've never run a CBC (Criminal Background Check) on him.
I haven't formed an opinion on whether or not Mark should receive additional jail time. He has already served a short amount of time during the bail process which makes me think that unlike another comment that was made by someone else, it's unlikely Mark has hidden money somewhere. If he did, I doubt he would have sat more than 24 hours in the hole.

BTW, I've served on two juries for criminal assault cases in recent years and served as jury foreman both times.

The conversation I started was more a legal issue as to what the odds that Mark would serve jail time based on what he pled guilty of, sentencing guidelines of Colorado, other factors including the age/health of the defendant, the amount of money involved, living space availability in the minimum security system (I can't imagine that he would go to "real jail" but you never know). I wasn't asking "should Mark go to jail" because everyone has an opinion on that and most of that has already been told here and elsewhere.

Finally, I had assumed that Mark would enjoy "first offender" status since there had been nothing disclosed so far that he had ever committed a felony crime. The reason I assumed that is because it is difficult these days to hide facts like this especially considering that the victims in this case are savvy Internet users who have financial means. If this or something like it had happened before, I think somebody would have run across it in a Google search. Most of the state AGs' databases of cases is available online. For example, it wasn't hard for me to find out that a conman who had swindled my father-in-law out of his life savings over the past several years had a criminal record (in fact the same Colorado AG's office is prosecuting him now).
 
H

Hugh-Melody

Audioholic
Excellent guess. :)

Believe me when I say this, IF you were me, you would have kicked his behind several times over. :D
I was just guessing based on second and third hand information. Looks like I guessed well. :)
 
MinusTheBear

MinusTheBear

Audioholic Ninja
This must be an awkward time for some people or maybe not? There were a few that were staunch defenders/apologists of MLS that spread and enabled his charitable actions and good nature over the years :rolleyes:. I wonder if they will fill out these forms brought forth by the CO AG? :eek:
 
H

Hugh-Melody

Audioholic
Guys,

Please excuse my thought but I think we should respect others' opinions/comments regarding this.

As far as I'm concerned, it's perfectly alright if someone decided not to bother filing out that form. It's their choice so there is no need to jump down their throat (figure of speech) due tho their decision.

Different people...different ways of doing things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top