View Full Version : Federal agents execute search warrants in Spokane, Idaho, and Arizona
As part of an ongoing investigation, federal, state, and local investigators carrying search warrants entered seven private and commercial addresses in Washington State, Idaho, and Arizona on Thursday, August 11. Agents removed documents and computer hardware for further inspection.
The investigation focuses on businesses that are alleged to sell university degrees.
Agencies participating in the investigation include the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, the office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Washington, the U.S. Immigration Customs Enforcement Bureau, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, the Office of the Attorney General of Washington State, and the Spokane, Washington Police Department. The Secret Service is the lead agency in the investigation.
Searches were conducted at the following addresses:
14525 N. Newport Hwy, Mead, WA
601 E. Seltice Way B-8, Post Falls, ID
office of Northwest Business Stamp, Inc.
5210 N. Market Street, Spokane WA
residence of Dixie Randock and Steve Randock, Sr.
3127 E. River Glen Drive, Colbert, WA
residence of Heidi Lorhan and Douglas Lorhan
14308 E. 22nd Ave.
Veradale, WA
residence of Richard Novak
14628 North 90th Dr.
Peoria, AZ
residence of Amy Hensley
8015 E. Baldwin
Spokane, WA
I believe more information will be available through the U.S. Attorney's office.
From KXLY Spokane: Feds Crack Down On Alleged Diploma Mills (http://www.kxly.com/common/getStory.asp?id=44745)
The St. Regis saga continues!
Associated Press: Law officers investigate alleged diploma mills (http://www.kgw.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D8BUEKC82.html)
Spokesman Review: Agents visit diploma mill sites (http://www.spokesmanreview.com/local/story.asp?ID=84975)
Redlyne Racer
08-14-2005, 10:51 PM
How much, if any, of this will stick? Hopefully someone with access to court docs will post links so we can pretend our speculation is based on substance.
And if any of it sticks, what will be the effect?
Ron Pellar got 8 months for mail fraud on the Columbia State deal, and he seems to have scammed a lot more dough than the "hundreds of thousands of dollars in profit" the news articles allege of the SRU crew.
According to Laurie Gerald's testimony at the Senate hearings last year: "During its two year heyday, from 1996 to 1998, I understand the Columbia State University grossed roughly $20 million. I personally saw it pull in over $6 million in a six-month period in 1998."
In comparison, Pellar got five and a half years on fraud charges related to Perma-Derm and Permanetics, which supposedly offered courses in applying permanent makeup with tattooing equipment.
Pellar also got four years for attempted murder when he hired a hit man who turned out to be an undercover cop.
http://chronicle.com/free/v50/i42/42a01301.htm
Another comparison, Chuck Berry got four months imprisonment and 1,000 hours of community service for income tax evasion. (He also got two years for transporting a woman across state lines for immoral purposes, and did three years in reform school for attempted burglary.)
http://www.cascadeblues.org/Legends/ChuckBerry/ChuckBerry.htm
Someone once told me that mail fraud was the federal equivalent of spitting on the sidewalk. If these cases are any precedent, if the defendants are convicted will they get a 4-8 month vacation at Club Fed and be back in business?
(Totally unrelated, but as a fan of their music I found it amusing. Link to picture of Ron Pellar with the Cream, great British band from the 60's.)
http://www.sharpeworld.com/hal_morris_museum/chops/dr_ronald_dante/cream_photo.jpg
Sitting on my yacht, what a life I've got, happiness is something that just cannot be bought...
Robert J.
08-16-2005, 04:29 AM
I don't know how much if it will stick and how much more might be unconvered during the investigation, for example bribes, foreign govt. corruption etc. Also, Columbia State wasn't internet based and I don't think credit card based either so I'm not sure if that brings in a whole new class of charges for the SRU people as well as stronger paper trails.
The article did say that they have not been charged with anything to date.
...is here (http://forums.degreeinfo.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20751).
The affidavit used to obtain the search warrants in Washington State became public today. The information in the affidavit is simply amazing.
From KXLI: New Details in Diploma Mill Investigation (http://www.kxly.com/common/getStory.asp?id=44765)
Redlyne Racer
08-16-2005, 10:12 AM
Any guesses on why the feds used the name "Randolph Addison Davis Technical University" for their fake school?
Gotta be some federal style humor there somewhere.
Two articles from the Associated Press:
Couple face diploma mill investigation (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/236687_lbriefs16.html)
Alleged diploma mill could have aided potential terrorists (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/aplocal_story.asp?category=6420&slug=WA%20Diploma%20Mill%20Terrorism)
Anyone with information relevant to the investigation discussed in the thread Federal affidavit to search Saint Regis sites now public (http://forums.degreeinfo.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20751) is requested to call the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Washington at 1-800-775-6357.
Material about Saint Regis, James Monroe, Robertstown, and Trinity Christian School is of particular interest.
Rochester Democrat & Chronicle: Feds investigate diploma mills - Sites in West raided; records that name local man are sought (http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050817/NEWS01/508170335/1002/NEWS)
Redlyne Racer
08-17-2005, 10:10 PM
An interesting twist uncovered in the affidavit excerpts posted elsewhere. One of the emails in the affidavit appears to be communication between client and attorney, and hence likely privileged.
Message ID# 200503150509.j2F59PZK091143@relay.marketrends.net
To: forwardinfo@university-service.net
Final-Recipient: RFC822; brad@edwardjblakejr.com
The message, signed by “Steve and Dixie Randock, (509) 466-8829”, to “Brad” references the issuance of “44 blank degrees to Shafiq’s fake St. Regis University”.
Entering http://www.edwardjblakejr.com into a browser forwards to http://www.blakeandallen.com, among whose attorneys is one Bradley C. Allen. http://www.blakeandallen.com/attorney_profiles.htm
The "Brad" referenced in the email probably is attorney Bradley C. Allen.
Thus the communication may have been between client and attorney, and thus quite likely privileged.
If that is true it seems improper for the government to be making such communication public. The use of intercepted privileged communications as evidence in court generally is prohibited.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3975/is_200407/ai_n9454346
http://www.aclu.org/CriminalJustice/CriminalJustice.cfm?ID=10157&c=15
Motion to suppress, anyone?
Hoyer says "never": Irondequoit man part of federal investigation into diploma mills (http://www.10nbc.com/news.asp?template=item&story_id=15931)
An interesting twist uncovered in the affidavit excerpts posted elsewhere. One of the emails in the affidavit appears to be communication between client and attorney, and hence likely privileged.
Entering http://www.edwardjblakejr.com into a browser forwards to http://www.blakeandallen.com, among whose attorneys is one Bradley C. Allen. http://www.blakeandallen.com/attorney_profiles.htm
The "Brad" referenced in the email probably is attorney Bradley C. Allen.
Thus the communication may have been between client and attorney, and thus quite likely privileged.
If that is true it seems improper for the government to be making such communication public. The use of intercepted privileged communications as evidence in court generally is prohibited.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3975/is_200407/ai_n9454346
http://www.aclu.org/CriminalJustice/CriminalJustice.cfm?ID=10157&c=15
Motion to suppress, anyone?
I think the lawyer was likely to be Ishaq Shafiq's.
Redlyne Racer
08-24-2005, 06:12 PM
I think the lawyer was likely to be Ishaq Shafiq's.
Think again.
Bogus Degrees On Sale in the U.S. (http://allafrica.com/stories/200508230282.html)
Snippet:The United States of America has long been considered by Liberians 'a land of vast opportunities.'
...
Abdullah Dunbar, the deputy chief of the Liberian Embassy in Washington, D.C., demanded $5,000 and an expense-paid trip to his homeland to finalize accreditation for the online university, the court documents allege.
Asked if any laws were being violated by making such a demand, Dunbar responded, "Nah, I'm a diplomat," according to the court documents. If he isn't charged, U.S. authorities are expected to seek Dunbar's deportation, according to a source familiar with the case.
...
But with the alleged involvement of a Liberian Embassy official in the sale of fake online degrees, many are wondering how many of these false degree holders are in the country posing as achievers waiting to [be] awarded state power and ministerial posts following the elections?
'I Didn't Solicit Bribe' (http://allafrica.com/stories/200508250308.html)
Dunbar says he didn't demand the $5,000. But he doesn't say that he didn't accept it.
Indictments returned in diploma mill case (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002542535_webdiploma05.html)
Seattle Times: Diploma-mill charges: degrees of deception (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002545288_diplomamill07m.html)
Redlyne Racer
10-10-2005, 01:58 AM
Thanks to George Gollin for being so kind as to arrange for the posting of the complete indictment document here (http://www.hep.uiuc.edu/home/g-gollin/pigeons/SRU_indictment.pdf).
Since I am quick to make sarcastic comments when people don't share, it seems only fair that I thank someone when he does. Sharing and exchanging information of use or interest to the public and our own little community seems like one of the best forms of "collegiality."
The first (mail and wire fraud) count alleges a scheme to sell degrees "that consumers did not earn through actual course work and that were issued by business entities that lacked any accreditation." (pages 3-4)
Obviously there are many other sub-issues and angles on the various facts alleged, but with that statement as a starting point it's easy to see how the government is going to have a tough time making any of this stick.
"Actual course work" and "accreditation" are both controversial concepts, forming the core of most of the argument and discussion here and elsewhere for years. Even as amusing as some of the alleged statements by SRU people are (e.g., "I don't even care if...the Higher Education guy makes something up and accredits us..." (page 13)), it's going to be hard to send someone to jail over "accreditation" in a foreign country, or degrees issued by something other than "actual course work," regardless of how those concepts are defined or implemented in the US.
SRU could argue: PLA or VAE or whatever you care to call it is a legitimate concept, recognized in the US, France, and many other countries. Here in the US schools like the Easy 3 award PLA "degrees" that won't even get you into UCLA. Is the government accusing them of fraud? (Should they?)
SRU also could argue: Accreditation is an American concept; the universities of most foreign countries are not accredited. Most countries require only the approval of the nation's ministry of education (which SRU apparently had, to one degree or another). Liberia is a third world country and operates just exactly like you would expect a third world country to operate, with third world standards and third world idiots running the show. Is the government (or anyone else) surprised that Liberia fails to meet American standards, or that the diplomas were issued under Liberian standards?
I'm not suggesting that any of this is an excuse for selling bogus degrees, just that in trying to prove a matter beyond a reasonable doubt there is going to be a lot of legitimate opportunity to create that reasonable doubt.
The second count (money laundering) just says that they took money from their diploma operation and either sent it from the US to offshore locations, from offshore locations to the US, or from one offshore location to another, with the intent of furthering the alleged fraud. Obviously, no fraud, no money laundering. There are many legit reasons businesses go offshore, and the use of offshore services is by no means improper on its face. Considering that the business entities in question appear to be offshore companies, and that many of the students likely were non-US persons, there probably are lots of very good, legitimate, business reasons why they would fund and maintain offshore accounts and activities.
Similarly, the third count (for asset forfeiture) is more in the nature of a request for a remedy than an allegation of a crime. It wants the alleged ill-gotten gain turned over to the government. Again, no fraud, no ill-gotten gain, no forfeiture.
So if the government's house of cards is built strictly on the notion that selling PLA-based degrees from a third world country is inherently fraudulent, that house is likely to tumble. The government will need a lot more. For example, if they could show that no one ever submitted any documentary proof for their claims (transcripts, pay stubs, etc.), that the submissions were never verified, that there was no rubric for evaluation of that documentary proof, etc., they would be in a much stronger position.
But if for every fake Syrian chemist the government has testify that he got a degree in exchange for a credit card SRU can trot out someone who says truthfully that he submitted an inch-thick stack of documents proving his worth, that's a draw at best, and SRU wins.
..."Actual course work" and "accreditation" are both controversial concepts, forming the core of most of the argument and discussion here and elsewhere for years.
There were several examples of an undercover agent buying degrees in exchange for money. That's a fairly clear example of something that is not "actual course work."
SRU could argue: PLA or VAE or whatever you care to call it is a legitimate concept, recognized in the US, France, and many other countries. Here in the US schools like the Easy 3 award PLA "degrees" that won't even get you into UCLA. Is the government accusing them of fraud?
...But if for every fake Syrian chemist the government has testify that he got a degree in exchange for a credit card SRU can trot out someone who says truthfully that he submitted an inch-thick stack of documents proving his worth, that's a draw at best, and SRU wins.
Having a high school dropout doing "PLA evaluations" of submitted material aimed at acquisition of academic degrees in a wide range of subjects does seem problematic.
Redlyne Racer
10-10-2005, 05:34 PM
There were several examples of an undercover agent buying degrees in exchange for money. That's a fairly clear example of something that is not "actual course work."
According to the indictment, "Jeffrey Rowley" took a test, "Anthony Gwynn" sent some documents, and "Mohammed Syed" also sent documents. The details are not clear, but that doesn't seem consistent with what you state.
Having a high school dropout doing "PLA evaluations" of submitted material aimed at acquisition of academic degrees in a wide range of subjects does seem problematic.
I saw that in the indictment, but I didn't find it particularly cogent. The issue would seem to be the rubric being applied, not the education of the person applying it. For example, presumably a bachelor's degree would be required of someone seeking a master's degree. Presumably some sort of proof of the bachelor's degree would be required, such as transcripts from the issuing institution. Do you really need a PhD to check the "received" box next to "bachelor's degree transcripts"? That's clerical work, and no offense to any clerical people intended, but a lot of people with high school diplomas might be over qualified. Obviously, if there was no rubric then you have another issue, but I didn't see that alleged in the indictment.
My point is not that the defendants are innocent. Rather, it is that if the indictment is a framework for what the government hopes to show at trial to gain a conviction it seems flawed by superficiality or perfunctoriness. This is going to let the defendants off the hook, which will be a tragedy if they truly are milling degrees. Just calling people rude names like "high school dropout" isn't going to get you a conviction, particularly since a lot of people sitting on juries are themselves high school dropouts and are none the worse for it. Your intellectual snobbery is showing.
According to the indictment, "Jeffrey Rowley" took a test, "Anthony Gwynn" sent some documents, and "Mohammed Syed" also sent documents. The details are not clear, but that doesn't seem consistent with what you state.
The "test" was submitted with 25% of the questions answered correctly. That does seem clear to me, and consistent with what I wrote. The information is in the indictment and also discussed in the search warrant affidavit.
Just calling people rude names like "high school dropout" isn't going to get you a conviction
That is a quote from the press release. I do not think that the investigators believe that the way to obtain a conviction is to chant the words "high school dropout." They have been involved with prosecutions in times past.
Your intellectual snobbery is showing.It is ridiculous to have a high school dropout doing PLA's for advanced degrees. It is not intellectual snobbery to believe that.
Seattle Times: Bail granted for operators of alleged online diploma mill (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education/2002587515_webdiploma27.html)
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.