Major Rolex AD Accused Of Racketeering And Selling Directly To Grey Market

Posts
1,444
Likes
2,321
From my understanding they can sell who they want to sell too, that is not illegal... what is the proof of racketeering, cc fraud, money laundering, and defrauding rolex?

Skimming through the 52 page filing it appears the major claims are that the salespeople would allow customers to come into the store and buy watches that they walked away with while the store shipped empty boxes to Nevada and Oregon (states with no sales tax) to avoid Illinois taxes. It seems that one salesperson in particular would charge the watches to their own personal credit card and people were later observed bringing large amounts of cash into the store that was given to said employee. Technically money laundering can be the exchange of funds in furtherance of another crime. In this example they were laundering money when they accepted cash as part of a scheme to avoid taxes.

This probably wouldn’t be difficult to prove since the buyer probably posted pictures on Instagram the day they bought it when said watch was supposed to be in transit to Nevada.
 
Posts
17,576
Likes
26,635
Skimming through the 52 page filing it appears the major claims are that the salespeople would allow customers to come into the store and buy watches that they walked away with while the store shipped empty boxes to Nevada and Oregon (states with no sales tax) to avoid Illinois taxes. It seems that one salesperson in particular would charge the watches to their own personal credit card and people were later observed bringing large amounts of cash into the store that was given to said employee. Technically money laundering can be the exchange of funds in furtherance of another crime. In this example they were laundering money when they accepted cash as part of a scheme to avoid taxes.

This probably wouldn’t be difficult to prove since the buyer probably posted pictures on Instagram the day they bought it when said watch was supposed to be in transit to Nevada.
That is a stretch... Also if the person lived in Nevada or Oregon, the tax fraud case is very flimsy and if proven at most receive a slap on the wrist.

The cash to the salesperson who put it on their own credit card is also not proof of laundering, you would need to prove where the cash actually came from.
 
Posts
2,245
Likes
11,370
It is not the case between the employer and the employee that is interesting for "us" i think... But rather that it exposes the mechanisms involved in making high demand watches pass through the gates that Rolex is supposedly trying to put against the gray market. And how the AD network is rotten to the bone.

Still I wish the best of luck to the whistleblower in their personal case.
 
Posts
314
Likes
308
That is a stretch... Also if the person lived in Nevada or Oregon, the tax fraud case is very flimsy and if proven at most receive a slap on the wrist.

The cash to the salesperson who put it on their own credit card is also not proof of laundering, you would need to prove where the cash actually came from.
Doesn't matter where the person lives. If you ship an empty box and the person walk out with the watch that's tax evasion. A quick google search says in Illinois tax evasion over $300 is a class 3 felony.
 
Posts
12,576
Likes
16,969
Doesn't matter where the person lives. If you ship an empty box and the person walk out with the watch that's tax evasion. A quick google search says in Illinois tax evasion over $300 is a class 3 felony.
The felony charges would likely be leveled against both the employees of the store and the customers illegally possessing the property on which sales taxes were not paid.

I agree that this case will be settled quickly. The next step would be to start to subpoena people from the store’s customer list. One can just imagine how that will go.

Hopefully, the plaintiffs will get their settlement in cash up front. Otherwise, the store could later declare bankruptcy and as unsecured creditors, they go to the back of the line to be paid.
gatorcpa
 
Posts
13,002
Likes
51,886
CDP is a big chain. Rolex would be foolish to dump them. They move a lot of watches. I have a favorable impression after they solved a Mont Blanc issue for me that the boutique I bought it from couldn’t solve. They gave MB hell and got it fixed properly.
 
Posts
2,840
Likes
12,860
Just looking up a bit more on this, I stumbled across a story on the Bernie Madoff scheme years ago that ripped off Rolex for over 1 BILLION dollars. Holy Cow!
 
Posts
1,235
Likes
3,777
Just looking up a bit more on this, I stumbled across a story on the Bernie Madoff scheme years ago that ripped off Rolex for over 1 BILLION dollars. Holy Cow!
Any link for this? Sounds interesting
 
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,987
Having skimmed the thread:

first, there is an underlying and more advanced state court proceeding between these parties, based on state employment law claims; these new federal court claims being discussed here have been filed more recently and can most likely be assumed to be either (1) mostly true and sincere effort, or (2) primarily an effort to generate leverage and settlement zone in the underlying state court case (eg, tactical fluff)

second, I can’t decide if I’m surprised so many people here are skimming a plaintiffs side brief as though it states some objective truth. There are two sides to every story, and sometimes a plaintiffs brief ends up being largely factual and just as many times it ends up being complete bullsh*t **

Nobody here knows which is which

** I was a law clerk for a federal judge and assisted in deciding hundreds of these cases
 
Posts
110
Likes
213
Having skimmed the thread:

first, there is an underlying and more advanced state court proceeding between these parties, based on state employment law claims; these new federal court claims being discussed here have been filed more recently and can most likely be assumed to be either (1) mostly true and sincere effort, or (2) primarily an effort to generate leverage and settlement zone in the underlying state court case (eg, tactical fluff)

second, I can’t decide if I’m surprised so many people here are skimming a plaintiffs side brief as though it states some objective truth. There are two sides to every story, and sometimes a plaintiffs brief ends up being largely factual and just as many times it ends up being complete bullsh*t **

Nobody here knows which is which

** I was a law clerk for a federal judge and assisted in deciding hundreds of these cases
Well put. But it's going to be very hard for many to remain completely objective in the way you would professionally because this story strikes a loud chime with so many pre-existing suspicions.
 
Posts
1,444
Likes
2,321
Having skimmed the thread:

first, there is an underlying and more advanced state court proceeding between these parties, based on state employment law claims; these new federal court claims being discussed here have been filed more recently and can most likely be assumed to be either (1) mostly true and sincere effort, or (2) primarily an effort to generate leverage and settlement zone in the underlying state court case (eg, tactical fluff)

second, I can’t decide if I’m surprised so many people here are skimming a plaintiffs side brief as though it states some objective truth. There are two sides to every story, and sometimes a plaintiffs brief ends up being largely factual and just as many times it ends up being complete bullsh*t **

Nobody here knows which is which

** I was a law clerk for a federal judge and assisted in deciding hundreds of these cases

Since the plaintiff was the one that filed its hard to know the other side of the story. Until they file motions to dismiss or go to trial, I can only see one side of the story. For sure they’ll claim she was dismissed because of poor work performance. The employer is at a disadvantage here because even if she was terminated because of poor performance, if her attorney can show she emailed, or somebody admits she protested against certain actions, they’re doomed. I’m guessing the company will settle but a trial would be very interesting
 
Posts
230
Likes
598
This article is better and provides some interesting details from the complaint:

Breaking: Rolex AD sued for racketeering and fraudulently selling hot models to the grey market — Rescapement
February 15, 2021

In a case filed on Feb. 11 in the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois, a former employee of authorized Rolex and Patek dealer C.D. Peacock is accusing CDP of engaging in illegal and fraudulent activity, perpetuating a conspiracy to illegally sell Rolex and Patek watches to foreign grey market dealers.

The allegations

The former employee’s complaint alleges: (1) CDP terminated her employment for whistleblowing and refusing to engage in flagrant illegal activity in violation of Illinois’ Whistleblower Act, (2) firing her in retaliation, and (3) engaging in racketeering in violation of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (i.e. RICO, the law often used to take down organized crime).

According to the complaint, "[t]he heart of the scheme was a conspiracy to illegally sell Rolex watches to foreign grey market resellers in order to enrich themselves." The complaint also alleges the scheme involved other brands, including Patek Philippe. The now-former employee says that she repeatedly notified management of the scheme, eventually raising it to CDP’s CEO and CDP’s owner/chairman. Perpetuating the scheme involved “racketeering, money laundering, mail, wire, immigration, and credit card fraud, and Illinois tax evasion,” as well as immigration law violations and other illegal activities. In December 2019, after reporting her full knowledge of the scheme to upper levels of management, the plaintiff was terminated.

The complaint offers a wild look at the inner workings of a Rolex AD, and provides some of the juiciest allegations that can be made against an AD. Let’s take a look.

The alleged facts

CDP is a large authorized dealer with three locations in the Chicago suburbs. It’s an AD for Rolex, Patek, and a number of other luxury watch brands.

Interestingly, the complaint draws on a publicly available version of Rolex’s distribution agreement (link here) to provide a look into Rolex’s selling practices. This includes Rolex sending “secret shoppers” to audit the practices of its dealer network.

CDP ostensibly implemented its own policies to further ensure compliance with Rolex requirements, including: (1) sales professionals must wear a Rolex timepiece and scarf or tie while making Rolex sales; and (2) protective stickers must be removed from any watches sold in-store. The policy also makes clear that Rolex does not allow sales of in-demand models to unknown clients, that they can be sold only in-store, and only to clients the sales professional already knows, and that client cannot have a history of purchasing only limited-availability models. These last rules are designed to ensure that hot models don’t end up on the internet or grey market.

Rolex also has strict warranty requirements, requiring that the Rolex/Store Manager monitor sales and that both sides of the warranty card are completed and copied (along with the sales receipt) so that Rolex can ensure the watch was not later sold onto the grey market. Additionally, CDP was not to offer shipping of watches so as not to violate state sales and use tax regulations.

CDP also had policies to maintain strict control over the allocation of in-demand Rolex watches to its sales professionals, with the Store Director and Manager overseeing the process. CDP also instituted a general rule that, if a customer entered through the Rolex entrance of its boutiques, the Rolex Manager would make first contact; customers who entered on the general CDP side would be assigned to whichever sales professional was free.

The scheme

Those are the facts, as of December 2018. Then, two things set the stage for the elaborate, allegedly illegal scheme: (1) CDP hired a sales associate named Yingxue Duan; and (2) a $10m sales goal was set, which, if met, would mean big bonuses for upper management and Rolex paying to help remodel a CDP store.

The plaintiff, Suzanna Krajisnik, was also hired around this time, in October 2018. According to the complaint, she initially performed well, staffed 40 hours per week; however, when she refused to take part in the illegal scheme, she was no longer allocated in-demand Rolex watches to sell and her hours started to get cut. In the complaint, Krajisnik is joined by two other whistleblowers: Joe Di Lorenzo, the Rolex Manager of one of CDP’s locations, and Olga Nelson, who was the assistant store manager.

Starting in 2019, the plaintiff and whistleblowers began to observe Duan openly engaging in activities that not only violated Rolex and CDP policies but were also illegal and criminal. In early 2019 (post-holiday season, when sales are slow, especially for a new sales associate like Duan), Di Lorenzo, the Rolex Manager, saw Duan’s Rolex sales skyrocketing. He soon discovered Duan forging credit card signatures, using her own credit card to make sales and making remote sales of in-demand Rolex watches via phone and internet to unknown customers. This also involved Duan shipping multiple watches out of state at a time, avoiding sales taxes. Di Lorenzo noticed that, while the watches were being sent to “customers” with different names, they were all being sent to only a handful of addresses.

Meanwhile, Krajisnik observed Duan openly posting Rolex watches for sale on Duan’s Facebook page, against CDP policy. The complaint details messages Duan swapped with interested parties offering to avoid sales tax, fraudulently completing warranty cards, even offering some of her repeat buyers to come to the store to check out inventory. The whistleblowers alerted the Store Director, Dyol Hill, who took no action.

To maintain high demand for certain watches, Rolex requires they be specially ordered by existing customers. Accordingly, Hill began instructing the plaintiff and whistleblowers to place fraudulent “special” orders to increase CDP’s inventory of these watches. Duan would then sell this unauthorized, fraudulently-obtained inventory to her overseas network. Further, while Hill and Di Lorenzo (the Rolex Manager) previously had a policy of meeting to record and catalog all new Rolex watches, Hill stopped doing this, instead keeping the watches locked in his office and assigning them directly to Duan. Soon after, the Store Director offered Di Lorenzo a commission on Duan’s sales, in an attempt to bribe him, which Di Lorenzo refused. Soon after that refusal, Hill said to Di Lorenzo that he and CDP’s CEO, Bob Baumgardner, “aren’t going to let no one derail our retirement plans.”

Independently, the third whistleblower, assistant store manager Nelson, began to observe suspicious sales in CDP’s sales software. She noticed multiple transactions to different buyers, but all utilizing Duan’s credit card. Soon after, these same individuals came to CDP’s boutique and Duan took them into a private room, out of view from all other employees, proceeding to sell them three in-demand Rolexes. But, instead of these individuals leaving with the watches, Duan shipped them to Las Vegas, to an address that turned out to be a Walgreens. These customers proceeded to purchase 3-4 more Rolexes — Nelson reported all of this activity to Hill, who did nothing. Eventually, Nelson raised her concerns to CDP’s head accountant, who proceeded to inform Nelson that she had been blocked by Hill from performing her most basic accounting duties of checking and rechecking sales receipts and related paperwork.

In May 2019, Nelson had a meeting with Baumgardner (CDP’s CEO), and Hill, laying out all of her concerns regarding Duan’s behavior and the evidence she’d compiled.

Soon after this meeting, Duan’s boyfriend came to the CDP store. Duan, the boyfriend, and Baumgardner then entered Baumgardner’s office (after Baumgardner “expectantly” greeted the man), where the boyfriend opened a lunchbox with a large amount of cash and the group proceeded to count it all. The complaint alleges these cash transactions were not reported, in furtherance of money laundering activities.

The complaint also tells the story of a time when 3 green Rolex Submariners came to the store. Krajisnik quickly requested one, saying she had a buyer for it. Instead, Hill yelled at her, telling her the entire shipment was for Duan, and that Krajisnik would have to make the illegal “special” orders if she wanted access to any Rolexes.

A month after Hill and Baumgardner’s meeting with Nelson, Nelson was fired under the false pretext of her sexually harassing Duan, as well as insubordination towards Hill. After her firing, Nelson notified CDP’s chairman/owner, Seymour Holtzman, of the illegal scheme, who never responded to her.

After this close call, Hill tried to re-iterate certain policies to cover-up his previous behavior. However, he also began to share partial commission with new sales professionals who had begun complaining about the lack of Rolex access. Soon after this, Hill mysteriously left CDP and moved to Texas.

In one of my favorite allegations, Duan would fill out warranty cards with obviously fake names like Lebron James and Richard Mille. After Hill’s firing, a new store manager was hired, to whom Krajisnik also reported all of Duan’s illegal activity. Three weeks after this meeting, like Nelson, Krajisnik was fired. Also like Nelson, Krajisik emailed Holtzman after her firing to inform him of the illegal activity.

Holtzman’s only response was to reply all, writing “Bob [ Baumgardner,] Tom [Keevan, Senior Vice President of Merchandising] I don’t know who this person is and find out who gave her my email address ?” Weeks after Krajisnik’s firing, Rolex Manager Di Lorenzo was also fired, having reported the illegal activity to the newly-hired store manager.

Hells Angels, the mafia, and authorized dealers

These factual allegations make up the bulk of the complaint against CDP and the various actors. The complaint then alleges that CDP engaged in racketeering activity, in violation of federal RICO law. To be convicted, the defendant must be engaged in a pattern of racketeering involving two or more instances of illegal activity, and participate in interstate commerce (i.e. across state lines). The “pattern” must be continuous and pose a threat of future illegal activity.

Congress passed RICO laws to root out organized crime. It’s been used to convict the mafia, Hells Angels, and other high-profile gangs. And now, apparently, it’s being used to bring a lawsuit against an authorized Rolex dealer.

In addition to two counts of RICO violations, the complaint also alleges that the defendants violated Illinois’ Whistleblower Act, which protects various activities of the plaintiff and whistleblowers for reporting the illegal activity observed. Finally, the complaint alleges that they were fired for refusing to participate in the alleged illegal scheme. As for damages, Krajisnik is seeking lost wages (including penalties for wrongful termination), damages for emotional distress, and attorneys’ fees, including the costs of the lawsuit.

What’s next?

Notably, the complaint also claims that the scheme defrauded Rolex (and presumably, other brands), so it will be interesting to see if Rolex seeks to get involved in the lawsuit.

Note that this is a complaint brought by the plaintiff, so presents one side of the story and facts. CDP and the defendants will have a chance to respond, so this is a breaking story that has only begun to develop. Stay tuned.
 
Posts
2,245
Likes
11,370
This article is better and provides some interesting details from the complaint:

Breaking: Rolex AD sued for racketeering and fraudulently selling hot models to the grey market — Rescapement
February 15, 2021

In a case filed on Feb. 11 in the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois, a former employee of authorized Rolex and Patek dealer C.D. Peacock is accusing CDP of engaging in illegal and fraudulent activity, perpetuating a conspiracy to illegally sell Rolex and Patek watches to foreign grey market dealers.

The allegations

The former employee’s complaint alleges: (1) CDP terminated her employment for whistleblowing and refusing to engage in flagrant illegal activity in violation of Illinois’ Whistleblower Act, (2) firing her in retaliation, and (3) engaging in racketeering in violation of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (i.e. RICO, the law often used to take down organized crime).

According to the complaint, "[t]he heart of the scheme was a conspiracy to illegally sell Rolex watches to foreign grey market resellers in order to enrich themselves." The complaint also alleges the scheme involved other brands, including Patek Philippe. The now-former employee says that she repeatedly notified management of the scheme, eventually raising it to CDP’s CEO and CDP’s owner/chairman. Perpetuating the scheme involved “racketeering, money laundering, mail, wire, immigration, and credit card fraud, and Illinois tax evasion,” as well as immigration law violations and other illegal activities. In December 2019, after reporting her full knowledge of the scheme to upper levels of management, the plaintiff was terminated.

The complaint offers a wild look at the inner workings of a Rolex AD, and provides some of the juiciest allegations that can be made against an AD. Let’s take a look.

The alleged facts

CDP is a large authorized dealer with three locations in the Chicago suburbs. It’s an AD for Rolex, Patek, and a number of other luxury watch brands.

Interestingly, the complaint draws on a publicly available version of Rolex’s distribution agreement (link here) to provide a look into Rolex’s selling practices. This includes Rolex sending “secret shoppers” to audit the practices of its dealer network.

CDP ostensibly implemented its own policies to further ensure compliance with Rolex requirements, including: (1) sales professionals must wear a Rolex timepiece and scarf or tie while making Rolex sales; and (2) protective stickers must be removed from any watches sold in-store. The policy also makes clear that Rolex does not allow sales of in-demand models to unknown clients, that they can be sold only in-store, and only to clients the sales professional already knows, and that client cannot have a history of purchasing only limited-availability models. These last rules are designed to ensure that hot models don’t end up on the internet or grey market.

Rolex also has strict warranty requirements, requiring that the Rolex/Store Manager monitor sales and that both sides of the warranty card are completed and copied (along with the sales receipt) so that Rolex can ensure the watch was not later sold onto the grey market. Additionally, CDP was not to offer shipping of watches so as not to violate state sales and use tax regulations.

CDP also had policies to maintain strict control over the allocation of in-demand Rolex watches to its sales professionals, with the Store Director and Manager overseeing the process. CDP also instituted a general rule that, if a customer entered through the Rolex entrance of its boutiques, the Rolex Manager would make first contact; customers who entered on the general CDP side would be assigned to whichever sales professional was free.

The scheme

Those are the facts, as of December 2018. Then, two things set the stage for the elaborate, allegedly illegal scheme: (1) CDP hired a sales associate named Yingxue Duan; and (2) a $10m sales goal was set, which, if met, would mean big bonuses for upper management and Rolex paying to help remodel a CDP store.

The plaintiff, Suzanna Krajisnik, was also hired around this time, in October 2018. According to the complaint, she initially performed well, staffed 40 hours per week; however, when she refused to take part in the illegal scheme, she was no longer allocated in-demand Rolex watches to sell and her hours started to get cut. In the complaint, Krajisnik is joined by two other whistleblowers: Joe Di Lorenzo, the Rolex Manager of one of CDP’s locations, and Olga Nelson, who was the assistant store manager.

Starting in 2019, the plaintiff and whistleblowers began to observe Duan openly engaging in activities that not only violated Rolex and CDP policies but were also illegal and criminal. In early 2019 (post-holiday season, when sales are slow, especially for a new sales associate like Duan), Di Lorenzo, the Rolex Manager, saw Duan’s Rolex sales skyrocketing. He soon discovered Duan forging credit card signatures, using her own credit card to make sales and making remote sales of in-demand Rolex watches via phone and internet to unknown customers. This also involved Duan shipping multiple watches out of state at a time, avoiding sales taxes. Di Lorenzo noticed that, while the watches were being sent to “customers” with different names, they were all being sent to only a handful of addresses.

Meanwhile, Krajisnik observed Duan openly posting Rolex watches for sale on Duan’s Facebook page, against CDP policy. The complaint details messages Duan swapped with interested parties offering to avoid sales tax, fraudulently completing warranty cards, even offering some of her repeat buyers to come to the store to check out inventory. The whistleblowers alerted the Store Director, Dyol Hill, who took no action.

To maintain high demand for certain watches, Rolex requires they be specially ordered by existing customers. Accordingly, Hill began instructing the plaintiff and whistleblowers to place fraudulent “special” orders to increase CDP’s inventory of these watches. Duan would then sell this unauthorized, fraudulently-obtained inventory to her overseas network. Further, while Hill and Di Lorenzo (the Rolex Manager) previously had a policy of meeting to record and catalog all new Rolex watches, Hill stopped doing this, instead keeping the watches locked in his office and assigning them directly to Duan. Soon after, the Store Director offered Di Lorenzo a commission on Duan’s sales, in an attempt to bribe him, which Di Lorenzo refused. Soon after that refusal, Hill said to Di Lorenzo that he and CDP’s CEO, Bob Baumgardner, “aren’t going to let no one derail our retirement plans.”

Independently, the third whistleblower, assistant store manager Nelson, began to observe suspicious sales in CDP’s sales software. She noticed multiple transactions to different buyers, but all utilizing Duan’s credit card. Soon after, these same individuals came to CDP’s boutique and Duan took them into a private room, out of view from all other employees, proceeding to sell them three in-demand Rolexes. But, instead of these individuals leaving with the watches, Duan shipped them to Las Vegas, to an address that turned out to be a Walgreens. These customers proceeded to purchase 3-4 more Rolexes — Nelson reported all of this activity to Hill, who did nothing. Eventually, Nelson raised her concerns to CDP’s head accountant, who proceeded to inform Nelson that she had been blocked by Hill from performing her most basic accounting duties of checking and rechecking sales receipts and related paperwork.

In May 2019, Nelson had a meeting with Baumgardner (CDP’s CEO), and Hill, laying out all of her concerns regarding Duan’s behavior and the evidence she’d compiled.

Soon after this meeting, Duan’s boyfriend came to the CDP store. Duan, the boyfriend, and Baumgardner then entered Baumgardner’s office (after Baumgardner “expectantly” greeted the man), where the boyfriend opened a lunchbox with a large amount of cash and the group proceeded to count it all. The complaint alleges these cash transactions were not reported, in furtherance of money laundering activities.

The complaint also tells the story of a time when 3 green Rolex Submariners came to the store. Krajisnik quickly requested one, saying she had a buyer for it. Instead, Hill yelled at her, telling her the entire shipment was for Duan, and that Krajisnik would have to make the illegal “special” orders if she wanted access to any Rolexes.

A month after Hill and Baumgardner’s meeting with Nelson, Nelson was fired under the false pretext of her sexually harassing Duan, as well as insubordination towards Hill. After her firing, Nelson notified CDP’s chairman/owner, Seymour Holtzman, of the illegal scheme, who never responded to her.

After this close call, Hill tried to re-iterate certain policies to cover-up his previous behavior. However, he also began to share partial commission with new sales professionals who had begun complaining about the lack of Rolex access. Soon after this, Hill mysteriously left CDP and moved to Texas.

In one of my favorite allegations, Duan would fill out warranty cards with obviously fake names like Lebron James and Richard Mille. After Hill’s firing, a new store manager was hired, to whom Krajisnik also reported all of Duan’s illegal activity. Three weeks after this meeting, like Nelson, Krajisnik was fired. Also like Nelson, Krajisik emailed Holtzman after her firing to inform him of the illegal activity.

Holtzman’s only response was to reply all, writing “Bob [ Baumgardner,] Tom [Keevan, Senior Vice President of Merchandising] I don’t know who this person is and find out who gave her my email address ?” Weeks after Krajisnik’s firing, Rolex Manager Di Lorenzo was also fired, having reported the illegal activity to the newly-hired store manager.

Hells Angels, the mafia, and authorized dealers

These factual allegations make up the bulk of the complaint against CDP and the various actors. The complaint then alleges that CDP engaged in racketeering activity, in violation of federal RICO law. To be convicted, the defendant must be engaged in a pattern of racketeering involving two or more instances of illegal activity, and participate in interstate commerce (i.e. across state lines). The “pattern” must be continuous and pose a threat of future illegal activity.

Congress passed RICO laws to root out organized crime. It’s been used to convict the mafia, Hells Angels, and other high-profile gangs. And now, apparently, it’s being used to bring a lawsuit against an authorized Rolex dealer.

In addition to two counts of RICO violations, the complaint also alleges that the defendants violated Illinois’ Whistleblower Act, which protects various activities of the plaintiff and whistleblowers for reporting the illegal activity observed. Finally, the complaint alleges that they were fired for refusing to participate in the alleged illegal scheme. As for damages, Krajisnik is seeking lost wages (including penalties for wrongful termination), damages for emotional distress, and attorneys’ fees, including the costs of the lawsuit.

What’s next?

Notably, the complaint also claims that the scheme defrauded Rolex (and presumably, other brands), so it will be interesting to see if Rolex seeks to get involved in the lawsuit.

Note that this is a complaint brought by the plaintiff, so presents one side of the story and facts. CDP and the defendants will have a chance to respond, so this is a breaking story that has only begun to develop. Stay tuned.

Please quote your sources... I think this is Tony's? (Rescapement)
 
Posts
230
Likes
598
Please quote your sources... I think this is Tony's? (Rescapement)
The title is hyperlinked and goes to Rescapement, and the title includes “Rescapement” in it...
 
Posts
2,245
Likes
11,370
The title is hyperlinked and goes to Rescapement, and the title includes “Rescapement” in it...

Great - wasn't obvious to me the title was a hyperlink...👍 on my phone screen it "just" looks like a bold font, like the rest of the words that are in bold but not linked.

Thanks!
 
Posts
6,318
Likes
26,141
Great - wasn't obvious to me the title was a hyperlink...👍 on my phone screen it "just" looks like a bold font, like the rest of the words that are in bold but not linked.
It looks bold and not like a hyperlink on my computer as well.
 
Posts
980
Likes
2,999
A question to US folks, lawyers probably - is Krajisnik-Defendants settlement still possible at this stage?
 
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,987
A question to US folks, lawyers probably - is Krajisnik-Defendants settlement still possible at this stage?

this federal suit has only just been filed by the plaintiffs.

In the US the parties could settle (or drop) basically anytime between now and a final, non-appealable, determination (a long way off)

settlement most likely, statistically

But the prior and underlying state court claim I don’t know about status - if it settles, the dropping of these federal claims would surely be a term
 
Posts
16,306
Likes
44,888
this federal suit has only just been filed by the plaintiffs.

In the US the parties could settle (or drop) basically anytime between now and a final, non-appealable, determination (a long way off)

settlement most likely, statistically

But the prior and underlying state court claim I don’t know about status - if it settles, the dropping of these federal claims would surely be a term
If it is proven in a civil case that state and particularly federal law have been broken, can this be brought as a criminal case by the state/fed using the same evidence regardless of the outcome of the civil case (either dismissed or settled)?