Monthly Archives: March 2016

THE INVESTMENT FRAUD MESS: You Should Make Your Attorney and CPA Read This Post

Indictments for Ponzi schemes and investor fraud have been increasing every day. While pundits, congress and financial experts pinpoint problems with regulatory agencies such as the SEC, the real problem centers on what I call the “Due Diligence Mess,” the way in which this process is handled within the legal and financial community.

After the sentencing of Bernard Madoff one of his victims made this statement to USA Today, “My due diligence was the SEC. What greater due diligence can you have than the SEC? They failed us.”

While I agree that the SEC and the SIPC failed to uncover the crimes of Madoff and his affiliates, the initial decision to invest with Madoff was made by the investors and it was their responsibility to make an informed decision. That decision must not be based solely on government information.

Anyone who seeks to invest in a business or financial product knows that there is risk, and that risk is primarily based on the ethics and competency of the people running the operation. While the U.S. economy nose-dived, some geographic areas did not have the same economic problems as the rest of the country. Most notable was South Dakota and Indiana.

When banking and financial executives were asked the reason for this in a recent NPR interview their answer was simple: “We did not get involved in the sub-prime phenomenon and we stayed with the conservative financial model that we have always used.” Ethical, cautious, professional people and organizations provide safe havens for investment. Those qualities are best discovered through forensic psychology and criminal investigation models.

Just as forensic accounting is a powerful tool in vetting the numbers of an organization, forensic criminal investigation models are just as powerful in vetting the quality and ethics of people leading an organization. The following is a list of three reasons why I believe the financial crimes of the past year will continue to occur unless radical changes are made in the due diligence process.

  1. The Problem with Databases

With the aggressive rise of the Internet in the mid 1990’s the use of online databases has become a mainstay in the daily processes of many law firms and accounting firms.

The problem with these databases is their dependence on local, state and federal agencies to provide accurate and updated information. Our legal services division investigators have found that 40 to 45% of the information that comes through these databases is inaccurate or outdated even information from the “premier’ providers.

Our investigators also discovered that much of the remaining information cannot be verified, which begs the question: “Why are legal and accounting professionals still depending on these inadequate systems?” The answer is simple they are inexpensive and convenient.

There is nothing inexpensive or convenient about due diligence. In my experience it requires time and professional manpower to collect accurate data, confirm those data and assess the information. “Easy” does not enter into the process of accurate due diligence.

The other problem with databases is that the information must be assessed using criminal forensics. What may seem unimportant to the untrained eye can be a critical element to an investigation. Knowing what to look for and knowing how that information plays into a psychological assessment of a fund manager, business executive or broker comes only from forensic psychology which has the distinct ability to look behind the professional facade of people.

Bottom line: due diligence is as much a criminal investigation as it is a financial and legal process.

  1. Forensic Accountants but not Forensic Investigators?

Over the past 10 years, the use of forensics accountants has become increasingly commonplace in civil and divorce legal cases. Their value as a tool for uncovering financial crimes has become a legal necessity.

However, the use of forensic investigators in due diligence is a legal rarity. This contradiction is troubling.
In most cases cost is the primary factor – “my client doesn’t want to spend the money!” How ironic this is since the client will be investing a significant amount of money in a business enterprise or handing over the significant amount of money to an investment firm.

Rather than explain the value of a proper investigation some professionals will attempt to do the work “in house.” This is done through their favorite private investigator.

Contrary to popular belief most private investigators do not have criminal forensics training. Their training consists of “experience” which can be inconsistent and unreliable. Even many federal agents are not trained in this process. Inexperienced investigators without proper forensics training set the stage for a legal and financial disaster.

  1. Data Without Context

Data without context are useless. Because many professionals lack criminal forensics training, they do not understand how to accurately assess human data. Because of this limitation, many professionals miss key information that would have saved their clients great pain.

A perfect example is the correlation between trespassing, breaking and entering, and sex crimes. I have seen this fact missed many times in background checks and criminal investigations.

What seems like unimportant data can be an indicator of narcissistic activities, embezzlement or other negative behaviors on the part of the people running an organization. Bottom line: either data are accurately assessed or people will suffer.

The current state of due diligence is woefully inadequate in determining risk. The current focus of such efforts is mistakenly solely placed on the company being purchased or the organization that will handle the client’s money and not on the people operating these entities.

Professionals and investors alike must understand the need for forensics within this process. Due diligence is about assessing the people and people assessment has and always will be the domain of forensic psychology.

Protect Yourself  


Dale Yeager a Forensic Profiler, who worked for the Boulder District Attorney’s office in 1997 on the original murder investigation of JonBenet Ramsey, is teaching the general public forensic profiling in a series of national seminars.

The PROFILING YOUR LIFE Series will provide various seminars for adults and children focusing on Bullying, School / College Student Safety and Personal Safety for adults.

“I saw the potential for Mr. Yeager to teach a version of his Federal Law Enforcement programs to regular people”, states series organizer Tara Levy.  “What I saw being taught to children and adults as ‘self defense’ in the U.S. seemed lacking to me once I met Dale Yeager and heard what he knew about criminal behavior. I knew Dale could teach people reality based actions to protect themselves.”

The seminar series began in New York City. Additional seminars have been performed in New York City and Philadelphia. With plans to expand the series to the Midwest in 2016.

“As a professional I am routinely asked by parents and students about self defense and profiling and sadly what people know is ‘myths’ not facts.”, says Yeager. “The first rule of self defense is ‘ don’t become a victim’ and that requires the ability to accurately assess people for dangerous behavior.  And if you have to fight use techniques that work for law enforcement which doesn’t include kicking them in the groin like fathers’ tell their daughters to do.”

The series includes several seminars;

  1. STOP BULLYING TODAY – A child and parent seminar for children ages 4-11.
  2. PROTECT YOUR TEENAGER FROM BULLYING AND DANGER – A seminar for parents and adolescents ages 12-17.
  3. KEEP YOUR DAUGHTER SAFE AT COLLEGE – A college student focused seminar.
  4. “PROFILING YOUR LIFE” How To Use Criminal Profiling To Protect Yourself And Your Family From Violent People, Con Artists and Dangerous Co Workers – A seminar for ages 18 and up.

“I decided to make the seminars family focused – working together and learning together,” explains Yeager.  “The idea was to bring quality and reality to the issue of personal safety whether it was a third grader or a senior citizen.”

TRAVEL ALERT: 50 Most Violent Cities In The World – Surprise!


  • Latin America is home to 41 of the 50 most dangerous cities in the world
  • Caracas in Venezuela is now the most violent, according to homicide rate
  • Took the top spot from San Pedro Sula, in Honduras, now in second place
  • Drug trafficking, gang wars, political instability and corruption are blamed
  • U.S. cities St Louis, Baltimore, Detroit and New Orleans are also named 

By Imogen Calderwood


1. Caracas, Venezuela – 119.87

2. San Pedro Sula, Honduras – 111.03

3. San Salvador, El Salvador – 108.54

4. Acapulco, Mexico – 104.73

5. Maturin, Venezuela – 86.45

6. Distrito Central, Honduras – 73.51

7. Valencia, Venezuela – 72.31

8. Palmira, Colombia – 70.88

9. Cape Town, South Africa – 65.53

10. Cali, Colombia – 64.27

11. Cuidad Guayana, Venezuela – 62.33

12. Fortaleza, Brazil – 60.77

13. Natal, Brazil – 60.66

14. Salvador, Brazil – 60.63

15. St Louis, Missouri, U.S. – 59.23

16. Joao Pessoa, Brazil – 58.40

17. Culiacan, Mexico – 56.09

18. Maceio, Brazil – 55.63

19. Baltimore, Maryland, U.S. – 54.98

20. Barquisimeto, Venezuela – 54.96

21. Sao Luis, Brazil – 53.05

22. Cuiaba, Brazil – 48.52

23. Manaus, Brazil – 47.87

24. Cumana, Venezuela – 47.77

25. Guatemala City, Guatemala – 47.17

26. Belem, Brazil – 45.83

27. Feira de Santana, Brazil – 45.5

28. Detroit, Michigan, U.S. – 43.89

29. Goiania, Brazil – 43.38

30. Teresina, Brazil – 42.64

31. Vitoria, Brazil – 41.99

32. New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S. – 41.44

33. Kingston, Jamaica – 41.14

34. Gran Barcelona, Venezuela – 40.08

35. Tijuana, Mexico – 39.09

36. Vitoria da Conquista, Brazil – 38.46

37. Recife, Brazil – 38.12

38. Aracaju. Brazil – 37.7

39. Campos dos Goytacazes, Brazil – 36.16

40. Campina Grande, Brazil – 36.04

41. Durban, South Africa – 35.93

42. Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa – 35.85

43. Porto Alegre, Brazil – 34.73

44. Curitiba, Brazil – 34.71

45. Pereira, Colombia – 32.58

46. Victoria, Mexico – 30.50

47. Johannesburg, South Africa – 30.31

48. Macapa, Brazil – 30.25

49. Maracaibo, Venezuela – 28.85

50. Obregon, Mexico – 28.29

SERAPH Travel Safety Emergency Help for Families Churches & Corporations





“Bad” Neighborhoods Are the Most Dangerous, Right? Wrong!

Don’t believe these myths about crime

Special from Bottom Line/Personal

An Interview with Forensic Profiler Dale Yeager

Some of the things that people do to avoid crime actually increase their odds of becoming victims. Here, the truth about common misconceptions about crime — plus important safety strategies…

Myth: If you’re mugged, throw your wallet or purse at the assailant and run. The mugger will stop to pick up your valuables rather than pursue you.

Reality: Many street criminals value respect above all else. Throwing your valuables could be taken as a form of disrespect. The mugger might use violence against you for this.

Better: Politely hand over your valuables without making eye contact. Follow the mugger’s directions, and do not say anything beyond, “Take my money… it’s all yours.”

Exception: If you hand over your valuables and the mugger continues issuing instructions, such as “get down on your knees” or “walk into that alley,” it is time to run away. Muggers who do not leave quickly after obtaining a victim’s possessions often intend to commit murder or sexual assault.

Myth: The best way to fight back against a male assailant is with a kick to the groin.

Reality: Attempts to disable assailants with kicks or punches to the groin almost always fail. Men usually experience an adrenaline rush when they commit assaults or muggings. One consequence of this adrenaline rush is that their testicles retreat up close to their bodies, making the testicles a very difficult target to hit. Most men also are quite adept at protecting their groin area when they realize that an attack might be coming. Even if an assailant’s testicles are struck, the onset of pain is not instantaneous. An assailant might have enough time to seriously injure or kill you before feeling the full effects.

Better: If you do attempt a physical attack on an assailant, go for a kidney. The kidneys are located on our sides, just above the waist — roughly where the thumbs rest when we stand with our hands on our hips. Kidneys are extremely sensitive. If an attacker comes at you, hit or slap the kidney or stab a pen in the area.

Myth: If you act confident, you are less likely to be targeted by criminals.

Reality: Criminals could mistake your show of confidence for arrogance and target you to take you down a peg. When a man acts very confidently, a male criminal might target him for assault to prove that the criminal is the top dog. When Americans abroad act confidently, they sometimes are targeted by criminals who consider the US their enemy. Rape-prevention groups often recommend that women walk and act with exaggerated confidence when they feel threatened, but this can increase the risk for sexual assault.

Better: It is fine to feel confident, but don’t act cocky. Arrogance can make you a target. Also, feigned confidence often seems unnatural and makes us stand out from crowds. Acting the way we actually feel helps us blend in, a far better way to avoid unwanted criminal attention.

Myth: The least safe areas are “bad neighborhoods” at night.

Reality: In my experience, the highest-risk areas for physical attacks by strangers are not bad neighborhoods but near nightclubs. The perpetrators typically are nightclub patrons who have had too much to drink.

Better: Stay out of nightclubs, and advise your adult children to do the same. If you do go to nightclubs in any kind of neighborhood, leave before midnight — most attacks happen later, when patrons have been drinking for many hours. If you feel at all threatened when leaving a nightclub, ask a doorman or bouncer to keep an eye on you as you walk to your car. Avoid parking near nightclubs if you will be returning to your car after midnight.

Myth: Burglars won’t come in if they know you’re home.

Reality: Most break-ins happen between 2 pm and 9 pm, partly because this is when people are likely to have their doors unlocked. Burglars target homes that appear easy to break into and move on to other homes if the first one selected proves challenging.

Better: Determine what your neighbors do for home security, then do that and a little more in your own home. Dogs, motion-detecting lights, deadbolts and alarm systems all can be effective deterrents. And be sure to lock doors.

Myth: College campuses are safe.

Reality: Unfortunately, our colleges and universities are very unsafe. Security is extremely lax on most campuses, and burglary, assault and rape are distressingly common. Even prestigious colleges have crime problems.

Better: Impress upon your children that college campuses are not safe havens and that attention must be paid to personal and property security.

IRRESPONSIBLE PARENTS? 7 Questions For Every Parent With A High School Or College Student Traveling Overseas


by Dale Yeager SERAPH

The terrorist attacks in Brussels, Belgium have brought the issue of travel safety and students to the national spotlight. Families of murdered or injured students thought that Western Europe was safe. They were wrong.

It never ceases to amaze me how many parents trust the most valuable humans in their lives to teachers, principals and college administrators.

I routinely hear these statements when I speak about travel safety;

“Oh Dale, the high school teacher has a lot of experience traveling.” or “The College / University has a lot of experience with semesters abroad.”

You are trusting people with your children’s lives, remember Natalee Holloway? Irresponsible school administrators and parents – without a travel safety plan – allowed teenagers to manage themselves and the result was forever devastating for the Holloway family.

I have some questions that every parent reading this should ask themselves:

  1. Where is the contact list of doctors and dentists that meet U.S. standards in the country your child will be traveling in? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]
  2. How will the trip leaders get Real Time [Live] updates on severe weather, terrorist threats, disease, riots, etc.? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]
  3. What happens if they close the borders? Where is the plan of action to evacuate your child to safety? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]
  4. What happens if your child loses their medication?
  5. What police or hotel / hospice security are in place to prevent sexual assault or violence to your child? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]
  6. How will the U.S. embassy know where your child is?
  7. Have the leaders of your trip been trained in Travel Safety and do they have a Travel Safety Plan? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]

How do you protect your children when they travel out of the country?

  • Train your children and yourself in Travel Safety. Even if you have traveled extensively you will be surprised what you will learn.
  • Register your child with the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program [STEP]  . This program protects your child from most safety and security issues and provides a no cost solution to travel safety.
  • Have a Travel Safety Plan Of Action. A copy should be placed in the lining of your child’s bag, a copy should be on your child at all times and you should have a copy at all times.

Travel safety is a deliberate act!

Rape On College Campuses: The Harvard Dirty Secret


Many parents are unaware of what is really happening on college campuses in the U.S. related to their daughters safety. They are inundated with inaccurate information from news sources and talk shows.

What is really going on? This op-ed is a must read:

Harvard to Girls: Go Where The Rapes Are

by Naomi Schaefer Riley

Want to know why students supposedly experience sexual assault with “alarming frequency” at Harvard University?

A special task force set up by the school’s president to address the question blames, at least in part, its Final Clubs — the university’s nonresident version of fraternities.

There is, according to a report released last week, “a strong sense of sexual entitlement within some of the male Final Clubs, stemming in part from the members’ control of social spaces that are imbued with a certain historical tradition and that elevate members’ social status on campus.”

In other words, blame the frats.

It’s not clear how the geniuses who wrote this report can draw a direct line between historically imbued social status and incidences of rape, but this is just the university’s latest in a series of public statements that will make people wonder whether Harvard’s reputation as being a place with smart people is at all deserved.

The school has spent the better part of two years and God knows how many hundreds of thousands of dollars to study the “sexual assault” problem on its campus. First it conducted a shockingly bad student survey — full of unclear and leading questions that put asking someone on a date and complimenting someone on their looks in the same category as rape.

Then its president sent a letter to the community citing the shoddy evidence, noting “the alarming frequency with which our students, especially but by no means only our undergraduates, experience incidents of sexual assault.”

And now there’s a report from the president’s task force detailing steps the college should take to address the problem.

It turns out that other than dorms, Final Clubs are the most likely place for students to experience sexual assault. Well, aside from dormitories, they’re pretty much the only private space on the campus. If you’re going to assault someone, the cafeteria is not a great idea. And the English Department offices are usually locked after hours.

Perhaps this sounds flip, but most of these assaults aren’t assaults at all. They’re unwanted sexual contact between intoxicated people, as the report demonstrates. But the idea that these all-male institutions, which exist independent of the university, get to admit women to parties based on their looks has goaded liberals for so long that they are going to use “rape culture” as an excuse to make them co-ed or shut them down altogether.

Newsflash: Even if women were in “positions of power,” drunken sexual encounters and even sexual assault would still be a problem at these clubs.

Across the country, fraternities were forced to go co-ed in the ’80s and ’90s. Administrators thought they would “introduce the civilizing force of women into fraternities,” as Caitlin Flanagan explains. Flanagan, who has written extensively on the problems caused by fraternities on campus for the Atlantic, notes that “college women are no longer a civilizing force. They drink really heavily and they love to prove that they are just as gross as the guys.”

Middlebury forced all of its fraternities to go co-ed and become “social houses.” At one, I recall, when Madonna’s “Like A Virgin” started playing at any of its parties, all the women in the room would spontaneously remove their shirts. The patriarchy didn’t make them do it.

Of course, the idea that admitting women to all-male clubs is going to solve the problem of sexual assault is absurd. As Flanagan argues, “if these outfits are actually such centers of sexual assault, why in God’s name would the university recommend that its female students join one of them? ‘Women get raped at this location. We must send more women to this location.’ What’s next? Sending women students to areas with a high murder rate?”

If these task force members really believed that women were being regularly raped at Final Clubs, the university president would be on the phone with local police. Harvard men would be escorted out in handcuffs.

But no one really thinks that. They just believe Final Clubs are the location for a lot of drunken hook-ups. And they are.

If the college wants to protect women from such encounters, the best response wouldn’t be to force more women on the boards of these institutions but to suggest a boycott instead. That’ll teach ’em.

Dale I’m Not a Racist I Just Hate Jews!


Sad that in America a growing number of people are justifying their racism under the cloak of leftist politics. READ ON:

NYC Campus Bigots

by Seth Lipsky

Americans are mourning today the murder of one of their finest sons, Taylor Force, a West Point graduate. He made it through tours in Iraq and Afghanistan only to be stabbed to death by a Palestinian Arab terrorist on the streets of Tel Aviv.

It is a bitter moment, one that will be talked about at dinner tables in homes across America. The State Department was quick to issue a condemnation, declaring there is “no justification for terrorism.”

Could this kind of violence erupt at the City University of New York? That’s one of the questions being discussed by New Yorkers who are working on the problem of anti-Semitism at our city’s great public university.

They are alarmed at the pussyfooting by politicians as anti-Semitism on CUNY’S campuses grows more overt and edges closer to physical confrontation.

Anti-Semitic incidents are being reported at world-famous CUNY campuses.

There are reports of students being harassed and faculty intimidated in the name of “justice for Palestine.” Partisans of CUNY insist its administration is marshaling the right response.

Yet almost no public officials are standing up.

Mayor de Blasio is mum. The City Council hasn’t acted. The borough presidents are preoccupied. The state Legislature, except for Dov Hikind and one or two others, is cowering in silence.

Neither the Assembly nor Senate has called hearings, though they pay for much of CUNY. They have issued no subpoenas. No legislators or officials have offered to, say, escort Jewish undergraduates across campuses so hostile that some students fear showing a Star of David necklace.

The silence was broken by one of the most distinguished Jewish groups, the Zionist Organization of America. Last month it sent a horrifying bill of particulars to CUNY’s chancellor, James Milliken.

The details were promptly reported by The Post’s Carl Campanile under the headline “‘Jew-haters’ spread fear at CUNY colleges.” Campanile cited incidents at John Jay, Hunter, Brooklyn and Staten Island campuses.

“Jews out of CUNY” is the cry the ZOA says was heard at Hunter. At John Jay, ZOA reports, slurs were so frequent that three Jewish students transferred out. At a Brooklyn College faculty meeting, a yarmulke-wearing professor was called a “Zionist pig.”

The ZOA letter prompted one state senator, Jack Martins of Mineola, to write to Gov. Cuomo, demanding he take action. Martins cited reports blaming a group called Students for Justice in Palestine.

CUNY answered ZOA’s letter the next day. Its answer was signed by Milliken and CUNY Chairman Benno Schmidt.

High hopes had been placed on Schmidt, a former president of Yale, when he took over as chairman of CUNY.

Yet Schmidt and Milliken seem to have consulted the law firm of Milquetoast, Nervous & Dodge. Their letter confessed that they were aware of “many” of the incidents described in the ZOA’s 14-page letter but failed to satisfy the ZOA.

The disruption of the faculty meeting at Brooklyn is “still under active investigation,” they said. They insisted that in the other cases, the colleges responded “promptly,” including with “strong contemporaneous public condemnations.”

Milliken and Schmidt rattled on about free speech, which is not the issue. They also said they’d deploy a student-faculty “task force” and seek “additional perspective and advice” from outside counsel.

The outside counsel — Paul Shechtman and Barbara Jones, both partners at Zuckerman Spaeder — are regarded by one activist on this issue as serious figures. I hear that they were Milliken’s idea, but, separately, that they were essentially forced on CUNY by an angry Andrew Cuomo.

The Anti-Defamation League has praised CUNY’s response. ZOA’s president has suggested that had the events involved hostility to any other group, the response would have been stronger. There have been no warnings of expulsion or criminal charges.

Not that the anti-Semitism is limited to CUNY. Intimidation of Jewish students is taking place at campuses all across America. And not just America, as a column by The New York Times’ Roger Cohen marked this week.

Cohen wrote about his alma mater of Oxford. He made a point of calling this phenomenon what it is — “Anti-Semitism of the Left.” Good for him. Yet the Times itself has been silent on anti-Semitism at CUNY.

De Blasio has closed the NYPD’s demographics unit, which had allegedly surveilled campuses in and out of New York. So our guard has been reduced against what could become the kind of violence that cost the lives of Taylor Force and so many others.

5 Reasons Why Colleges And Universities ARE NOT Safe!

One in Four College Women Will Be Raped Before They Graduate, According to Justice Department Study

The SERAPH Research Team, consisting of education and law enforcement experts, has discovered five reasons for unsafe college campuses.

The SERAPH Research Team provides a bi-yearly schoolsafety report for Congress and in 2006 prepared an assessment of the “The Virginia Tech Review Panel Report”.

In its analysis of security concerns at colleges and universities across the country, SERAPH has determined:

1. Since the Columbine massacre in 1999, police departments across the United States have been training in “active shooter” response. This has been a well-established practice for use in public [K-12] schools.

However, our survey of college and university security directors and police chiefs shows that few have had this training. Two reasons were given: Administrators often do not want to pay for the training or in some cases bar campus security/police from participating in training to avoid what they perceived to be a “militaristic campus atmosphere”.

2. College administrators have no training in security or police operations and as a result micromanage security operations on their campuses. This is problematic because of the obvious delay it causes in response time. In addition, when a college or university has a police department, administrative micromanagement can violate state law regarding obstruction of justice.

3. A proper security audit is vitally important to campus security. However, our survey of security directors / police chiefs indicates that most college administrators will not allow these assessments to be done out of fear of liability exposure and the chance the audit would require changes in management systems.

4. Threat assessment as a science has existed in the United States since the early 1940s. Predication and prevention of violence is a critical aspect of campus security and one that, in SERAPH’s experience, seriously is lacking on higher-education campuses. All Resident Assistants, security / police and department administrators should be trained to identify violent behavior in students, staff and visitors.

A lack of systematic monitoring of people on campus contributes to crime.

5. An emergency plan is only as good as the data in it and the ability of key personnel to use it effectively.

Training is important for the effective management of an emergency by key personnel. You cannot ask untrained people to do what trained people do.

PARENTS click here:KEEP YOUR DAUGHTER SAFE AT COLLEGE A College Student Focused Self Defense Seminar