Conviction

Update as of 10-15-2018 -- The Trevino vs. Alfieri case has been dismissed by both parties.  As we have agreed to move forward, the dismissed case will remain confidential.

---

UPDATE -  This post has been updated on February 13, 2016. Please read about each defendant below.

-------

About a year ago I wrote about a federal case involving a couple of con artists who defrauded me and over 3,000 other people.  Please read my previous post Indictment - U.S. Department of Justice

Michael Patrick Sullivan and John Nicosia operated different companies and used fake names to lure customers to a deceptive scheme. They promised to resell unwanted time shares. I was one of their victims. 

US Attorney Steve Wigginton stated that this "rip-off" raked in $11 million!!!  Because at least 12 victims live in the Metro East of St, Louis Illinois, the case was prosecuted in that area.  But as we know, there were more than 3,000 victims.

On October 16, the website for the United States Department of Justice published news about this case.

New York Man Sentenced For Role In $11 Million Dollar Telemarketing Scam

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

October 16, 2014

Follow @SDILNews

Stephen R. Wigginton, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Illinois, announced today that on October 16, 2014, John C. Nicosia, 56, of Rochester, New York, was sentenced to 60 months in prison, and ordered to pay $962,538.61 in restitution and a $100 special assessment. Nicosia had previously pled guilty to a charge of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud for his role in a Las Vegas based telemarketing scam operating under the names Vacation Max and Showcase Resorts.

Vacation Max and Showcase Resorts targeted owners of timeshares throughout the United States. The overall scam bilked thousands of consumers throughout the United States, Canada, and other countries of $11 million dollars. There were at least twelve victims in seven of the thirty eight counties comprising the Southern District of Illinois. In this case, Nicosia and other telemarketers for Vacation Max placed cold calls to timeshare owners and then falsely represented that their company had actual buyers for the owners’ timeshare property. Telemarketers then solicited advanced fees of up to several thousand dollars from each victim in purported closing costs that they promised would be refunded to the owner once the closing on the property occurred. Many timeshare owners were told that their closings were scheduled within the next sixty to ninety days. Despite collecting fees from over 3,000 victims, these companies were not successful in selling a single timeshare unit. Nicosia and his co-conspirators simply pocketed the closing costs.

This prosecution follows an investigation by the St. Louis Field Office of the Chicago Division of the United States Postal Inspection Service. The case is being prosecuted by Special Assistant United States Attorney Michael Hallock.

John C. Nicosia

On October 17, 2014, I received a notification confirming the above news release.

Case Number 2014R00058  Court Docket Number 14-CR-30009

The Court ordered  John C. Nicosia to the following:

• Incarceration of 5 years
• Followed by Supervised Release of 5 years
• Special Assessment of $100.00

On November 24, 2014, I received an email informing me that John Nicosia's case had proceeded through the criminal justice system and that he was now incarcerated within the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP).   His Register Number is 38651-018.

On May 4, 2015, I received an email informing me that on April 30, 2015, John Nicosia had died while in federal custody.

Michael Patrick Sullivan

Today I got notification that Michael Patrick, Jr. Sullivan has finally been sentenced. The Court ordered  him to the following:

• Incarceration of 5 years
• Followed by Supervised Release of 5 years
• Special Assessment of $100.00

If you would like more information on this case, here's the case number and Court Docket Number.
Case Number 2013R00230
Court Docket Number 13-CR-30103

There are four more defendants who have been separately indicted who were part of this multimillion scam. Their names are: Patrick A. Nosack, Becky S. Marrs, Elpenike Eddy-Aldava, Robert K. Mathews.


Elpenike Eddy-Aldava

Case Number 2014R00317  Court Docket Number 14-CR-30127

Status Hearing: Scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel for February 9, 2015 at 11:00 am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL. (Hearing rescheduled to October 5, 2015 at 10:00 am, same location)

Trial: Scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel for February 18, 2015 at 9:00 am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL. (Trial rescheduled to October 6, 2015 at 9:00 am same location).C
Trial: Continued to October 7, 2015 at 9 am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.
On October 9, 2015, a jury returned the following verdict(s):
Attempt and conspiracy fraud        GUILTY
Sentencing: Set for February 4, 2016 at 9:30 am, at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL before Judge Nancy Rosentengel.
He pled guilty to Attempt and Conspiracy Fraud.
SENTENCE: Incarceration of 1 year 1 month; Followed by Supervised Release of 2 years; Special Assessment of $100.00

Becky S. Marrs

Case Number 2014R00318  Court Docket Number 14-CR-30128

Status Hearing: Scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel for April 13, 2015 at 2:30 pm at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.Trial: Scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel for April 22, 2015 at 9:00 am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.
Status Hearing: Scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel for October 13, 2015 at 9:00 am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.Trial: Scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel for April 22, 2015 at 9:00 am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.

Trial: Scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel for October 20, 2015 at 9:00 am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.
Status Hearing: March 15, 2016 at 9:00 am (same location).
New Trial Date: April 5, 2016, 9:00 am (same location, same judge). 

Robert K. Mathews

Case Number 2014R00320  Court Docket Number 14-CR-30129

Status Hearing: Scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel for October 27, 2014 at 9:30 am am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.

Trial: Scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel for November 4, 2014 at 9:00 am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.

I have not received any more updates on this defendant.
He is currently incarcerated at FCI Mendota. Register Number: 11239-025. He is scheduled for release on December 24, 2019. He is not eligible for parole.

Patrick A. Nosack

Case Number 2014R00316  Court Docket Number 14-CR-30130

Arraignment: Scheduled for January 23, 2015 at 1:30 pm at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL - CANCELLED (it will be rescheduled)
He had a plea hearing scheduled before Judge Nancy Rosenstengel on June 29, 2015 at 9:00 am at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.
He pled guilty. His sentencing hearing was scheduled for November 19, 2015 at 1:30 pm at East St. Louis Courthouse, 750 Missouri Ave, East St. Louis, IL.
SENTENCE: Incarceration of 2 years and 6 months; Followed by Supervised Release of 5 years; Special Assessment of $100.00.

This case is being prosecuted because some of the victims chose to speak up. If nobody says anything, this type of people will continue taking advantage and stealing from others.  I am happy these people are facing the consequences of their illegal and deceitful actions. I just wish that I also see some justice as my case against Victor Alfieri moves through the judicial system.

Disclaimer – As of October 15, 2018, all legal issues (Trevino vs. Alfieri) have been resolved. This resolution was reached during arbitration. There are no pending issues (Trevino vs. Alfieri) related to fraud or theft. The resolution was mutually agreeable. There will be no more posts written about this story.

Above the Law

Update as of 10-15-2018 -- The case has been dismissed by both parties.  As we have agreed to move forward, the dismissed case will remain confidential.

---

When I started my relationship with Victor Alfieri in 2010, he told me about all these different issues he had at that time. He was losing his California home, was getting very little work as an actor and had some debt. He showed me a court notice for a hearing to which he had to appear. It had to do with money that a credit card company was trying to collect from him.

He told me that he did not owe that money, that it was his ex-wife's debt, that she had maxed out their credit cards. I remember asking him what items had been purchased with the money owed. He pointed at his big screen tv, at the furniture. I smiled at him and said, "well, you have the items, why do you refuse to pay?" He was clearly angry and started saying that it was his ex who made the purchases, that he was not responsible. Although I believed that he should pay the balance owed, I offered to call the credit card company and/or collection agency to try to get to an agreement before the court appearance.

I did get him a $600-700 reduction. I even got them to agree to take monthly installments. I told Victor  the good news. He was not happy and said he would fight and ask the judge to order his ex-wife to pay for this debt. I asked Victor if he had gotten any other court notices. He said no.  "Everyone has the right to give their side of the story," I thought. However, I still believed he should have taken that offer.

I went to court with Victor. We were sitting in the last row of the small courtroom. He kept mocking people who were approaching the bench when their cases were called. I told him to be respectful because we were in a courtroom. Finally his case was called. He approached and stood in front of the judge.  I was surprised to hear the judge talking non-stop without giving Victor a chance to say one word. I heard the judge state that Victor had ignored all the court notices sent to him. The judge also said that Victor had been given the opportunity to respond and did not do so.

When Victor requested the opportunity to address the court, the judge loudly said, "you already had an opportunity before. Judgment in favor of plaintiff."

When we were walking out of the courthouse, Victor admitted to having received notices from the court and having ignored them, thinking they were not a big deal. I told him that when an issue is brought to civil court, it goes from the hands of the "private" parties and put in the hands of the court system.  Those notices were coming from the COURT, from a judge, I explained.

It is my opinion that Victor Alfieri believes he is above the law. He already used "the law" against me. His lawsuit contained slanderous claims about me. He used my own money to finance that lawsuit. He pocketed additional money from the budget. He finished the movie and has no intention of ever reimbursing me for my investment. And he still believes the "law" cannot touch him...  that I should "move on" and let him get away with what he did and continues doing.

I filed a complaint against him, his mother, Daniela Carloni and his two production companies on April 15th, 2014.  Alfieri was served on April 16th, 2014. See post "The Service"  for video. He has not filed an answer in court yet.  He has until May 16th to respond.

Because I have filed a "verified" complaint swearing under oath that all the statements contained in the submitted document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, he also has to respond in a similar manner. He has to admit or deny each allegation (paragraph) of my verified complaint. And he also has to do it under oath.  It will be interesting to see his responses. I wonder if he would blatantly lie and deny facts or even statements the he, himself, previously gave under oath during his deposition.

Please go to bottom of the page for the complete complaint filed in court ---

Laws are created to govern our actions and behavior. Laws dictate what is "right" and what is "wrong," what is allowed and not allowed.  These laws are meant to protect our rights and wellbeing. In theory, laws are a great way to maintain balance and fairness. However, it is evident that there are flaws in every country's judicial system - Justice does not necessarily prevail every time.

There is an inherent "legal system" that rules human existence. It is our conscience - that inner voice that tells us when our behavior and actions are "right" or "wrong." We are our own judge. We are the toughest, least forgiving judge we will ever find. We know when we have done something that goes against our principles, morals and values. We know when we are hiding a dark truth. We are also the only ones who can ultimately forgive ourselves. That self-forgiveness can only be achieved if the "wrong" has been acknowledged and somehow rectified either with a sincere apology or proper amends for our actions. Everything can be forgiven - EVERYTHING - as long as we can regain our inner balance and peace through honest, kind, compassionate and generous actions towards others and ourselves.

Please click below [read more] for complete complaint

Advocating for Justice

Update as of 10-15-2018 -- The case has been dismissed by both parties.  As we have agreed to move forward, the dismissed case will remain confidential.

----

I recently received a letter from attorney Manuel Saint Martin on behalf of Bondolini Productions and Victor Alfieri by email. The letter demands the return of business records, contracts and anything related to the production of "Looking for Clarissa" within seven days from the date of the letter, February 7, 2014.

I promptly replied to Mr. Saint Martin's communication by email.

Mr. Saint Martin,

Please see email below. These are my requests. The only difference is that communication can be done through you, if you are willing to do so.

Let me remind you that Victor Alfieri breached the contract repeatedly. He took MY money and used it to hire attorney Roger Muse to sue me.  I believe that is CONVERSION and clearly BREACH OF CONTRACT.

Alfieri has not provided proof of all expenditures.  My simple requests listed below will guarantee fairness for both parties and clear communication.  Of course I do want to recover my investment. However, Alfieri has not proven to be a reliable, nor a trustworthy person.

I am willing to discuss this with you.

Adriana Trevino

I did not hear from Mr. Saint Martin and again, on February 11, I forwarded to him my original message while stating, "I am forwarding you this email I sent to you on Friday in case you did not receive it."

Again, I did not hear from attorney Saint Martin. So I decided to call him on the phone today. After a couple of rings, he picked up. I thought I would be talking with a reasonable person - a person with common sense that would help facilitate compliance with the agreements signed and with the proposed amendments.

I was shocked with the way Mr. Saint Martin conducted himself. It is my opinion that he was extremely rude and condescending... even sarcastic.  When I simply introduced myself and asked, "did you receive my emails?" he said, "I received nothing from you."  When I started talking about the several things I was requesting that, in my opinion, would guarantee "fairness" to both Victor and me, he interrupted and threatened to demand an immediate arbitration hearing.

Why would an attorney do this when there is room for negotiation? My original investment agreement states that there could be amendments if both parties agree in writing. I am not asking for anything out of the ordinary. Negotiation is actually suggested and sometimes "required" before any hearing is demanded.

Manuel Saint Martin said that I was in breach of contract to what I replied, "and what do you call what your client did, taking my money to use it to hire attorney Roger Muse to sue me? Isn't that breach of contract... and it is also conversion."  I believe that he did not appreciate this statement.

I also said to him that he should learn the facts of the case before making such demands and threats to me. I said, "You should learn a little more about the people you choose to represent." He quickly responded that he was simply acting as a legal representative or mediator to get those documents back.  Why would he say he is a "mediator" if the last thing he is doing is mediate. He is simply intimidating and voicing "legal" threats.

I then added, "I know Victor is not paying you. You are doing this as a favor to him." At this point, he sounded irritated and had clearly lost his patience. He immediately said, "yes, but that is not important because, I will go after you to pay for my fees."

I know he meant if Victor prevailed in the arbitration hearing, I would be responsible for his fees. But the way he yelled and threatened me was truly unjustified. Is this the way to "advocate for justice"?

After I hung up the phone with Mr. Saint Martin, I could not help but wonder...

Is he expecting to recover attorney's fees from me through this arbitration hearing because Victor is not paying him?  

Did he tell Victor about the points we can negotiate to avoid any further legal action and unnecessary expenses? 

Has he informed Victor of the consequences of losing (or not prevailing) and his liability to pay for my attorney's fees and for the costs of the arbitration?

Why didn't Saint Martin respond to my two emails? Attorneys are supposed to respond to any communication from opposing parties especially when a settlement or agreement can be reached. 

I am puzzled by Mr. Saint Martin's inexplicable refusal to discuss points to negotiate. His actions are not helping his client but preventing us from moving forward with the sale and distribution of "Looking for Clarissa."

Now I am just waiting to receive his demand for arbitration in writing via email or regular mail.  I am actually looking forward to it. I will finally have a chance to present my case to a neutral party although it would only be the business/contractual aspect of it.

Justice will prevail.

Disclaimer – As of October 15, 2018, all legal issues have been resolved. This resolution was reached during arbitration. There are no pending issues related to fraud or theft. The resolution was mutually agreeable. There will be no more posts written about this story.