Author Avatar



Share post:

Four days into his trial, Alan Friedland has resolved fraud claims with the CFTC.

This is a bit bizarre, as settlements are usually obtained before trial. I believe this is the first MLM fraud prosecution in which a settlement was actually made during the trial.

According to Friedland’s court docket, the trial began on January 31.

Here’s a rundown of what happened next:

Trial Day 1 (January 31): jury panel selected and sworn in opening remarks by CFTC and Friedland’s legal team; examination and cross-examination of CFTC’s witness

Trial Day 2 (February 1): The CFTC’s second and third witnesses were examined and cross-examined;

Trial Day 3 (February 2): the CFTC’s fourth and fifth witnesses were examined and cross-examined.

Trial Day 4 (February 3): The CFTC’s sixth and seventh witnesses were examined and cross-examined;

12:12 p.m. – “The court confers with the parties”;
12:14 p.m.- “Court is in recess”;
1:45 p.m. – “Court meets with the parties to consider settlement; conditions. The parties reach an agreement to settle on the record;

February 3, 2022: defendant (Alan Friedland) admits the conditions of settlement as presented in open Court on the record.”

“Court adjourned” at 1:49 p.m.

Unfortunately, no information about Friedland’s settlement is available.

As per the issued order: “the parties to submit a combined request for entry of consent judgment and permanent injunction” the same day it was reached (February 3).

This implies that Friedland yielded, and the settlement favored the CFTC.

By March 7, Friedland must submit the proposed joint motion. The consent judgment will result in disgorgement, a monetary sentence, and a civil penalty.

Friedland will be prevented from violating the Commodity Exchange Act in the future as a result of the order.

The bottom line is that Friedland settled after the CFTC lay out its case against him. He didn’t bother giving his argument since he knew he was screwed.

I’d like to assume that in a flash of insight, Friedland realized that whatever nonsensical defense he had wasn’t going to work.

This is in direct contrast to Friedland’s comments to NRGY investors in April when he stated that “US authorities “were not equipped to control a cryptocurrency business.”

Friedland went on to say that he was “under no duty to register CompCoin, the program, or myself,” and that US officials had “botched everything up horribly.”

The CFTC’s case against Friedland outlines charges of CompCoin fraud.

NRGY, which will be launched in early 2021, is Friedland’s CompCoin relaunch Ponzi scheme.

NRGY began to dump after the standard Ponzi shitcoin failed.

Friedland established NRGYGO in August 2021 in an attempt to resurrect the fraud.

NRGYGO has followed a similar path as NRGY, but with a later pump that did not begin until mid-November.

No action has been taken yet by US regulators over NRGY and NRGYGO. It remains to be seen whether this changes as a result of Friedland’s CompCoin fraud settlement.

Michael Faust’s Project Lantern Review: Is A Fraud
Binaxx Review: Is A Fraud

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *