Author Avatar



Share post:

The judge presiding over Frank Ricketts’ OneCoin trial in Germany has urged that he enter a guilty plea.

The recommendation was made after the Judge heard testimony against Ricketts and based on the facts presented.

A confession made early in a proceeding may have a mitigating impact. It melts down to a very little part if it arrives later. Rickett’s 50-day experiment is still in its early stages.

Ricketts (right), his wife Manon Hubenthal, and Munich attorney Martin Breidenbach have all been charged with OneCoin money laundering.

The prosecution’s case against the defendants runs over 15,000 pages.

According to Martin Himmeltrager for NRWZ, email and video exhibits were admitted on the fifth day of the trial.

Defense lawyers opposed the emails, but they were overturned.

The DOJ produced the emails as part of its investigation into OneCoin.

They were comprised of the scathing emails between Ruja Ignatova and Sebastian Greenwood, the creators of OneCoin.

Ricketts and Hubenthal claim to be unaware of the claims leveled against them.

As part of their defensive strategy, the couple is dressed casually as a fragile elderly couple.

Of course, this is nonsense. Ricketts has been at the center of the pyramid and Ponzi-related fraud since SiteTalk’s inception.

Ricketts will go on to launder money for numerous other Ponzi scams after OneCoin.

Following evidence presented on OneCoin’s non-existent blockchain, Judge Pfeiffer suggested Ricketts and Hubenthal plead guilty.

Pfeiffer examines the two defendants. “We listened to the two experts.” Customers might have recognized anything resembling a blockchain from the two 500-watt servers, but there were no expanding algorithms.

The challenge had to be answered in 400 milliseconds because it was so basic.

“What did the defendants think, what did the customers think?” Do you require technical knowledge?

When financial service providers such as Frank R. and Manon H. are there, there is no need to look; no computers are purchased, and no power bills are paid.

“The money is used for quite other purposes elsewhere.” “Do I have to question myself, ‘Am I taking part in a very significant dizziness?'” (auto-translated)

That happened on October 20th. Himmeltrager reported on the sixth day of the trial on October 26th.

Thirty-four witnesses have been invited to testify on behalf of 60,000 German people who donated money to Rickett’s firm IMS Services on OneCoin’s behalf.

The public prosecutor’s office in Bielefeld recorded over 88,000 transactions totaling 320 million euros.

Martin Breidenbach’s attorney demands an official translaton of one of Ruja Ignatova’s emails for the second time.

Ignatova assuring Greenwood that they’ll “say their victim’s trash” to fool them is apparently not clear enough for him.

One of the witnesses is a member of the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Bielefeld. He claims he

contrasted images from another company’s report on (OneCoin’s blockchain) (of one of the witnesses).

When compared to the report and data from OneCoin, he discovered that the majority of the data was missing.

Another witness, a OneCoin investor, claimed that when he inquired about “where the earnings originate from,” the response was evasive.

He chose to invest at the end of March 2016 because of the potential rewards and deposited 1030 euros to IMS.

He does not know about cryptocurrencies or blockchains.

“The promise of profits was the deciding factor.” He didn’t care about the training materials.

OneCoin began as a basic fraudulent investment scheme, but eventually included education packages for pseudo-compliance.

Another witness said that OneCoin’s DealShaker e-commerce portal, another phony compliance endeavor, was filled with “crap.”

He didn’t look at the training packets since they were too dull for him, and they were solely for academics.

The tokens were provided as extras to the educational packages.

Everyone knew, however, that this was a ruse to escape the legal risks. “In actuality, we were all quite interested in the tokens.”

Judge Pfeiffer again urged the defendants consider pleading guilty at the end of the sixth day.

Unlike on Tuesday, he emphasizes his message.

Given the severity of the harm, a punishment of more than two years is “in any instance.” As a result, a “no longer likely jail term.”

He invites everyone present to “think it over again in quiet” before adjourning the gathering.

Rickett’s trial is slated to conclude in May 2022, pending a change of plea.

Mindset 24 Global & SEC Review - Is a Fraud
CashFX Group & Dominican Republic Review - Is a Fraud

Leave a Comment

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