Comments
A relief is a sculptured artwork where a modelled form is raised, or in sunken-relief lowered, from a flatish background from which the main elements of the composition project (or sink). Reliefs are common throughout the world, for example on the walls of monumental buildings. The frieze in the classical Corinthian order is often enriched with bas-relief (low relief). Alto-relievo (high-relief) may been seen in the pediments of classical temples, e.g., the Parthenon. Several panels or sections of relief together may represent a sequence of scenes.
Comic relie[censored]sually means a release of emotional or other tension resulting from a comic episode interposed in the midst of serious or tragic elements in a drama. Comic relief often takes the form of a bumbling, wisecracking sidekick of the hero or villain in a work of fiction. A sidekick used for comic relief will usually comment on the absurdity of the hero's situation and make comments that would be inappropriate for a character who is to be taken seriously.
Comic relie[censored]sually means a release of emotional or other tension resulting from a comic episode interposed in the midst of serious or tragic elements in a drama. Comic relief often takes the form of a bumbling, wisecracking sidekick of the hero or villain in a work of fiction. A sidekick used for comic relief will usually comment on the absurdity of the hero's situation and make comments that would be inappropriate for a character who is to be taken seriously.
In criminal law, fraud is the crime or offense of deliberately deceiving another in order to damage them – usually, to obtain property or services unjustly. [1] Fraud can be accomplished through the aid of forged objects. In the criminal law of common law jurisdictions it may be called "theft by deception, " "larceny by trick, " "larceny by fraud and deception, " or something similar.
Fraud for profit involves industry professionals. There are generally multiple loan transactions with several financial institutions involved. These frauds include numerous gross misrepresentations including: income is overstated, assets are overstated, collateral is overstated, the length of employment is overstated or fictitious employment is reported, and employment is backstopped by conspirators. The borrower's debts are not fully disclosed, nor is the borrower's credit history, which is often altered. Often, the borrower assumes the identity of another person (straw buyer). The borrower states he intends to use the property for occupancy when he/she intends to use the property for rental income, or is purchasing the property for another party (nominee). Appraisals almost always list the property as owner-occupied. Down payments do not exist or are borrowed and disguised with a fraudulent gift letter. The property value is inflated (faulty appraisal) to increase the sales value to make up for no down payment and to generate cash proceeds in fraud for profit.
Marriage Fraud can take several forms and is the act of entering a marriage for personal gain rather than a genuine desire to enter into a sincere marital relationship. Marriage Fraud is usually associated with obtaining immigration benefits. In the United States, marriage fraud for immigration purposes is punishable under INA §204(c)(1) and the Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986. Possible criminal penalties include $250, 000 and 5 years in prison as well as deportation and a permanent bar against receiving future immigration status. Marriage Fraud can be either unilateral or bilateral Unity and Immigration Policy in the United States. In a unilateral marriage fraud, only one party is aware of the fraud and the fraud is against both the immigration service as well as the other party. The innocent party may file a lawsuit and/or annulment of the marriage. In a bilateral fraud, both parties are aware of it and both parties are subject to criminal penalties.
In academia and science, fraud can refer to academic fraud – the falsifying of research findings which is a form of scientific misconduct – and in common use intellectual fraud signifies falsification of a position taken or implied by an author or speaker, within a book, controversy or debate, or an idea deceptively presented to hide known logical weaknesses. Journalistic fraud implies a similar notion, the falsification of journalistic findings.
Fraud can be committed through many methods, including mail, wire, phone, and the internet (computer crime and internet fraud). The difficulty of checking identity and legitimacy online, the ease with which hackers can divert browsers to dishonest site and steal credit card details, the international dimensions of the web and ease with which users can hide their location, all contribute to making internet fraud the fastest growing area of fraud.
Acts which may constitute criminal fraud include:
bait and switch
Fraud can be committed through many methods, including mail, wire, phone, and the internet (computer crime and internet fraud). The difficulty of checking identity and legitimacy online, the ease with which hackers can divert browsers to dishonest site and steal credit card details, the international dimensions of the web and ease with which users can hide their location, all contribute to making internet fraud the fastest growing area of fraud.
Acts which may constitute criminal fraud include:
bait and switch
Acts which may constitute criminal fraud include:
bait and switch
bankruptcy fraud, is a US federal crime that can lead to criminal prosecution under the charge of theft of the goods or services,
charlatanism (psychic and occult),
confidence tricks such as the 419 fraud, Spanish Prisoner, and the shell game
creation of false companies or "long firms"
embezzlement taking money which is under your control, but not yours,
false advertising
false billing
false insurance claims
forgery of documents or signatures,
health fraud, selling of products of spurious use, such as quack medicines,
identity theft
investment frauds, such as Ponzi schemes
marriage fraud to obtain immigration benefits INA §204(c)(1).
securities frauds such as pump and dump
taking payment for goods sold online, by mail or phone, such as tickets, with no intention of delivering them.
Fraud, in addition to being a criminal act, is also a type of civil law violation known as a tort. A tort is a civil wrong for which the law provides a remedy. A civil fraud typically involves the act of intentionally making a false representation of a material fact, with the intent to deceive, which is reasonably relied upon by another person to that person's detriment. A "false representation" can take many forms, such as:
A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;
A statement of fact with no reasonable basis to make that statement;
A promise of future performance made with an intent, at the time the promise was made, not to perform as promised;
A statement of opinion based on a false statement of fact;
A statement of opinion that the maker knows to be false; or
An expression of opinion that is false, made by one claiming or implying to have special knowledge of the subject matter of the opinion. "Special knowledge" in this case means knowledge or information superior to that possessed by the other party, and to which the other party did not have equal access.
bait and switch
bankruptcy fraud, is a US federal crime that can lead to criminal prosecution under the charge of theft of the goods or services,
charlatanism (psychic and occult),
confidence tricks such as the 419 fraud, Spanish Prisoner, and the shell game
creation of false companies or "long firms"
embezzlement taking money which is under your control, but not yours,
false advertising
false billing
false insurance claims
forgery of documents or signatures,
health fraud, selling of products of spurious use, such as quack medicines,
identity theft
investment frauds, such as Ponzi schemes
marriage fraud to obtain immigration benefits INA §204(c)(1).
securities frauds such as pump and dump
taking payment for goods sold online, by mail or phone, such as tickets, with no intention of delivering them.
Fraud, in addition to being a criminal act, is also a type of civil law violation known as a tort. A tort is a civil wrong for which the law provides a remedy. A civil fraud typically involves the act of intentionally making a false representation of a material fact, with the intent to deceive, which is reasonably relied upon by another person to that person's detriment. A "false representation" can take many forms, such as:
A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;
A statement of fact with no reasonable basis to make that statement;
A promise of future performance made with an intent, at the time the promise was made, not to perform as promised;
A statement of opinion based on a false statement of fact;
A statement of opinion that the maker knows to be false; or
An expression of opinion that is false, made by one claiming or implying to have special knowledge of the subject matter of the opinion. "Special knowledge" in this case means knowledge or information superior to that possessed by the other party, and to which the other party did not have equal access.
Common law fraud has nine elements: (1) representation of an existing fact; (2) its materiality; (3) its falsity; (4) the speaker's knowledge of its falsity; (5) the speaker's intent that it shall be acted upon by the plaintiff; (6) plaintiff's ignorance of its falsity; (7) plaintiff's reliance on the truth of the representation; (8) plaintiff's right to rely upon it; and (9) consequent damages suffered by plaintiff. Most jurisdictions in the United States require that each element be proved with clear, cogent, and convincing evidence (very probable evidence) to establish a claim of fraud. The measure of damages in fraud cases is to be computed by the "benefit of bargain" rule, which is the difference between the value of the property had it been as represented, and its actual value. Special damages may be allowed if shown proximately caused by defendant's fraud and the damage amounts are proved with specificity.
In the UK a report concluded that the total costs of fraud and dealing with fraud in the year[protected] was at least 13.9 Billion GBP.
In the UK a report concluded that the total costs of fraud and dealing with fraud in the year[protected] was at least 13.9 Billion GBP.
1. To lift up; to raise again, as one who has fallen; to cause to rise. [Obs.] Piers Plowman.
2. To cause to seem to rise; to put in relief; to give prominence or conspicuousness to; to et off by contrast.
Her tall figure relieved against the blue sky; seemed almost of supernatural height. Sir W. Scott.
3. To raise up something in; to introduce a contrast or variety into; to remove the monotony or sameness of.
The poet must . . . sometimes relieve the subject with a moral reflection. Addison.
4. To raise or remove, as anything which depresses, weighs down, or cruches; to render less burdensome or afflicting; to allevate; to-abate; to mitigate; to lessen; as, to relieve pain; to relieve the wants of the poor.
5. To free, wholly or partly, from any burden, trial, evil, distress, or the like; to give ease, comfort, or consolation to; to give aid, help, or succor to; to support, strengthen, or deliver; as, to relieve a besieged town.
Now lend assistance and relieve the poor. Dryden.
6. To release from a post, station, or duty; to put another in place of, or to take the place of, in the bearing of any burden, or discharge of any duty.
Who hath relieved you? Shak.
7. To ease of any imposition, burden, wrong, or oppression, by judicial or legislative interposition, as by the removal of a grievance, by indemnification for losses, or the like; to right. Syn. -- To alleviate; assuage; succor; assist; aid; help; support; substain; ease; mitigate; lighten; diminish; remove; free; remedy; redress; indemnify.
2. To cause to seem to rise; to put in relief; to give prominence or conspicuousness to; to et off by contrast.
Her tall figure relieved against the blue sky; seemed almost of supernatural height. Sir W. Scott.
3. To raise up something in; to introduce a contrast or variety into; to remove the monotony or sameness of.
The poet must . . . sometimes relieve the subject with a moral reflection. Addison.
4. To raise or remove, as anything which depresses, weighs down, or cruches; to render less burdensome or afflicting; to allevate; to-abate; to mitigate; to lessen; as, to relieve pain; to relieve the wants of the poor.
5. To free, wholly or partly, from any burden, trial, evil, distress, or the like; to give ease, comfort, or consolation to; to give aid, help, or succor to; to support, strengthen, or deliver; as, to relieve a besieged town.
Now lend assistance and relieve the poor. Dryden.
6. To release from a post, station, or duty; to put another in place of, or to take the place of, in the bearing of any burden, or discharge of any duty.
Who hath relieved you? Shak.
7. To ease of any imposition, burden, wrong, or oppression, by judicial or legislative interposition, as by the removal of a grievance, by indemnification for losses, or the like; to right. Syn. -- To alleviate; assuage; succor; assist; aid; help; support; substain; ease; mitigate; lighten; diminish; remove; free; remedy; redress; indemnify.
If you have ever been a victim of anxiety panic attack symptoms, you know you would do almost anything to make sure this frightening event never happens again. These symptoms may have led you on a desperate search for something to prevent future attacks--and on this search you may have found that there are lots and lots of options. You probably also realized that choosing one can be difficult.
There are two opposing schools of thought regarding anxiety attack panic treatment: one is tied to doctors and traditional medicines, while the other is for natural cures for panic attacks. There are some who choose to use either, or both, and there are those stridently set on both sides of this debate.
Many victims of this experience will choose only one method and disregard all other options. Since I was raised by a mother who gave us vitamins before we could chew, I always lean toward the natural side of health maintenance. I’m also a firm believer that knowledge is power, so I tend to research the issues and options. When I looked into solutions for dealing with anxiety panic attack symptoms, I found that there are definite benefits and success through using natural cures for panic attacks.
There are two opposing schools of thought regarding anxiety attack panic treatment: one is tied to doctors and traditional medicines, while the other is for natural cures for panic attacks. There are some who choose to use either, or both, and there are those stridently set on both sides of this debate.
Many victims of this experience will choose only one method and disregard all other options. Since I was raised by a mother who gave us vitamins before we could chew, I always lean toward the natural side of health maintenance. I’m also a firm believer that knowledge is power, so I tend to research the issues and options. When I looked into solutions for dealing with anxiety panic attack symptoms, I found that there are definite benefits and success through using natural cures for panic attacks.
There have always been limits to medicine’s ability to ‘cure’ disease and there are several reasons to defeat panic attacks naturally:
Three Reasons for Choosing a Natural Cure
Treating Causes - Not Symptoms
Many medicines are developed to treat only symptoms, not causes, of an ailment. For example, aspirin may bring relief from the symptoms of a headache but it won’t do a thing for the allergies, stress, or illness that may be causing them.
When the panic of an anxiety attack sets in, accompanied by shortness of breath, palpitations, sweating hands, dizziness, shaking, and the fear of dying or losing your mind, many people run to the doctor for relief from this experience. While the prescribed medication does in fact bring some relief, it does not help with the underlying fear causing the experience.
Many people are so thankful by this relief that they forget to think about the long term. They don’t realize that medication will only decrease the frequency of attacks. They don’t think about the fact that the panic is still waiting in the wings, just showing up less often. Sufferers who choose medication are treating the symptoms, not the driving force of this experience, and without addressing the causes, there are no long term solutions.
Empowering Yourself
One of the most positive reasons for using a natural method is that individuals are empowered to control the panic attacks. With prescription medication, although the number of attacks declines, there is still the continual understanding that it is not ‘if’ it will happen again, but “when.” If you have been lulled by the thought that your pills are working, you are completely unprepared when it does happen.
You are much better prepared to face a panic attack if you rely on a natural method to cope. Natural coping techniques reduce the horror of experiencing an attack by giving you important tools to fight them. Over time, the panic attacks will lose their edge and eventually they will leave.
Lasting Results
Medication is only effective while you are on it. When you quit taking it you are no better off than before you started the prescription. As we discussed earlier, medications only work on symptoms, but using natural cures for panic attacks empowers you to eliminate the attacks completely and gives you skills to fight them off for life.
Three Reasons for Choosing a Natural Cure
Treating Causes - Not Symptoms
Many medicines are developed to treat only symptoms, not causes, of an ailment. For example, aspirin may bring relief from the symptoms of a headache but it won’t do a thing for the allergies, stress, or illness that may be causing them.
When the panic of an anxiety attack sets in, accompanied by shortness of breath, palpitations, sweating hands, dizziness, shaking, and the fear of dying or losing your mind, many people run to the doctor for relief from this experience. While the prescribed medication does in fact bring some relief, it does not help with the underlying fear causing the experience.
Many people are so thankful by this relief that they forget to think about the long term. They don’t realize that medication will only decrease the frequency of attacks. They don’t think about the fact that the panic is still waiting in the wings, just showing up less often. Sufferers who choose medication are treating the symptoms, not the driving force of this experience, and without addressing the causes, there are no long term solutions.
Empowering Yourself
One of the most positive reasons for using a natural method is that individuals are empowered to control the panic attacks. With prescription medication, although the number of attacks declines, there is still the continual understanding that it is not ‘if’ it will happen again, but “when.” If you have been lulled by the thought that your pills are working, you are completely unprepared when it does happen.
You are much better prepared to face a panic attack if you rely on a natural method to cope. Natural coping techniques reduce the horror of experiencing an attack by giving you important tools to fight them. Over time, the panic attacks will lose their edge and eventually they will leave.
Lasting Results
Medication is only effective while you are on it. When you quit taking it you are no better off than before you started the prescription. As we discussed earlier, medications only work on symptoms, but using natural cures for panic attacks empowers you to eliminate the attacks completely and gives you skills to fight them off for life.
Everyone agrees Madoff was running a Ponzi scheme. He even admitted it himself in a court of law. There was never any investment plan - just a lot of hoopla that encouraged people to buy in. Why should we doubt this story? Because the people who bought in were multi-billion dollar institutional managers who could detect a Ponzi scheme with their eyes closed. So who profited from the fiction that it was a Ponzi scheme?
It is possible to accept the idea of a Ponzi scheme be played on members of the public, who are ignorant of how such schemes are worked, in fact the schemes are targetted specifica lly at such people. Yet, Madoff would have us believe that he managed to convince professional investment companies to put their funds with him without any due diligence being performed. This is clearly nonsense.
It is possible to accept the idea of a Ponzi scheme be played on members of the public, who are ignorant of how such schemes are worked, in fact the schemes are targetted specifica lly at such people. Yet, Madoff would have us believe that he managed to convince professional investment companies to put their funds with him without any due diligence being performed. This is clearly nonsense.
“Full details of the exact losses are yet to emerge. Hedge funds and banks have so far admitted to having around £16billion with Madoff - only half of the total that is reckone d to have been lost. Some of the biggest casualties are Swiss private banks, which have taken hits amounting to about £2.5billion. Spanish bank Santander had £2.1billion of client money with Madoff. HSBC has admitted to lending about £600million to funds who wanted to use debt to gear up their positions with Madoff. RAB capital, the hedge fund that lost huge sums on investing in Northern Rock, has revealed that it is exposed to Madoff to the tune of around £6million.”
The idea that anyone in HSBC or Santander could authorise large investment, without the internal checks and controls being employed, is almost impossible. To try and believe that EVERY institution that invested in Madoff circumvented their internal control procedures IS impossible.
Why is this important? Simple. If someone approaches the HSBC credit risk team, for instance, with a view to making a loan or investing a sum as large as £600m to what is ultimately a single institution (therefore a single counterparty credit exposure) a significant number hoops would have to be jumped through. Firstly there is the credit officer competence limit, which is the maximum amount that a single credit officer may be allowed to authorise. More than his/her limit must be referred up the credit approval food chain. In an institution like HSBC or Santander etc, £600bn or US$1bn will have been referred to the very top of the food chain, the banks’ credit committees at the board level. This is an enormous sum and no lacky is going to be able to approve this by themselves, ever.
Why is this important? Simple. If someone approaches the HSBC credit risk team, for instance, with a view to making a loan or investing a sum as large as £600m to what is ultimately a single institution (therefore a single counterparty credit exposure) a significant number hoops would have to be jumped through. Firstly there is the credit officer competence limit, which is the maximum amount that a single credit officer may be allowed to authorise. More than his/her limit must be referred up the credit approval food chain. In an institution like HSBC or Santander etc, £600bn or US$1bn will have been referred to the very top of the food chain, the banks’ credit committees at the board level. This is an enormous sum and no lacky is going to be able to approve this by themselves, ever.
When the credit committee are called together to review an application, everything is ready prepared for them, so they can cut to the chase . The lower levels of the credit approval process will have prepared a summary of all the application documentation, included in the meeting bundle, with the strengths, weaknesses, and other important credit risk points. This application will usually contain a set of audited accounts going back a minimum of 3 years and most likely 5 years. There will be a full credit breakdown of the investment profile of the business, Madoff’s hedge fund, looking at how the fund obtains its returns; investment assets and investment methodology. After the committee is satisfied that all the issues and concerns have been addressed they will vote on the approval or otherwise.
So, there is no way that Madoff could have been pulling a scam. It would have stood out as clear as day to professional financial analysts, whose only job in life is to examine the management of companies and their reports and accounts, to make sure that all is in order. Its their job, its what they do. They are the world experts in spotting anomalies. The idea that all these professionals in all these companies were all duped is absolute nonsense. It is highly improbable that one such evaluation process could have been fooled, but all of them, never. A Ponzi scheme is easy to spot when you have the audited accounts and the full range of investment assets and investment metodologies employed.
Also, this scam avoided the attention of all the funds employees; accountants, traders, auditors and the US regulators, all of whom are also financial professionals.
Also, this scam avoided the attention of all the funds employees; accountants, traders, auditors and the US regulators, all of whom are also financial professionals.
This again is absolute nonsense. A ny company that I have ever worked for would have known internally that such business was being done, because they are all involved. For instance, a trader goes on buying equities from the worlds stock exchanges that go down in price for 5 continuous years, but the company just keeps giving him more money to top up the trading, continues paying his salary and even annual bonus. Absolute rubbish. But assuming this actually did happen, the market risk team would have been watching these losses, as would have the accountants. It is not possible to hide things like this internally for very long, months at the most; 20+ years, NEVER.
So why plead guilty? The answer is simple. Look on the net and you will see that because this case is being labelled a fraud, it would appear that investors are going to be able to claim their investment back under the US government’s financial fraud protection scheme. A judge has already given his approval in principle for compensation, w ithout any evidence having been presented and financial fraud being demonstrated in a court of law. And it would appear that there will never be such a demonstration in a court of law. Why? It would appear that all the funds financial records are mostly “missing” (rather like Dov Zakheim’s US$1.4tn) and those few records that do survive are in a terrible mess.
However, since the guy has pleaded guilty, we do not need to demonstrate the fraud, because he says he is guilty.
However, since the guy has pleaded guilty, we do not need to demonstrate the fraud, because he says he is guilty.
And look further on the net and you will see that these “victims” have also been told by the US tax authorities that they will probably also be entitled to claim back some taxes on these defrauded sums.
Rather than saying this hedge fund has gone bust, due to its choice of investment assets and investment methologies, a scenario which is highly probable in the current financial paradigm, since all the professionals are predicting that at least 30% of all hedge funds are about to fail, more than 700 of them, the CEO chooses to fess up to fraud. If the CEO admits the fund has gone bust, then all those wealthy members of the Jewish community get nothing, but if the CEO admits to fraud they get their money back as compensation from the US tax payer, just as they are also drawing money back from the tax payers with the other hand.
Rather than saying this hedge fund has gone bust, due to its choice of investment assets and investment methologies, a scenario which is highly probable in the current financial paradigm, since all the professionals are predicting that at least 30% of all hedge funds are about to fail, more than 700 of them, the CEO chooses to fess up to fraud. If the CEO admits the fund has gone bust, then all those wealthy members of the Jewish community get nothing, but if the CEO admits to fraud they get their money back as compensation from the US tax payer, just as they are also drawing money back from the tax payers with the other hand.
It can be termed as unfortunate, but nobody can do anything if someone is contemplating fraud, Indian corporate leader Sunil Mittal said about the massive financial wrong-doings at Satyam Computer.
"It's unfortunate. But this is not a corporate governance issue. It is clearly a fraud, " Mittal told PTI on the sidelines of the Mobile World Congress being held here.
"Most of the Fortune 500 companies were (being) served by Satyam. The board was very strong. If fraud is going on in someone's mind, nobody can do anything about that, " said Mittal, who heads India's largest telecom company Bharti Airtel.
Indian IT firm Satyam's founder and the then Chairman B Ramalinga Raju shocked the corporate world last month with a disclosure of about Rs 7, 800 crore financial wrongdoing at the company through over-statements of profits and under-statement of obligations over several years.
"It's unfortunate. But this is not a corporate governance issue. It is clearly a fraud, " Mittal told PTI on the sidelines of the Mobile World Congress being held here.
"Most of the Fortune 500 companies were (being) served by Satyam. The board was very strong. If fraud is going on in someone's mind, nobody can do anything about that, " said Mittal, who heads India's largest telecom company Bharti Airtel.
Indian IT firm Satyam's founder and the then Chairman B Ramalinga Raju shocked the corporate world last month with a disclosure of about Rs 7, 800 crore financial wrongdoing at the company through over-statements of profits and under-statement of obligations over several years.
Life is sweet, until Stevie finds himself in hot water for selling a dodgy watch to biker Russian Tony.
To buy his way out, Stevie agrees to do a job for local hood 'Bondi Bob' McLean. All he has to do is fly to Melbourne to pick up some stolen jewels in a briefcase.
When it all goes pearshape and a gunfight breaks out, Stevie and Elmo narrowly escape but, in the confusion, with the wrong briefcase.
The briefcase belongs to Peter Cho, a Chinatown villain with a deadly reputation - its contents: a rare go-fast potion said to turn any average horse into a race winner.
The only thing to do is trade off with Cho - how hard can it be?