Court Strips Ruth Madoff of Everything....Except $2.5 Million To Survive
From Reuters today: "NEW YORK (Reuters) - Ruth Madoff, the wife of epic swindler Bernard Madoff who reaped billions and a lavish family lifestyle, will be left with $2.5 million and have to look for a new home as she forfeits claim to some $80 million in assets."
I read this item after coming in from a walk. Five houses away from my house, there is a sign in front of the nicest house on the street. "FOR SALE BY THE BANK."
I live in Chevy Chase, Maryland and, no surprise, I don't see many of these.
As for this house, it was pretty gorgeous. It was owned by a very old couple who kept the house immaculate. We didn't know them but saw them around. And we knew their name because it was affixed to the house on a beautiful mosaic sign. They obviously were proud people.
Now they are in foreclosure. The spot where their name was is mangy looking and, believe it or not, the house is already looking shaggy.
So what happened?
It turns out that they vacationed in Florida where they met one Bernie Madoff. You know the rest of the story.
I'm not crying over this old couple. There are surely people worse off who never could have had the means to invest with that pig Madoff.
But I am furious contemplating my neighbors losing everything while Bernie's wife and partner gets to walk away with $2.5 million in stolen money. Ruth worked. No one can touch her social security. She's eligible for Medicare. Let her live off that.
Why does she get to keep money she and hubby stole? Justice. Feh.
But, does she awake at 3 am in a cold sweat, every night, to await the harsh dawn?
June 27, 2009 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Highly Doubtful
June 27, 2009 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm thinking about what I'm going to say and I realize what I what to say here sounds like I'm a real lefty and I'm not one.
This is *stolen* money, as you say. The court is awarding *stolen* money that surely doesn't belong to the government to the thieves (or wife of thief) who robbed people whose identities must be known. How can that be? If social security is enough to live, great, let the thief's wife live on social security. Problem solved. If it's not, then she can think about what kind of job she'd like to get to supplement that. She might like to wash floors, for example. Or try working nights as a rent-a-cop. Again, solved.
The reason the government would have the temerity to award her stolen money that is not its own, that her husband stole, and that she off of illegitimately for however many years must be one of two things: (1) the people who wrote the laws and regulations governing this are fat cats sympathetic to the rich who have a twisted view of what a thief's wife shold be entitled to, or else (2) the judge is a fat cat with that twisted view. You might ask in fact, instead of receiving *anything,* why is she not paying *compensation* to those defrauded for all those fancy dinners and vacations she went on with the money stolen from them. They relayed on that money. Why doesn't she help pay it back to them? Why isn't she forced to?
Beats me.
June 27, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'd be inclined to agree. How the court decided she was legally entitled to any of it is a fair question. There may be things we don't know or as suggested, maybe the judge isn't so hot in the judgment department.
What we really need though is for all the crooks lounging in the executive suites of the nations major banks is to visit Madoff - permanently. After all they made bad judgements that ended in equally bad results for a lot of people while all along proposing they knew exactly what they were doing. Not a whole lot of difference when you come right down to it.
June 27, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whole thing's pretty annoying, isn't it?
June 27, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right about this. It's more than a little screwed up she gets to walk away with $2.5 mil. Most people don't make that in an entire lifes work and ceratinly don't have that much 'left over' when it comes time to retire. Its even worse when you think about all the working stiffs who lost serious value in their homes and 401k plans because of people like the Madoffs. None of them have a $2.5 mil cushion laying around.
June 27, 2009 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Many states treat marriages as partnerships where both partners fully own all of the assets of the partnership and fully own all of the debts of the partnership. If that seems unfair to an "innocent" wife of a crook, it isn't. No one is forced to enter into a partnership with a crook.
I think in this particular case, the Judge was unaware that anyone can live on less than $2.5 million in assets. He most likely believed he was allowing her to keep only the very bare minimum, to keep her out of homelessness. The wealthy, and most judges fit that criteria, are utterly unaware of real life.
June 27, 2009 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is a federal judge, so he cannot be voted out in 2 or 3 or 5 or 6 or however many years. Too bad.
The prosecutor shares part of the blame, there was a bargain or some sort.
June 27, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
"In compromise of claims Ruth Madoff would have pursued, the Office (U.S. Attorney) will not contest claim to a sum of money equal to $2,500,000, which sum the Office shall cause to be tendered to Ruth Madoff promptly after she vacates the real property and surrenders all personal property," the court order said. Reuters 6/27/2009
I don't see the judge being involved at all?
June 27, 2009 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
There was a fraud case from the depression era 1930's handled by the feds, and discussed a few years ago in the NYT. I can't find it now but it mentioned how the chief executive had his house and vacation property seized, his accounts all taken to pay off defrauded investors, and the feds even auctioned off his personal possessions, including the clothes in his closet! The former executive went to jail of course.
Treatment like that likely helped keep other would be white collar criminals honest the rest of their lives.
June 27, 2009 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Her closet should be cleaned out, and she should move into a homeless shelter. When she starts getting pay checks from her $7.15/hr janitorial job, the homeless shelter can deduct $300/month for rent, as is now being done by order of Mayor Bloomberg.
Additional money can be deducted to pay victims of the fraud she undoubtedly partook in.
If she spends her food stamp money very wisely, she'll only need to live in the homeless shelter for 6 months or so before saving up $600 to pay a $300 deposit and $300 first month rent for her half of a converted 1 bedroom in East New York/Brownsville.
Within 6 months, her food stamps will be taken away because she will be making more than $1,000/month.
She will be taxed at almost double the rate that hedge fund CEOs get taxed, and she can think about the definition of fair during her 1 hour 15 minute, bus, train, train commute to and from work.
If she decides that it is unfair that she is only given a half hour unpaid break for lunch during the course of an 8 hour shift, with no other breaks, she can write a letter to her legislator.
If she decides that it's unfair that her janitorial supervisor threatens to fire her every time she shows up 2 minutes late, or misses a spot on the floor, she can write a letter to her legislator.
If she becomes ill or injured, she should have thought about that before she decided to make more than the minimum for Medicaid, by quitting her job within 6 months, re-applying for Medicaid, and hoping she finds another custodial job in a time of high unemployment, age discrimination, and a preference for 5 or more years janitorial experience.
June 27, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
If a federal court executed that sentence on Madoff, it would do more to clean up Wall street than a hundred accountants and a six foot pile of new regulations.
June 27, 2009 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
MJ: "Why does she get to keep money she and hubby stole? Justice. Feh."
The stories of many of the victims of Madoff are very heart wrenching. And a reminder of how cold America can be when you are old and broke.
June 27, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
She claims to have had an inheritance from her father. Her legal bills will be way more than 2.5. She will have no possessions. In some ways her life will be harsher than Bernie who will never have to cook a meal or pay rent. If she's lucky she will be indicted and convicted.
June 27, 2009 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ruth Madoff must show independent sources of wealth
When Madoff approached Donald Trump he was told "I can lose my own money, thank you very much". Many other savvy people were aware that what Madoff was peddling was too good to be true...and they so advised their friends and clients.
Madoff was a crook who, on his own and through a network of equally guilty and greedy "feeders" betrayed the trust of friends, family, community. But most of the victims were not complete innocents. They should have done due diligence. If they didn't, or if they chose to disregard good advice in favor of "assured" returns, then, to some extent, they got what they deserved.
After all "thepeoplechose" says
people should be jailed for exercising bad judgement (and no one here has disagreed) and the victims are certainly guilty of that.
Kind of fries your populist asses, doesn't it. That's not what you had in mind, is it?
June 27, 2009 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess excessive tribal pride can lead to bad judgment.
"Of course we're getting top return, Madoff's Jewish!"
June 27, 2009 9:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
And your explanation for those who fell for Stanford's swindle is?
June 27, 2009 10:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
And all those Congressional and Administration people who went for the bailout of big bankers first proposed by Paulson and now by Summers and Geithner? More Jewish swindles?
June 27, 2009 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
After all these years of swindling others the Jews finally got what was coming to them, right? Come on, Walker, admit that's what you believe.
Or.
The truth could be that so many Jews got taken because Jews hardly ever behave the way Madoff did, hardly ever betray each other. A handshake between lansmen is enough to be worthy of trust. Did that ever occur to you? Naw. Of course not. A hardcore anti-semite like you would never entertain such a thought.
June 27, 2009 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Settle down, ordinary. You were trying to antagonize:
"Kind of fries your populist asses, doesn't it"
So I figured I'd point out a factor in the Madoff swindle that would be sure to rile you up.
The rate of return that Madoff was delivering was enough to make a whole lot of people suspicious.
And since you bring it up, I'm sure Greenspan, Bernanke, and these guys...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXlxBeAvsB8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj0JAfq4esk
Were all hired by the Fed in a meritocratic fashion, despite their inability to know a giant housing bubble when they (over)see one, to explain where trillions in loans went, or to investigate these issues, respectively.
What are the odds that Jews, who make up 2% of the U.S. population, could end up with all these top Fed positions, where they could use their superior intellects to safely guide the American economy?
Most Jews are good honest people, but the bastards shouldn't get a blank check for all eternity. Agreed?
June 27, 2009 11:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Correction, "blank check" should have been "free pass."
June 27, 2009 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
All the guys at the top possess superior intellect, honest or not, right or not. Why are so many of them Jews? Why are Jews so successful? There aren't too many possible explanations are there; great genes, a superior culture, or they are just sneaky, conniving bastards.
Economics is not a science, dismal or otherwise. Which means that there are all kinds of theories about how things work...and they are all wrong at crucial times. That means overnment regulators are going to have a very hard time being party poopers. Greenspan was hired because he got it; He tried with "irrational exuberance" and was told if he didn't shut up he could forget about invitations to the best parties. He shut up.
June 28, 2009 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
"great genes, a superior culture, or they are just sneaky, conniving bastards."
How about good genes, an outsider/immigrant culture of striving, and, in some cases, they are conniving bastards.
Also, given the historic persecution of Jews, and the importance of this persecution in Jewish culture, it wouldn't be surprising if Jews tended to help other Jews get a leg up in a historically hostile world.
Lastly, if a person or group wanted to engage in some devious behavior, they would tend to recruit individuals who could be trusted to keep it all a secret. That's why crime organizations tend to be ethnically homogeneous, and why the CIA has a WASPy and Ivy League history.
Jews have the highest education rate among all religious groups in the U.S., and that is something to be very proud of. This undoubtedly gives them a meritocratic advantage that cannot be denied, and only the jealous or racist would try.
But it doesn't explain the entire extent of Jewish achievement in America, and internationally. We live in a corrupt country and world, and high achieving Jews have earned outsize power in the world. But it's only fair to point out instances of corruption engaged in by Jewish individuals and groups, just like people and groups of any other demographic.
And when easily visible cabals of Jews play key roles in corruption that affects the world in a very serious way, a person shouldn't have to worry about getting kicked off a web site by pointing it out.
Neo-cons and their wars that draw millions of protesters across the world into the streets? As David Brooks said, "con is short for conservative, and neo is short for Jewish."
Wall St and the Fed, which threaten to collapse the global economy even more, at great benefit to a small number of people? A very high number of Jews involved, and minimal accountability as far as the eye can see.
American national politics? If you don't toe the line on Israel your opponent in your next election will receive a huge influx of money from outside your district, and you will go down. Message sent to anybody else with any ideas of getting out of line.
To summarize, the accomplishment of the Jews as a demographic has several factors, some of which deserve the admiration of all. But some factors are not as flattering, and have likely been enabled by the self-censoring of the world in the wake of the Holocaust, and a fear of that overused word, anti-Semitism.
June 28, 2009 12:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I leave it to Rosenberg to respond to you. He's always calling me a racist and won't talk to me. Let's see where you stand with him.
June 28, 2009 1:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
In the mid-80s I dated a lady who is a CPA. She is also jewish. She took me to NY city and we went to visit her brother in his Park Avenue apartment. On the way home to NJ she explained to me how she was a bit of a black sheep in the family since she was only a corporate auditor and college professor.
Family and cultural expectations may have something to do with jewish folks choosing to work in finance. If a large percentage of jews choose to work in finance then it make sense that a they will tend to dominate the field, don't you think?
p.s. Both the lady and her brother were plenty smart too. Good genes, high expectations, hard work = good chance of success!
June 28, 2009 5:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Doctors, lawyers, scientists, mathematicians, musicians, inventors, businessmen, and now - since the creation of the state of Israel - warriors and farmers. Jewish success is hardly limited to finance.
June 28, 2009 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bill Walker reminds me of what a Palestinian friend told me. She was bemoaning the fact that her cause attracts people who don't give a damn about Palestinians but become involved only because they hate Jews. She was talking about how glad she was that groups like J Street and IPF exist so "we aren't stuck with anti-semites."
That's Bill.
June 28, 2009 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
M.J., why do you cringe whenever anybody makes note of organized, conspiratorial, Jewish behavior? Because of what Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf?
Does that give PNAC, AIPAC, and every other Jewish dominated group a free pass to be a constant drag on the world for their own benefit?
Don't you look forward to the day when Presidential candidates are forced to make campaign promises to stand up to Israel, to declare AIPAC a foreign entity, and to encourage Congress to stand up to this lobby, as Israel's interests and our own are not the same?
If people were less afraid of pointing out the Jewish nature and Israel-centric motives of the Neocons, don't you think we would have had a better chance of avoiding "Operation Iraqi Freedom/Shock and Awe/They Only Understand Force/Allow Iraq's Cultural Treasures to be Looted/Disband the Army to Create 400,000 Terrorists and More Profits For U.S. No Bid Contractors?
Do you secretly support allowing Israel to bomb Iran, as I suspect given your past wish for the U.S. to assassinate its president?
Do you not see anything fishy about the creation of the housing bubble, the offering of sub-prime loans to anybody who can write their name down, the de-regulation that accompanied the creation of stability risking financial dark matter, and then the stick-up of the American tax payers to the tune of trillions of dollars?
I certainly haven't heard you write much about it.
It was certainly a vast conspiracy against the American people, was it not? And if so many of the key players (but by no means all) were Jewish, well, people are free to point that out. If pointing it out led to a newfound widespread suspicion of bankers, and Jewish bankers in particular, maybe (but not likely) these bankers will alter their behavior to avoid appearing like bad stereotypes and making Hitler look less despicable than he should.
How much negative influence on the world do bad Jewish people need to cause before you see that I have some semblance of a point?
Who else is capable and saber rattling to start a new world war? Extremist Jews control the 4th most powerful military in the world, and seem to have or share the reigns of by far the world's most powerful military. Just read Krauthammer, who represents the views of the AIPAC billionaires and Dennis Ross types much more than you, not that you support any sanctions on Israel under any circumstances.
These guys are ready to crash the global economy, with all the untold suffering, starvation, and exploitation that would accompany that crash. They don't even care, do they M.J.? As long as Israel is able to avoid it's own sins, expand their regional hegemony, and stop worrying about repercussions when they "transfer" the Palestinians out of the god given land.
I suppose Greenspan would call this bubble of extremist Jewish influence "a little froth," so his handlers would pat him on the head and keep inviting him to the cool parties.
It's not like all of the world's problems are caused by Jews, by any means, but you're delusional if you don't think the immediate threat of a world war that causes an immediate global economic collapse is not worth worrying about by anyone but anti-Semites.
Now, since your IPF is such an opposition group, and you are its policy guru, how about supporting any token sanction whatsoever on Israel, for current or any future possible behavior?
What would it take for you and your rebellious opposition group to support taking one dollar away from the fanatics in charge of Israel?
Or are you just AIPACs controlled opposition?
Step up to the plate M.J., and let's all try to help avoid the starvation of additional millions of people that would accompany the global economic collapse that would accompany an attack on Iran.
Or did you not think out the chain of events other than thinking, "Iran bad. Israel... not so bad. Look like me."
June 28, 2009 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
So Jews run the world.
I knew about Jesus and Ariel, but I'm surprised to learn that Napoleon, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Che, Mahmood, and, of course, Adolf were all yids.
All you goyim...read this and weep. You don't stand a chance.
June 28, 2009 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
The temper tantrum of a spoiled child. M.J. can relate.
June 28, 2009 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not upset. I'm laughing...because you're arguments are ridiculous.
June 28, 2009 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, basically, the lawyers negotiated to take a $2.5 million stipend from the defrauded in order to defend the fraudster? Nice trick.
What kind of deal would she have gotten without legal representation?
Don't forget that she had several sons who should be able to support her in her old age, unless they go to prison, too. And what about their wives?
June 27, 2009 9:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only way to make these CEO's obey any sort of rules in the future is to make sure their wives and children also lose everything. They aren't afraid of anything. THey're barely afraid of their wive's nagging, so we should make sure they start in on 'em asap.
June 28, 2009 1:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
American national politics? If you don't toe the line on Israel your opponent in your next election will receive a huge influx of money from outside your district, and you will go down. Message sent to anybody else with any ideas of getting out of line
The solution to this ludicrous state of American politics whereby the rich determine the make-up of the legislature, is to put a 'cap' on political donations, as there is in the UK and other democratic states who want a legislative assembly that is properly representative of the people and not of self-interest minority groups like AIPAC.
Why ordinary Americans put up with such a mickey mouse political system is incomprehensible. Three hundred million people could change the system overnight and at a stroke. AIPAC would be consigned to the trash can, American tax dollars would be spent on medicare and jobs and supporting foreign states on the Mediterranean to kill children would be just a fading nightmare. Why not do it - you have the power to change the way your country supports you - or neglects you.
June 28, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Careful, bluecanary. As M.J. told Ellen for using the word ghetto, "we don't do racism here."
I think we're more likely to see hate speech legislation outlawing the "rhetorical violence" that Hilary Clinton is already talking about, before we see real election reform. Congress members benefits from the status quo, even if they're just hired help for much more powerful interests that can't be voted out on a whim.
As far as I can tell, this country was lost in 1913 when the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans, and Warburgs conspired to create the Federal Reserve and legally cloak it in secrecy.
Contemplating whether this collaboration continued during WW2 is illegal in some countries.
June 28, 2009 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt, Bill, that anyone could confuse genuine comment with 'racism'. The former is a strongly held view of moral outrage and political dissent at a system that allows a self-serving lobby to exert a level of minority control that is, to say the least, both nonsensical and indefensible in a claimed multi-racial democracy.
The latter is the unreasoning hatred or dislike of ethnic difference and/or a claimed racial superiority.
June 28, 2009 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some people choose to be confused, when it serves their interests. That was my point.
You are absolutely right about needing campaign finance reform, but power never voluntarily gives up power. It divides and conquers any possible resistance.
June 28, 2009 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remember a country called South Africa, just 15 years ago, where an arrogant white ethnic minority ruled over an indigenous population of millions? Virtually overnight, everything changed.
Remember a Portuguese colony called Mozambique where from one day to the next, the political system was turned on its head in favor of the demographic majority.
In both cases - it seemed impossible that there would ever be a sweeping change. But there was.
Remember a small place called the USSR?
June 28, 2009 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dylan: Steal a little they throw you in jail... steal a lot and they make you king.
June 28, 2009 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm just sayin... because I admit to knowing very little about finances and investing, etc., etc., but if someone promised me a 20% return on my money, I think I would be a bit suspicious. Huh???
Who invests their life savings into one basket????
June 29, 2009 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect the Prosecution made the deal for very practical reasons. Ruth Madoff apparently had about 80 million in her name, including real estate, and they had to make a choice. Invest in time and effort to determine, perhaps in a trial, what she could legitimately claim, and take chances with getting much less, or cut her loose, and give her the 2.5 million, with responsibility for all future legal expenses. Since Bernie gave up any claim to anything that might be recovered or discovered, (he is officially a pauper) she also gives up any interest in such.
I wonder if she plans to send him a monthly allowance to spend in the Prison Canteen?
June 29, 2009 11:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
From $7 million worth of penthouse, $2million of jewelries only $2.5 million being left to Ruth Madoff. A very tragic situation she had. She claims she feels just as shocked and outraged by his husband’s crime. Ruth Madoff won't go to prison or need short term loans, but she's doing the right thing.
July 7, 2009 6:25 AM | Reply | Permalink