The People of the County of New York vs. Bryan Caisse

Over five days in mid-October, prosecutors with the New York County district attorney’s major economic crimes unit brought forth a stream of witnesses who told a grand jury about a money manager named Bryan Caisse.

One after another, their testimonies painted a remarkably similar story: Caisse had borrowed money to aid his hedge fund, Huxley Capital Management, as it launched. Prosecutors allege that the distinctive feature of these loans is that they weren’t repaid. Moreover, they allege that some of the loans were used for Caisse’s personal expenses.

The loans, based on documents shared with the Southern Investigative Reporting Foundation, appear to have been structured as so-called working capital loans whose purpose was to help the newly formed fund pay bills and launch new portfolios until it could generate enough profit to sustain itself.

Such loans are common enough in the hedge fund business and usually bear interest rates above the market rate — in one example, based on documents reviewed by the foundation, the rate promised was 8 percent — and are typically paid off over the course of a year or two. Historically they represent decent risks in that many hedge funds make it past their first two years of existence and thus can pay the loans back.

Caisse’s marketing approach, according to his lenders, was tantalizing to lenders worried about risks in Huxley’s strategy of trading bonds (and derivatives) carved from pools of residential mortgage loans. He assured them that Huxley’s credit was essentially that of the U.S. government, reasoning that a portfolio invested solely in U.S. Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would always have streams of interest coming in.

More directly, Caisse was for many years a well-regarded figure in the mortgage bond trading community and sported an impressive track record of generating returns for investors. Handsome and outgoing, he was a highly effective salesman.

Determining how much capital allegedly was lost is not easy, but it is likely to be in the millions of dollars. The report of claimed losses vary. One person asserts having lost $15,000; another man alleges he obtained a second mortgage on his Manhattan residence to invest with Caisse. One Huxley lender told the Southern Investigative Reporting Foundation that on the day he provided grand jury testimony he met two men (also there to provide testimony) who claimed they had each invested more than $100,000.

Several weeks ago the grand jury handed down a sealed 10-count indictment against Caisse, including nine counts of larceny. It represents a truly stunning reversal of fortune for a man whose hedge fund launch was seen as being on a fast track to amassing a fortune.

When the indictment will be unsealed is not currently known and a spokesman for the New York County district attorney’s office declined comment when reached by phone.

Complicating matters is that Caisse’s whereabouts have been an open question for several months.

Interviews with lenders to the fund and a family member indicate that starting sometime in the late spring he stopped returning calls and emails.

Caisse’s younger brother Steven, an owner of a software business catering to the powersports car industry, told the Southern Investigative Reporting Foundation on Dec. 5, “I haven’t spoken to Bryan in at least nine months and I honestly have no idea where he is.”

While denying any knowledge of his brother Bryan’s legal woes — Steven Caisse described the issue as “a private family matter” — he did acknowledge that he and his family have banded together to care for his brother Bryan’s teenage daughter.

Indeed for nearly a week, numerous attempts to reach Bryan Caisse on his cellphone and email accounts failed.

On Dec. 7, however, Caisse was reached through Facebook’s instant messaging application, and in a brief phone call he denied any awareness of legal problems stemming from his hedge fund.

In a call later that evening — and in a series of instant messages — Caisse’s tone shifted considerably and he alluded to a confluence of events that had led to the collapse of the fund, and he confirmed he had left New York City, at least temporarily.

(Caisse’s initial call on Dec. 5 appears to have been made using a mobile phone’s voice over internet protocol application. A follow-up call he made that evening came from a phone number originating in Colombia.)

When one pieces together Caisse’s breathless theory, it all amounts to something of a conspiracy in which larger forces were at work against him. On first pass, these claims seem (to put it charitably) implausible. But investigation does confirm that Huxley Capital Management’s fate was highly unusual in many ways. And after some very consequential mistakes in personal judgment by Caisse, the district attorney’s office had a trail of bread crumbs laid before it leading right to his front door.

--------------------------------------------------

A screenwriter needing a character to illustrate a Wall Street fable could do a lot worse than using the life of Bryan Paul Caisse as a muse.

Born in the northern Massachusetts town of Athol and a 1985 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, Caisse served four years of active duty on a nuclear sub and, after leaving the service, found his way to New York.

Without a job and newly enrolled in New York University in pursuit of an M.B.A., Caisse, as he tells it, was half drunk and shooting pool in a dive bar in 1991 when in walked a pair of guys in suits. More than a few rounds later, the suits were defeated and buying Caisse a nightcap. Learning that he had been a weapons officer aboard a nuclear sub — and could hustle like a champ — they suggested he interview at their firm. The next morning, after interviewing while hungover and wearing a stained shirt, he was hired by a firm he said he had never heard of by the name of Bear Stearns to sell a product he hadn’t supposed existed called mortgage-backed securities.

Bryan Caisse’s joining Bear Stearns amounted to a match made in heaven.

In the early 1990s, Bear Stearns was building out its capital markets unit and sought to emphasize its underwriting of mortgage-backed securities, volatile and complex instruments that even in 1991 had proven alternately lucrative and deadly for larger, more established firms like Salomon Brothers and Kidder Peabody.

Yet with an engineering degree and plenty of advanced training in physics, modeling and selling mortgage bonds was not taxing for Caisse. Nor did Bear Stearns have problems with Caisse’s entertainment-driven approach to building client relationships: If (most) every salesman on Wall Street was expected to entertain clients at dinners or sporting events, he would go much further, taking them to getaway weekends when they would guzzle booze, eat like kings, fish offshore or attend the biggest games, all on Bear Stearns’ dime. (The expectation was that if Caisse spent $5,000 entertaining clients, he would in short order get $25,000 or $30,000 in trading commissions from them.)

Eventually Caisse would come to understand that being a salesman at a big Wall Street firm was akin to being a good accountant: You would have something approaching job security and, in most years, a (very) good income. But the stars of Bear Stearns — who were paid well with salaries stretching into the millions of dollars — were the traders. In 1994 he got his shot at trading when Bear Stearns’ nascent asset management unit was expanding, and for three years he profitably and independently ran a mortgage book for Bear Stearns Investment Advisors.

In 1997 Caisse left Bear Stearns: He joined his former Bear Stearns boss Gary Lieberman in launching West Side Advisors, a hedge fund managing only mortgage-backed securities. At Bear Stearns, the pair had done well but earned what the rapidly growing firm allowed the two to keep; at a hedge fund the sky was the limit.

And for a decade West Side Advisors provided plenty of blue sky for Bryan Caisse.

At around $500 million in assets and posting steady returns, West Side avoided excessive leverage and the absurdly complex bond bets that occasionally turned the mortgage-backed securities markets into a charnel house for the mathematically apt.

Sticking to the fund’s proverbial knitting proved lucrative for Gary Lieberman, who would buy a piece of the New Jersey Nets and a house once owned by Harrison Ford; Bryan Caisse, too, became wealthy and while sports franchise ownership wasn’t his thing, he began to have serious fun.

Summering in East Hampton, N.Y., and traveling the world, Caisse appears to have been the world’s happiest 20-year-old (albeit one that was trapped in a 40-year-old body), maintaining a social life that deserved professional chronicling and fueled by ample amounts of cold beer, expensive tequila and strong pot. With a pair of marriages behind him, New York’s Upper West Side was his playground as he dated models, had flings with actresses, went to the best restaurants and partied with rock stars.

But in several ways, Caisse retained a closeness to his roots that has rarely been seen in successful New York hedge fund managers, remaining proudly loyal to family and old friends, staying in constant contact and entertaining them generously when they came to New York. Moreover, in 2007, he fought for and won a long custody battle for his daughter.

In 2008, with the mortgage bond market collapsing and West Side Advisors’ portfolio experiencing sharp losses, Caisse — who had spent much of 2007 on the sidelines of the fund while in the midst of his custody battle — left to set up a hedge fund with the aim of taking advantage of the massive bargains that were for there for the taking for by someone with cash and experience. The fund was called Huxley Capital Management as a tribute to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and a reference to the collapse of certainty in the wake of the credit crisis.

Statistically speaking, mortgage bond traders said at the time (and with rank envy) that there was very little chance of Bryan Caisse’s not making an absolute killing.

--------------------------

For something everyone said couldn’t fail, the launching of Huxley Capital Management proved to be a hard road to travel.

To start, the paperwork alone set back Caisse six figures and then there was rent, accountants, compliance and a small blizzard of lesser expenses. Taking expensive flights back and forth between New York and Dubai (where petrodollar princes sat atop virtual piles of cash that they were newly keen to put to work in the capital markets), he secured a memorandum of understanding for a $200 million investment in the then near future.

So to keep the fund going until the Dubai capital came in and he could start charging 2 percent management fees, Caisse borrowed cash from his ever expanding circle of friends. One of those lenders was Dr. Wellington “Tony” Tichenor, a Park Avenue allergist that Caisse had met on the East Hampton social scene through a mutual friend, acting coach Gary Swanson.

“Gary introduced me and he spoke highly of Bryan,” said Tichenor. “His resume checked out and his credentials were solid; I liked the guy. He was smart.” Ultimately he would loan Caisse an amount he described as “more than $50,000, but not $100,000.” (Although he was never paid back, Tichenor did arrange for a girlfriend to get a job at Huxley; Swanson did not return multiple phone calls seeking comment.)

Calamities big and small began to intervene, however.

On Dec. 11, 2008, Bernard Madoff’s infamous Ponzi scheme surfaced, sending reverberations through the money management landscape. In short order, a nearly completed investment from Carl Icahn, the result of months of discussion, was canceled. Several days later, Huxley’s management was told that the pending Dubai investment had been put on hold. (For hedge fund managers the true fallout from the Madoff scandal wasn’t over ethics but funding. It would be several years before institutional investors would support a fund that wasn’t sponsored by a unit of Goldman Sachs or J.P. Morgan.)

In the post-Madoff wreckage, small funds like Caisse’s Huxley were truly orphans.

Six months later, in June 2009, Caisse secured a working capital loan from Chicago’s Ritchie Capital Management for $2 million. Ritchie, which had just put its own series of headaches behind it, owned Royal Palm Insurance and was able to secure Huxley $50 million from Royal Palm in a managed account. (A managed account is a portfolio within a hedge fund for a single client. While managed accounts are counted in the all-important assets under management figure, the fund usually charges a 1 percent management fee and keeps 10 percent of profits, half the standard fees of what most hedge funds charge their investors.)

Using leverage, Huxley got the Royal Palm portfolio up to $500 million in value and by all accounts did an absolutely stellar job managing it for a year.

Nonetheless, the reality of life at Huxley was hardly gilt-edged: With only $480,000 in annual management fees being generated, there wasn’t nearly enough to cover the $120,000 monthly in expenses from eight employees and a midtown Manhattan address. By that autumn, key employees began to leave. On a December 2010 trip to Dubai to raise funds, Caisse was able to peddle the leveraged $500 million in assets figure during a second attempt to get funding from Dubai, reckoning that Huxley’s solid performance was sure to attract the investors who could make that a reality.

Once again Caisse returned to New York with a commitment from Dubai to invest in the fund.

The other shoe, however, was soon to drop.

Ritchie sold Royal Palm in February after a dispute with Security First Insurance was settled through a protracted arbitration. (Some observers might find in this a supreme irony; the chairman of Security First was a founder of Royal Palm). A central condition of the deal was that all of Royal Palm’s investment assets would be converted to cash.

By the end of the month, Huxley effectively had zero assets and owed Ritchie $2 million.

Soon afterward, finance officials in Dubai, not wanting to be the only investor in the fund, halted their investment.

Refusing to quit, but with a desperate need for cash, in the spring of 2011 Caisse again turned to friends and family, except this time it was old friends; their trust in Caisse was strong but their asset base was not. When he took working capital loans from these people (unlike what occurred with Dr. Tichenor and other lenders from 2008), he was taking money that represented a material part of their net worth, slated to make future mortgage payments, college tuition or their retirement.

(So called friends and family money has long been a ready source of hedge fund start-up capital, but there is an unspoken tradition that the manager usually takes money only from those best able to risk it or who can live with a longer repayment time frame.)

Still, Caisse again got the attention of institutional investors and by that June appeared well on the way to getting Huxley off its back for a third time, but a bad car accident left Caisse effectively bedridden for the balance of 2011 and ended the resurrection efforts.

In January 2012,  Caisse took a job at Performance Trust Investment Advisors in Chicago, signing a contract that was designed to provide him ample cash up front so he could pay back investors. Ultimately the deal fell through: Chief executive officer Doug Rothschild said it was because Caisse would not move to Chicago for what he said were “personal reasons.” Caisse told people that it was because another executive got skittish over the use of derivatives in the fund’s mortgage portfolio.

In February of this year, back in New York and trying to get Huxley going again, the music finally stopped playing for Bryan Caisse.

The New York County district attorney’s major economic crimes unit, with a host of complaints from lenders, opened an investigation into whether Caisse had used their funds for personal purposes. Many lenders, convinced that Caisse was not being forthcoming about repaying them, were grateful recipients of phone calls from Sean Pippen, the major economic crimes unit prosecutor leading the investigation, and happily sent him emails, documents, texts and notes of their dealings with Huxley and Caisse.

------------------------------

Borrowing from old friends appears to have been a profound mistake for Bryan Caisse, and one that was especially compounded by his role in a series of increasingly implausible excuses for not returning their money.

The story of one lender, whose loan represented 30 percent of his life’s savings and who had invested in Huxley in 2011 on the promise that the money would be paid off in one year, is illustrative of the circus that getting paid back would devolve into.

This lender spent excruciating weeks emailing Caisse’s assistants at Performance Trust in late 2012 to get checks that he repeatedly was assured  were in the mail.

The emails — which were examined by the Southern Investigative Reporting Foundation — document a host of concurrent personal and professional crises that befell Caisse and his assistants and that conspired to prevent them from successfully sending checks via overnight delivery.

To examine this correspondence is to plumb the depths of acute incompetence to a level rarely imagined (save by the drollest of comedy writers). It is a world where seemingly educated and experienced professionals cannot send packages overnight to a neighboring state, where the post office returns every letter mailed damaged and undelivered, where wiring instructions are routinely bungled, and where HSBC, a global money center bank, purportedly would not wire funds except to another HSBC account.

(A baffled banker from HSBC who had handled some banking matters for Huxley later appeared in front of the grand jury and said that the bank regularly transfers funds to accounts at other banks.)

Furthermore, all communication with Caisse had to be handled by email. One assistant, a woman named Kristy Smith, would not speak on the phone because, as Caisse explained to the lender, she had a strong lisp and English accent. A casual reading of several weeks of her emails, however, suggests a particularly American style of writing, as well an unusually close working relationship with Caisse, in that she accompanied him to a hospital, for example, as he got chest X-rays. Shortly after the lender demanded to know the physical address of her office so he could send her a prepaid Federal Express envelope to expedite delivery of his erstwhile checks, Smith told him she had been fired by Caisse.

A second assistant of Caisse’s, Christine Woo, then took over the task that appeared to the lender to be finding new ways to avoid giving him back his money. Like her former colleague Kristy Smith, Woo also refused to talk on the phone. Shortly after engaging with the lender, she suddenly refused to deal with these issues any further, citing the complexity of the matter.

Having a pair of personal assistants is rare for an individual portfolio manager on Wall Street and having a pair of assistants that deal with nothing but his personal affairs — even as they pertain to a prior employer — is rarer still. What is even more unusual is how both Christine Woo and Kristy Smith didn’t have Performance Trust email addresses and used only Gmail addresses to communicate with the lender.

The Southern Investigative Reporting Foundation called Performance Trust and spoke to Megan Clark in its human resources department; she said no one named Christine Woo or Kristy Smith had ever worked there. Nor were they former Huxley colleagues. Dan Castro, a former Huxley portfolio manager, said that no one with those names had worked there.

In April, Caisse sent emails to the same lender’s wife promising repayment when his new assistant “Kristy” returned from England after caring for her sick father.

------------------------------

Caisse has his defenders to be sure.

One of them is Ken Scott, a self-described private investor who was one of Huxley’s biggest lenders. He said that when the district attorney asked him about the loans, he replied that every penny of the working capital loans had been used for normal business expenses and argued that if it hadn’t been for some horrible luck, Huxley would have generated enough cash to pay everyone off.

Characterizing the grand jury as a witch hunt, Scott described it by referencing the infamous Lavrenti Beria quote, “Bring me the man and I’ll show you the crime.”

“No one has shown me what Bryan has done wrong, and that includes the DA,” said Scott.

Ritchie Capital Management’s general counsel noted to the grand jury that the firm’s management company made the loan, not one of its client portfolios. Fund officials acknowledge that while the loan is in arrears, they do not view the Huxley matter as a criminal issue, but rather a civil one in which the fund itself is in debt, not Caisse. They have not sued Huxley and have extended the loan’s maturity several times.

---------------

After some initial brief phone contact, described above, Bryan Caisse did not, despite multiple promises, provide a detailed explanation about these issues to the Southern Investigative Reporting Foundation, nor did he ever send an extensive series of emails he promised. The two occasions he spoke to the Southern Investigative Reporting Foundation, his phone number appeared to trace to Medellin, Columbia. On a few days he did manage to instant message for several minutes though Facebook. The day before this story posted, he appears to have deleted his Facebook account.

Caisse declined to make an on the record comment and he would not disclose his whereabouts, other than alluding to a lack of available privacy for discussing Huxley. Pressed on the matter, he would only say, “[I’m] staying with a friend.”

50 thoughts on “The People of the County of New York vs. Bryan Caisse

  1. Inaccuracies abound. Caisse’s intentions looks like they had a chance the way this was written. Not even close. So bad it looks like propaganda.

    • Bryan is not the same person you knew on the boat, many of his victims were in fact your fellow shipmates. He’s a pathological liar and believes The Obama Administration is “out to get him”. He is a delusional thief. The facts are he stole a lot of money from a lot of people.

        • I know him well from his Navy days, and those were his words. Due to his political blog on Facebook. You loosely dismissing his comments as crap, show that you only know the man Bryan used to be and not the man he has become.

  2. I know Bryan as he is from my home town. Before everyone goes rushing to conclusions, let’s first get both sides. When he returns from Columbia it will be cleared. Fools.

    • It is you who is the fool. The facts are he stole a lot of money from a lot of people. People don’t line up to testify unless they were wronged. The State does not spend a year putting together a case against people who are handling other peoples money properly. He’s a liar and a thief. People who do no wrong don’t flee the country and give up their child to their relatives. I hope he does come back from Columbia, so he can be arrested and tried for his crimes.

  3. They who defend, have not been robbed,dodged or lied to again and again over a period of years. So it is you who don’t know the whole story. His victims and those who testified know the other side of the story, it is you who are the fools.

  4. Mr Boyd,

    I hope you have the integrity to ensure this post goes up permanently as a comment on your article.

    About six days ago, I got together with two other guys who know Bryan. I have known him 22 years & was there the day he started at Bear; another 15 years; and another almost 10 and did some contracting work for him. We all consider him a friend. Yes. We are biased.

    We want to voice an opinion here at the holidays that will clearly be the antithesis of your article. We have been doing our own research for the last 10 days.

    We believe that there is not a single paragraph here that doesn’t have a falsehood (or more) in it.

    We did our own research over the last couple weeks since this hatchet job was emailed to one of us. We spoke to a close friend of Bryan briefly, who told us not one single person from law enforcement has told his lawyer about an indictment. Whether true or not, we tend to believe that. We have, however, been told that just recently the DAs office contacted a witness who said an indictment was delivered just two weeks ago. That is probably the only thing that may be accurate in your article.

    We have all done quite a bit of research of our own and clearly have more reliable sources than this article has. In fact I would venture to guess we, collectively, have done ten times more research than you did.

    First off, we are very confused about the extremely personal nature of this article. We are assuming that Bryan has had little contact with you in recent years for various reasons. Only one thing makes sense. We will get to that.

    Secondly, we are rather shocked that you just publicly accused the man of doing drugs. Hope you have a lot of people to come forth to corroborate that. That’s an amazing assertion. Personally, I would be having further conversations about that were I Bryan. I am sure that you wouldn’t be happy if someone publicly accused you of that and your children could read it.

    Thirdly, as you personalize your tales of Bryan, why don’t you tell tales of amazing generosity? We ran in to many in our research. Such as -

    - holding multiple money raisers (at great personal expense) for the child of a NYC policeman whose child had leukemia.

    - supporting the family of a friend, and paying large medical bills when he was found to have advanced sarcoidosis.

    - supporting multiple friends over the years if they became ill or were let go from their jobs. I could provide multiple names here. We found a half dozen in one day.

    - we found two people who said Bryan bailed them out of bankruptcy.

    - in the town of Athol, we found multiple people to say that Bryan had set up a fund to help out children who couldn’t afford to pay an athletics tax and did so for many years under the radar.

    There are dozens upon dozens of sources for THESE tales. We will provide some privately as some have allowed us to provide their contact information.

    For all the stories of fun and games, we know more of generosity. And some of the lenders have been on the receiving end.

    Sure there are tales of parties and women. Sure, he had fun. But tell two sides of the story please.

    Fourth,

    There are the little things we researched that you clearly did not.

    - he wasn’t born in Athol.

    - he didn’t serve four years (much more including the reserves)

    - he has essentially raised a beautiful 13 year old girl by himself since she was born. Two of us know her. “Engaged father”? Understatement.

    - he was actually never an employee of Performance Trust. Huxley was a contractor. Therefore your call to Ms Clark made no sense. Call her back. I bet you will find that Bryan was actually never an employee regardless if the press release.

    - Kristy was a great girl who helped Bryan on the side, mostly after his accident. You publicly humiliated her. That comment should have been kept as private. Ken Scott knows her. One of us knows her. Personal Assistant? None of us ever heard if him saying he had a PA. Seems a little pretentious for the guy we know.

    - speaking of Ken Scott, you decided not to mention that not only was he a lender, but was an employee who made sure all funds were used maintaining the business. Going on the record was huge in that regard except we believe you intentionally left that little factoid out. We also hear that he was the second biggest lender.

    - one of our sources told us that Cristine was a friend who only dealt with one person over 3 emails because of a blow up with Kristy. So Bryan knew exactly who you spoke to. Our research tells us thru multiple people that this person that gave you info on Cristine is possibly the world’s most ungrateful and has been one if the recipients of Bryan’s generosity. He also has been running around denying any involvement in this hatchet job. You should look further in to that relationship. We are hearing he is quickly becoming a rather loathed person because if this. Additionally we have evidence that very same person (or his wife) wrote a letter to Performance Trust trying to blow up his job, yet complained he wasn’t getting paid back.

    Keep in mind we know there is a difference between generosity and business. But in some of these cases there were probably lines crossed.

    - I was there the day he arrived at Bear. Spotless. In the afternoon. He was seated near my row. Clearly not with stained shirt. No one had ever heard your version of that. Was he hired out of a pool hall? Yes. That was a legendary story at Bear. But the real story is he took his winnings that night and went and bought new clothes the next morning.

    - What customers did Bryan take away for a weekend? Unless there were events organized by Bear, I don’t remember taking customers away either. On that note he wasn’t a salesman for long enough to become so senior as to have carte blanche. He was moved to trading early and became very successful.

    - people were gleeful? Our research says quite the opposite. First off what lender would be “gleeful” that suddenly they were not seeing their money? The biggest lenders are pissed and are all on Bryan’s side. Our research days that well over 80% of the outstanding loans are really unhappy about this. The Ritchie Organization is very unhappy. Ken Scott is very unhappy. We are told by multiple people the third biggest lender, a close female friend, is not only pissed but a HUGE supporter. We are told other lenders are clearly on his side. The “gleeful” are few.

    - early this year there was going to be a relaunch of the company. Bryan was selling a portion of the company to raise the funds for payment of previous lenders. We found out at least one current lender wanted to put in MORE money to own equity. They are really unhappy about this.

    - the losses are in the millions? That may be true. But we know the Ritchie Organization is by far the biggest lender, being around 8 times the next biggest lender. And they don’t believe this is criminal. Because it isn’t. And that’s why it is in the millions. Because of one huge lender. We are hearing the second biggest was Ken Scott. You can see his comments.

    - “working capital loans” can go to personal expenses. For example, we found out that Bryan took a salary on the Ritchie Capital loan. They were fully aware of this. Bryan took a salary from the Ken Scott loan. He not only was aware of it, we were being told he was paying his bills. Working capital for a company is required to ensure that a firm is able to continue its operations and that it has sufficient funds to satisfy both maturing short-term debt and upcoming operational expenses. Salaries are expenses. Salaries obviously go to personal expenses.

    We spoke to a friend of Bryan’s who said you insisted he had a “deadline” to make, facts be damned.

    We spoke to people who had interaction with you. They described you as smug and arrogant, and clearly intent on a smear job. Why? For what reason?

    Because of this, you made a concerted effort to trash someone publicly on the internet. As a previous person, “Shipmate”, said, “inaccuracies abound”. What an understatement.

    This is nothing but a public hit job that was undoubtedly pushed by at least one particular person who used to work with Bryan. He is sure of this as we have found 6 people who say you are good friends with him. And Bryan fired that person. No different than interviewing an ex-wife with an ax to grind.

    Did Bryan make mistakes? Sure. We all do. But larceny is also the intent to permanently keep something. We know that is not true. One lesson he has learned is “choose your friends wisely”. We believe he will be cleared.

    Two of us saw Bryan after his car accident in mid-2011, with me being the exception. It is our understanding that his concussion and eye injuries were serious enough to have his doctor tell him to shelve Huxley for quite some time leaving him with the debt of the firm hung on him alone. We have this through a very reliable source.

    This was a rushed, disgusting, hit piece. Shameful actually. Only meant to convict in the court of public opinion.

    What trash. Or propaganda as one comment says.

    Bryan will be tried. But a smear job doesn’t help anyone.

    We did our own research on you also. There are enormous amounts of articles complaining of same issues we are complaining of today. We hope everyone reading this, if you have the guts to keep this post up, does their own research.

    Happy Holidays

    • Really Bryan you used “bear” hide in plain sight eh? If anyone knows you they can hear your voice as they read this! Everything in this article is true! They obviously spoke to someone who knows you well…karma is a bitch and she has finally come for you! I feel bad for E she deserved so much better then you! I miss her and she’s a great young lady despite the cards she’s been dealt she’s much better off being with your brother. You screwed with my life financially too and I can’t begin to tell you how happy I was reading all these articles! Even if you don’t go to jail for some reason or another you’re finished your life will never be the same and you’ll finally get to experience the financial strain you’ve put on others..by the way you never paid for B’s medical bills that is a lie and you couldn’t have come up with a different name for your “personal assistant” it just shows you didn’t care enough to come up with good lies…I’ll say it again KARMA has come for you and I can just sit back with a big smile and watch!

  5. I did indeed testify before the grand jury, against my will and under subpeona. This author contacted me, I wanted to speak out on Bryan’s behalf. But he told me there were no protected sources in this story, and to be honest, my finances are no one else’s business. So my story was not included in this article, along with that of others who wanted to speak out with an opposing view. Although it appears the author felt free not to name the sources on the accusatory side. I did not line up to testify. I did not feel I was taken. Yes, Bryan owes money and with this case, any option for getting it repaid has gone up in flames. I was portrayed as a victim when I was not. And a grand jury is a joke. There is no one representing the accused person in a grand jury room. Only the gov’t is allowed to ask questions, and I experienced how they were slanted to paint a picture that was not my intent. Quite an experience . Grand juries indict between 98-99% of the time. Nothing but an investigatory tool for the prosecution. Just remember, this is based on only one side of the story. The Ritchie Group and Ken Scott were the largest lenders, and they both came out in defense of Bryan. That should tell you something.

  6. As author of the story, I argue the comments of “Bear Alum” and “Not Taken” warrant a response.

    First, I should note that Bryan Caisse was for many years a friendly source of mine, and on at least five occasions, I passed enjoyable and long evenings being regaled with stories and anecdotes from what was both a busy and successful life (in addition to many dozens of email exchanges and countless phone calls.) Moreover, my Fortune.com story of November 2008 about the launch of Huxley was, per his own frequent admission to me, a major break marketing and exposure wise.

    Bryan’s input was a major component of the story, contrary to your assertion. He was fully briefed on its direction, and agreed to provide me with A) people to talk to who could provide some context to the story and B) extensive backup for his arguments. This would include on the record phone interviews and emailed documents for corroboration.

    He provide me with the names of Jennifer McDade Garbuzinski, a friend and lender, an official from Ritchie Capital Management and Ken Scott, another investor and Caisse friend. Ms. Garbuzinski declined to speak on the record. The exec from Ritchie CM spoke to me extensively and his primary assertion–that the loan was in arrears but represented a civil, as opposed to criminal, problem to their way of thought–was fully reflected; he was given veiled sourcing because of ongoing litigation issues. Ken Scott’s personal and professional views were clearly noted as well (and a nicer, funnier guy I’m hard pressed to recall interviewing.)

    On the other hand, Bryan did not–repeatedly–send me corroboration or more importantly call me to discuss these issues at length. There were a host of reasons offered, few of which made much sense: people suddenly visiting when he was making a call, someone was making a sandwich unexpectedly, shoveling snow (for six hours) and so on. Dates and times were made to connect and they passed. Eventually all reporters decide they aren’t going to get the cooperation and have to move on.

    Notwithstanding the friendship of the writer to Bryan Caisse and the anger over the state of affairs, most everything else referenced is, respectfully, immaterial to the story. Still, a few points are worth mentioning.

    –Bryan always told me he served four years active duty and was most proud of having left the silent service a weapons officer for a cold war era sub. The story reflected this prominently.

    –I recall that he was born in Canada but again, when Bryan spoke of his youth, he described a clear attachment to Athol, where he said he attended high school. Is this inaccurate? Where is he from? (I will of course reflect his town of origin.)

    –The story of his recruitment to Bear noted that he showed up at the interview with a stained shirt and a hangover, something he has told me repeatedly.

    –Many people accused of crimes do good works, for a host of reasons, noble and otherwise and the story clearly states Bryan’s heartfelt generosity to friends and family. Alternately, many people who are less than appealing when put under the microscope live life in full compliance with the letter of the law. Ultimately Bryan’s kindnesses–or his faults–lay outside the scope of what I wrote.

    Per Not Taken’s concern, Ken Scott is a sophisticated and, in his description to me, a successful investor. To that end, the partners of Ritchie Capital Management’s management company are ultra-sophisticated investors. The loss of their capital is bearable, if unpleasant. Presumably this broadly goes for “Not Taken” too.

    The story clearly stated that the NY DA appears to have been concerned with the issues surrounding a series of so-called friends and family investors who received assurances of little risk and short repayment horizons. A serious argument can be had that these people should have been kept a million miles away from any hedge fund, but Caisse borrowed from them and then through a series of clearly laid out reversals, he couldn’t live up to his end of the bargain. They–and the DA–felt he was less than forthcoming about the use of these loans and the repayment process.

    To both Bear Alum and Not Taken’s concern, the story said that working capital loans are standard enough across many hedge funds, and are expressly used to cover operating expenses until cash flow is generated.

    • Did you just say someone refused to be on record and you put them on record? This gets weirder by the moment.

      “People accused of crimes do good works”. Do some research. Bryan has been doing these things since the 90s and they continued until recently.

      All your stories of mischief are pre Huxkey. There is a confusion on the timeline here.

  7. Let me chime in on this heated debate. I am one of the victims. I don’t care if Bryan was a saint before his path crossed with mine. I don’t have a lot of spare cash and when he ‘loaned’ the funds from me I did so only because I knew him prior the arrangement and the contract was specifically structured as a loan to be paid monthly with a full return within a year – NOT an investment. The FACT is that 3 years later I still have not seen a penny back from my principle… I gave up on the interest long time ago. When he bothered to respond on a few occasions, he was full of misterious excuses (checks lost in mail multiple times, bank wires were somehow impossible to complete, not available for in person meeting). His PAs were afflicted with the same difficulties completing common tasks…
    If he was responsive and honest, I’m sure many – including me – people he got $ from would have been willing to work it out and save him the trouble he’s created for him self.

  8. He is an amazing liar/fabricator of excuses and obviously has high disregard for” friends” …but most disturbingly for his daughter. Not a great person or father. He has had many chances to at least make an attempt to put things right…but checks in the mail,…am walking to the bank…etc etc. Most of the people who loaned him money were ” friends”. Last time I looked the code of ethics of the Naval Academy was Honor!!!!

  9. I’ve known Bryan since 1981. We were classmates and I have considered him a friend for the past 32+ years. Bryan is a brilliant and complex guy. On one hand, no stranger to the party scene. He definitely knew how to enjoy himself. He is/was certainly a great “salesman” and every once-in-a-while, could embellish with the best.

    On the other hand, Bryan is one of the most caring and generous guys I’ve ever met. He is also a loyal friend. I know for a fact that he has helped out and supported countless people both monetarily and through friendship . He has been a phenomenal dad for his daughter since her birth, around 16 years ago. I don’t believe for a millisecond that he has “abandoned” her.

    I’ve not spoken with Bryan lately, but we have talked at length about his accident. He was in very bad physical shape for more than a year. When he finally had recovered enough to re-launch Huxley, he worked extremely hard to do so. I know for a fact that he was in constant pain. I also know for a fact that dealing with such pain is difficult.

    It is my opinion that this article is a one-sided, b.s., hatchet job. Every source for this article/crucifixion – including its author – undoubtedly has an enormous ax to grind. I am 100% positive that there is so much more here than meets the eye. There was obviously a string of negative and very unfortunate events that led up to the current situation.

    Bryan Caisse may have a lot of imperfections, but don’t we all? HE IS NOT A THIEF. I for one plan to reserve judgment and support my friend until he gives me a reason to do otherwise.

    • KP, I’m sure I would be standing right next to you defending Bryan had he not stolen my money. I have seen him many times and seen his physical condition since his accident. The accident did not keep him from walking around his West Side neighborhood and enjoying many alcoholic beverages, the company of young attractive women and keeping the conversation centered on him. By definition he is indeed a thief. Feel fee to reserve your judgement until he gives ANY reason or excuse for his behavior, but once the facts are laid out for you to see, you are just another of many who will defend him on the basis of his behavior years ago. I know all about his good deeds. He has changed, from an influential, savvy and trustworthy money manager, to a man who took money from many people (friends and family) to use as his own piggy bank. He has no honor or sense of morals, instead a completely skewed sense of fiduciary responsibility as spelled out in his contracts and promises. He has become a man of lies, excuses and a dodge artist. In my whole life time I’v had 3 pieces of mail lost, but somehow all mail from Bryan Caisse is undeliverable, he and/or his “secretaries/assistants” lost dozens of pieces of mail and provided me with non existing Fed-Ex tracking numbers. In closing, you obviously haven’t loaned Bryan any capital to launch and re-launch Huxley, for had you, your post would read differently. Defend as you wish, should he be man enough to face his accusers and the County of New York, many more facts will indeed come to light. As someone previously stated in the above comments, Bryan is not the “good” person I used to know. He has committed crimes knowingly and in a pre-meditated fashion. He has clearly stated contractual obligations that he totally disregarded. He was 100% in contact, answering and returning phone calls and texts, right up until the time my money was wired into his account. Once the time came to begin monthly payments to return the loan, he disappeared from the face of the planet. Except of course for his weekly blog and dissertations on the presidential elections, after that, he disappeared, along with the better part of my life savings. This does not describe a personal imperfections as you claim, it describes a premeditated plan to separate people from their money for his personal use. This is the description of a thief.

      • I apologize. I wanted to give Bryan the benefit of the doubt until there was some clarification. Unfortunately, today I received it.

        I wish you the best & hold out some hope that you and the other victims will be able to fully recoup your losses. Maybe the seizure of his personal property & real estate can help.

        I’m sorry for my blind, naive, & misguided loyalty.

        • Thank you Ken,
          I hope now that more of the facts have come to light, others who believed BC was incapable of such deeds will follow suit. Much of the evidence discussed by the DA’s office in numerous news sources was surprising even to me. As a victim I appreciate your comments. I hope justice is served and myself and others can somehow recoup our losses. I also want to express my deepest sympathies to his family and daughter.

  10. Bryan borrowed money from me. Never paid back. His behavior is delusional and he lies constantly. I have seen him smoke pot, he inhaled. Not that’s that a terrible thing but he is a partier. He treated average people and friends like they could support his pompous lifestyle as if we had resources like bear sterns. If he is the correct person your describing, well I’ll eat my words but more likely, you that defend him will be trying crow fresh up. Rob’s article was fair. In my opinion too kind. Bryan doesn’t care how anyone has suffered. He cares only for himself and all the world did him wrong. He might man up. I doubt it.

  11. Oh yea. Ken Scott. Cut from the same schmooze cloth as Bryan. He helped Bryan to tell me I’d be paid back, all just lead ons to more lies on going for many years. Neither one of them have a clue what honor means. It has to do mainly with honesty I believe. Hopefully for them any good selfless deed they ever committed to will help weigh the instant karma arriving at their doors.

  12. I will echo what emptied pockets said “He was 100% in contact, answering and returning phone calls and texts, right up until the time my money was wired into his account………….a few initial payments were made then full stop. Appears he entered his own VPN. In agreement to another post whenever he did respond he never failed to try to twist the whole situation into being everyone’s fault (including mine) but his own.

    And to the supporters: I agree of your discription of what Bryan use to be which makes it even more disapointing as to why he never bothered to go back to a trading job to earn one or two of those yr end money manager/trader bonuses we all hear about.

    There were many times when I tried to contact him to discuss my understanding of setbacks and “lets work it out”………..no replies. Does not help seeing pictures of him in Paris or hearing about vacations in other parts of the world. I would think none of us expected Bryan to just become a work hermit to make good. However and absolute withdrawl and no attempt is unacceptable.

    • I left a comment above under the name “Ken”. I can admit when I’m wrong and today is one of those days. I feel terrible for all of you who were bilked by Bryan.

      I sincerely hope that you will be able to recoup your losses. I want to apologize for my 12/29/13 comments, as well as for my naive and misguided loyalty & trust. Bryan’s actions are very sad and troubling.

  13. http://sirf-online.org/2014/01/21/bryan-caisse-comes-home/

    I lived Bryan’s Colombian-hide-out story first-hand. I was there from NOV-JAN and lived near the Shamrock. He stayed high or drunk, sometimes on my balcony with my booze, perpetuated the lies of his “successes”, led on young impressionable listeners while prying their money out of their hands (borrowed, as “Western Union is closed”, “my assistant sent me the MCTN”, “my brother sent $10,ooo.oo but Western Union can’t process it because it is too much”, etc.) , and threw around Edgar Botero Henao’s name and confidential beachfront development project to all comers. I got wise after a few days; holes in his $600.00 Gucci shoes, living in a hostel-style room, no cash, lying about his departing flights (one AirTran plane “broke down” and another time he was to fly out on Edgar’s corporate jet to Bogota but the jet “had to fly to Cartagena”). Then BC got “very ill”. I hired a nurse to assist him and began moving him to my apartment one evening, then 20 minutes later he was miraculously cured and went downstairs to Shamrock and began drinking again. Once all the expat’s began triangulating his lies they became suspicious too. I was a naval officer same time frame BC was on ACDU. I have deep roots at the Naval Academy going back two generations. On ACDU I saw first hand the naivety surrounding USNA grads as “irreproachable”. They are not better or worse than any other commissioning source as officers/people. (At one time BC may have been that perfect, trusted officer needed in the Silent Service). Looking back at those weeks, BC thought he was smarter than everyone else. My father’s USNA classmate took loads of money in the 1970′s from his trusting classmates and then when his investment scheme failed, took an private aircraft up and purposefully crashed it to commit suicide. So USNA grads doing wrong is nothing new. The story is not over, there are more facts and probable new charges coming so stand by! Great job Roddy!

  14. I’ve had no business dealings with Bryan but have known him well for over 20 years. He is at once a brilliant, charismatic, yet deeply arrogant and narcissitic person. If his hedge fund was tanking and he admitted to his investors that there would be no return because of the flailing business he’d simply be embarrassed – any investor knows there’s inherent risk in such a venture. But if it’s true that he used investors’ money to pay off others and to cover undisclosed extravagant personal expenses then that’s where the line was quickly crossed. Whether or not he intended for this to happen in the beginning isn’t really the point. He’s too damn smart not to know better and it would seem that his need to save face completely overshadowed his need to be honest. We’ve all failed at something, but it’s never acceptable to harm others in an effort to save our own skin no matter how likable we are. Being a professional, upstanding adult is to take ownership of one’s mistakes, learn from them and move on. This appears to be something altogether different. Here’s hoping that he’s proven innocent in the end, but I won’t be holding my breath for that outcome.

  15. Curious if the people who wrote the defense of Bryan on here are the ones trying to raise his bail? Do you still think that he is innocent?

  16. I’m just curious who made you give Bryan money? How were you forced to give him money? How did he go into your bank accounts and steal from you?
    Seems clear some or most of you were looking for a “good return” on the money YOU GAVE WILLINGLY.
    Many lose money gambling at casinos and in the stock market daily as they willingly Gamble. I’m just curious who they can have thrown in jail.
    The bottom line is you took a gamble and gave money freely. Nobody made you give a DIME of your own money to invest or as a loan. You decided to do that. That was your choice.
    Whether this guy named Bryan or anyone else, from a psychological perspective I’d be curious to know how you sleep knowing a single father has been arrested because you didn’t get your finacial REWARD you were seeking. Ever heard “Neither a lender or a borrower be”?
    A single father shouldn’t have to be separated from his daughter because you decided voluntarily and of your own FREE-WILL to give him money.
    I get that you don’t like his personal lifestyle but by all accounts he’s always been the same and you STILL wanted to give your money to him. I would be really angry also if I weren’t repaid but I also would know that was MY personal responsibility and MY risk didn’t pay off. It is MY fault if I loaned money or made a very risky investment. Personal responsibility lies with the giver. So many people in life seem to want to blame everyone else for their own personal decisions gone awry. Bottom line is it seems all funds were given freely and willingly. If funds had been stolen from your accounts, that would be a different matter. The responsibility lies with you and your personal decision to freely lend him money (looking for financial gains).

  17. REALLY?
    Your an IDIOT! When you enter into a financial contract with someone to invest your money, yes you may lose it. When you invest your money into financial contract to be invested and said monies are used on lavish dinners, booze, women, to pay his rent, pay his auto lease, he never returns your phone calls (for well over a year) and you file a complaint with the SEC, they contact you and provide them with the contracts. Then the DA contacts you and they figure out he mis-appropriated everyone of your and may others funds, The conclusion is the he is a THEIF. If you haven’t caught up on your research try these;

    http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/roddy_boyd_tracks_down_an_alle.php

    http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/naval-academy-alum-bilked-1-million-friends-da-article-1.1587220

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/22/former-navy-officer-bryan-caisse-is-accused-of-defrauding-friends-and-classmates.html

    http://nypost.com/2014/01/21/naval-academy-grad-charged-with-running-1-2m-ponzi-scheme/

    http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/naval-academy-alum-bilked-1-million-friends-da-article-1.1587220

    http://news.yahoo.com/navy-bernie-madoff-104500356–politics.html

    Happy reading!

  18. To REALLY?,
    Sir, ma’am, please look into the definition of an “accredited” (or sophisticated investor). These laws are on the books and enforced to protect the ignorant public from the Caisse’s of the world. Bryan was last registered with the SEC/FINRA in April 2013, see PERFORMANCE TRUST CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC (CRD# 36155) – CHICAGO, IL Bryan Paul Caisse. Accredited investors are assumed to have the knowledge and sophistication to evaluate the risk of an investment (not talking about personal loans). All others ARE NOT! It is illegal for someone like BC, with his credentials, past track record with BS, and his professional license to go to the “general public” and either ask for investment-secured/guaranteed loans (possibly family members excluded) or “sell” investment vehicles without full disclosure and registration of the investments. I wouldn’t call you an idiot, rather ignorant of the law. BC is scammer and dug himself deeper and deeper into the situation he is in. I hope that there is some restitution via the court system to his financial victims and that his family is there for his daughter during her degradation of the opinion of her father and that she makes better choices. Respectfully, DL.

  19. Why does government continue to fund military academies at great expense? Most career officers come by way of programs such as ROTC. Why not consider condensing the military academies down to one, i.e., Marine officers graduate from the Naval Academy. As DL said above “So USNA grads doing wrong is nothing new. The story is not over, there are more facts and probable new charges coming so stand by! Great job Roddy!”

    • This comment is really unworthy of any response…but I’ll give one anyway. You’re an total & utter waste of oxygen.

      Do a little research & find out the # of flag officers (you probably have no clue what a flag officer is) over the past 75 years who were service academy grads, ROTC grads, & OCS grads. Then figure out their #’s vs. the total # of grads from each program during the same timeframe.

      P.S. That asinine comment is something that The Impotent Incompetent Socialist Sock Puppet occupying our White House (or his Socialist groupies) would propose! Barry Hussein…are you “Shanks”?

      That should occupy your feeble mind for months!

  20. KP this is not the forum for you to vomit your political rants. You admitted you were wrong once and you are wrong again for posting vitriolic political jabs at the President. If you are in fact a graduate of the USNA or another branch of the armed service it is even more outragious to use this juvenile inflammatory language “the impotent incompetent sock puppet or his socialist groupies” when speaking about your Commander in Chief. It’s this exact behavior that got your buddy in trouble. Narcissism. Grow up.

  21. All,

    Roddy Boyd here. With a full understanding that this story brings up plenty of deeply held feelings given the allegations of personal and professional betrayal, I am respectfully requesting that comments avoid off topic considerations and personal attacks. We’re all human here and comments are welcome, let’s just try to keep it civil and focused.

  22. I’d like to get the readers engaged in nominating Roddy for a journalism award. Breaking this story, bringing this light, has changed the minds of many readers. It also exposed the truth about a world class scammer. Anyone know which organizations I can contact? (Google not helpful-already checked). -DL

  23. His loan from me goes back to 2006; 8 years of misdirection. So all who think this started lately are wrong. I have met hundreds of people from all walks of life who attest to Bryan’s generosity and kind heart. Just go to his class of 1985 re-union at the army navy game. Paradox is all I can say.

  24. I hung out with Bryan in Colombia this past fall many days and nights. It hurts my feelings to the core to see the photo of him in the Post at his arraignment looking defeated, tired, unshowered, and with his reading glasses hanging on his shirt like he always wears them.

    I only knew him for several weeks during my time in Colombia, but I would have given the man the shirt off my back. I don’t know if he intended ill will towards anyone or if he just got caught in a failed business venture that he tried to fix by shuffling funds. But the Bryan I met, and learned to love, is a man I will always remember for the rest of my days. He made my stay in Colombia much better for having known him. I say all of this with a tear in my eye for the man with which I got to have many wonderful times.

    Maybe Bryan snookered me. Perhaps he was, in fact, able to get people to trust him because he’s a very trusting guy. But that’s not the vibe I ever got from him. When we were hanging out in Colombia, if he was short on cash, I’ve loaned him a few pesos to get him through the night without worrying whether he was going to repay me the next day after a visit to the ATM. But I also never loaned him 10 grand. I don’t know. He was always golden to me, and it’s hard to wish ill upon someone that you appreciate and respect.

    I can’t speak to his true character as I only knew him a couple of months. But the Bryan I know is an impressive man that I will always remember. No matter what he’s gotten himself into, it’s difficult for me to believe that he’s anything but a standup fellow. I wish him the best always, and I so very hope to see him again one day.

    To Bryan: much love, bro. I wish you the best and I hope that you can fix your troubles.

  25. To Colombia Traveler,
    unbelievable. really? your naivety and lack of total understanding of sociopaths is remarkable. so much so that your post (which is worthless) should be deleted. what a bunch of pot-fueled crap. you are a fool. and certainly, young. go visit Caisse in jail and hive him a hug. he’ll get 20-years-plus(mark my word) so you’ll gave plenty of time. in the meantime, write your whining crap to you mommy and go back to getting high and living far from reality. remember this when you are (hopefully older and wiser) and handing over your family’s legacy as an investment…possibly to a scammer like your “beloved” Bryan. grow up.

    I wrote this for all of us who have lost money to this schemer. ColTrav, no one cares about how much you are sucked in by false charisma, especially when lighting up. NO ONE. your stupidity is rivaled by your lack of being able to judge a suicidal, down-on-luck, broke, white collar criminal on-the-run.

    W
    when BC reads this and recognizes who you are he will certainly be chuckling at what a sucker you are and will be looking you up for a spot on your sofa when he finishes his sentence.

    • AhHa,

      You apparently have much experience in the world of psychology and the justice system with your speak of “sociopaths” and “mark my word” on his eventual court case outcome and sentence.

      However, I have a different take. You obviously haven’t any education with regards to grammar, punctuation, or diction. It seems that you were educated in a cardboard box on a Kentucky mountaintop. Therefore, it’s difficult for me to take your knowledge of psychology or the law very seriously. Am I to believe you are a doctor of psychology or an attorney when you can only write on a second grade level?

      You are the one that gave your money to an alleged con man. I did not. You say you got taken for a lot of money. I did not. I also did not steal anything from you, nor would I.

      I also don’t smoke pot as you allege. No wonder you lost your money. It sounds as if you would have lost that money no matter what. With your lack of education or logical reasoning, I can only believe that any money you allegedly lost was willed to you in the first place. There’s no way an uneducated, illogical sucker would have ever have built a fortune to invest.

      Good luck with your outrage. I don’t and will not ever apologize for my relationship with Bryan. He never took anything from me, and he never asked for anything from me. He’s never done me any wrong. I have serious doubts that he did anyone any wrong.

      If you’d like to speak with someone about a nice GED course to hone your skills in the English language and to get a mere basic education, you can go to your local middle school and ask to speak to the guidance counselor. I’m sure they can help you. Until then, leave the comments about the law and sociopaths to lawyers and doctors.

      • Have to give you a “thumbs-up” on the rebuttal. We’re on the same page regarding AhHa’s lack of grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. It was painful just reading his input.

        Also agree that if Bryan didn’t steal his $, someone else eventually would have done so. Possibly email pleas from a Sudanese prince or the rightful heir to the throne of Congo – both living in exile in London – would have sealed the deal!

  26. Colombian Traveler you are a fool. And obviously young and high. Suckers like you are why the Bryan’s get away with their BS for so long. Grow up. He’s been exposed for what he is.

    You can bet that when he gets out of jail after a 20-plus year sentence (mark my word) that he’ll be showing up at your door to get money, drugs, and booze from you while sleeping on your sofa. Save your pining-whining comments for your mommy. Those that have really suffered could care less. He is NOT a good guy.

    • It’s nice to hide behind the internet and libel someone. I don’t smoke pot, but if that makes you feel better to think so, then great. You allege that Bryan stole money? If he did, then I hope he took every single dime you have. You seem like a rotten human. I don’t even know you, yet you have the audacity to call me names and disparage me for saying nice words about a man? I’d love to see your fat, lazy American face say those same things in person.

      Enjoy the rest of your investments. I hope they all work out like you claim this one did.

  27. AhHa,

    You don’t seem to have any idea how the legal system works. Based on the charges I would say that he will get five years and serve 2-3. Also, please work on your diction and punctuation.

  28. FT-
    FU
    not worrying about dickshun.
    just ensuring that comments with depth will forever be memorialized herein as this will be forever “searchable” for your remaining lifetime.

    As for sentences. Funny how YOU seem to think YOU know the answers. See you back here after sentencing to compare guesses.

    • Brian should receive no more than 5 years based on the monetary value of the funds he allegedly stole. However, when you take into account the “perception” or “possible fact” that he fled the country 1 day after having his passport returned to him, I’d say that the DA is beside himself, red-assed with anger & embarrassment. He’ll undoubtedly be doing everything in his power max out the sentence. Add to that the fact that many, if not most, of those who “invested” or “loaned” $ were considered by definition neither “qualified” nor “accredited” investors. I therefore wouldn’t be surprised if the sentence exceeds 5 years, but would be stunned if it exceeds 10. (I just hope that Bryan owns personal property and/or real estate which can be sold to re-pay most or all of what he took).

  29. AhHa,

    I assume that you will be the first witness called when the prosecution attempts to establish that BC targeted non-accredited investors.

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>