While Bernard Madoff rots in a
federal prison (we hope) court appointed officials are trying to recover as
much money as possible for the victims of the crimes. This
includes money and property that passed to Mr. Madoff’s family from the
fraud to the recipients. Among them are
the widow of Mr. Madoff’s son Mark, who committed suicide as a result of the
criminal activities of his family.
Mark Madoff's widow is fighting a court-appointed trustee's demand for millions of dollars in cash and real estate, arguing that her husband's suicide entitles her to the property.
The logic behind the family’s fight against stolen property is that since they claim they didn’t know of the crimes, they don’t have to return the stolen property.
The trustee is waging a battle with family members over money they allegedly got through the fraud.
"She had nothing whatsoever to do with" the Madoff firm, her lawyers wrote in a bankruptcy-court filing earlier this year, "much less a fiduciary role."
And you have this contradictory statement about Mr. Madoff’s brother.
The family members have denied knowing about the scheme. They include Peter Madoff, who pleaded guilty in June to falsifying records and conspiracy, and agreed to forfeit more than $10 million to prosecutors.
Hm, doesn’t pleading guilty mean you did admit to knowing?
Of course the real issue here is NOT whether or not certain family members knew of Mr. Madoff’s crimes. The real issue is whether or not those family members are entitled to benefit from the crimes. Being part of the entitlement class, they think they are.
There has been a lot of publicity recently about the so-called 47%, the Americans who because of low income, or age, or disabilities, or lack of education, or because of illness have to rely on government support. It is highly doubtful any of them would want to benefit from criminal activity. But then, they are not really the entitlement class, the wealthy people like the Madoff family are.