Defend MLM Freedom https://defendmlmfreedom.com No Distributor Left Behind Mon, 30 Sep 2024 06:00:55 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.1 https://defendmlmfreedom.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/favicon.png Defend MLM Freedom https://defendmlmfreedom.com 32 32 The I2G Court Instructed the Jury to Convict https://defendmlmfreedom.com/the-i2g-court-instructed-the-jury-to-convict/ https://defendmlmfreedom.com/the-i2g-court-instructed-the-jury-to-convict/#respond Mon, 30 Sep 2024 05:28:38 +0000 https://defendmlmfreedom.com/?p=1117
After deliberation, the i2g jury asked the Court whether they could consider all the “purchases” or only theone within the statute of limitations. Because the instructions referred to purchases as “securities” and distributors as “victim-investors,” the Court’s affirmation that a “purchase” occurred within the statute of limitations instructed the jury to convict.

The government argued that if the court made a mistake in responding to a jury question, it should be considered in the context of “the instructions as a “whole.” (United States v. Khalil, 279 F.3d 358, 367 (6th Cir. 2002)). This acknowledges the error in the court’s affirmation that a “purchase” occurred during the “statute of limitations” because instructions “as a whole” are needed to correct the error. However, the instructions “as a whole” had many errors, weakening the argument and supporting Hosseinipour.

Victim Investors

The instructions referred to distributors as “victim investors” and their product purchases as “securities,” assuming a crime occurred. The government argues that the wording of the jury question implied that the jury had already concluded that a “securities” purchase occurred. This is because written and oral instructions presented it as such. To make matters worse, the list of “victim investor’s securities purchases” was based on hearsay, consisting of non-testifying witnesses outside the statute of limitations.

“For Count 13,…the Government must prove…that a conspiracy member committed an overt act to advance or help the conspiracy to commit securities fraud with respect to the sale of the following securities.” 298 R.554, #5263. 299 R.554, #5263-64.

Considered “as a whole,” the instructional errors magnified the harm from other erroneous instructions that defined a pyramid scheme as an automatic “mail fraud,” vaguely described “pyramid scheme” and “securities” in a way that could apply to any MLM, failed to require criminal intent, denied an affirmative defense, and did not provide clarifying instructions to “distinguish between pyramid schemes and legitimate MLMs.”

Moreover, the jury was not provided with guard rails to weigh the evidence in favor of innocence; instead, they were instructed to convict.

]]> https://defendmlmfreedom.com/the-i2g-court-instructed-the-jury-to-convict/feed/ 0 The Critical Battle in the War Against MLM https://defendmlmfreedom.com/the-critical-battle-in-the-war-against-mlm/ https://defendmlmfreedom.com/the-critical-battle-in-the-war-against-mlm/#respond Wed, 18 Sep 2024 11:53:10 +0000 https://defendmlmfreedom.com/?p=887

In October 2022, Neora emerged victorious after a seven-year legal battle against the FTC regarding pyramid scheme charges. This victory was significant against unjust persecutions of multi-level marketing (MLM) companies based on ambiguous laws and standards. The lawsuit, initiated by Jeff Olsen in 2019, was a stand against attempts to abolish or criminalize MLM. It highlighted the absence of a federal law to define “pyramid schemes” and argued that efforts to change federal law and override state law were unconstitutional. The central argument was that MLM companies could not be expected to comply with non-existent laws and vague “guidance.”

The Neora lawsuit was timely as it coincided with a DOJ criminal indictment against I2G owners and distributors for the same allegations. Like Neora, Infinity Two Global was accused of having a 97% loss rate and a 90% focus on recruiting, which included “recruitment-focused” binary, matching, and leadership bonuses. The main difference was that a criminal conviction for the same allegations could result in
up to 20 years in prison.

If not overturned, the alarming precedent puts every mlm participant at significant risk of future criminal prosecutions.

Neora Verse I2G

Key differences separate the trials’ fundamental fairness. Unlike with Neora, i2G defendants were denied their pyramid scheme expert. Without an expert to rebutwhat the Neora Court concluded were “rigid theoretical assumptions” not “borne out in reality,” the i2G defendants had no way to prevail.

Unlike with I2G, The Neora Court stated that “it cannot be simply assumed that the 70 percent of Neora Brand Partners who never made a sale or earned a commission are disappointed victims of an illegal pyramid scheme simply because they never made a sale, recruited another Brand Partner, or earned a commission.” Thesestatistical representations would make every MLM companya pyramid scheme.

Learn More

I2G Products Were Related to Rewards

Infinity Two Global launched in 2013 and operated seven online digital platforms with a “consumption model” that included social media, digital music, online games, fantasy sports, travel, sports betting, and an overseas online casino. The owner, Maike, spent over $800,000 to acquire and develop two technology products.

The Songstagram Technology was later sold to bBooth and used to record music videos for American Idol contestants. NFusz, a publicly traded company, then acquired it. The i2G Touch had advanced Zoom capabilities predating Zoom and a walk-out technology that predated today’s AI technology. The Fantasy Sports platform competed with FanDuel. Sports betting is now legal in dozens of states. The i2G online games platform still thrives today. MLM companies use the same travel discount platform today. The products had real value.

Per the Koskot standard, products must be “unrelated to rewards” to qualify as a pyramid scheme. However, I2G products and usage were directly linked to “rewards,” accruing BV, payable through the I2G pay plan. Several witnesses confirmed that transactions involving the I2G casino, fantasy sports, and social casino activities resulted in “rewards” being paid to them.

The Koskot standard, which cleared Neora, was not applied to I2G. More than 2,300 casino customer transactions, totaling over $1.2 million, accrued BV, were paid through the i2G pay plan, and $360,000 in fantasy sports customer transactions. These were tracked via API feed and paid through the i2G pay plan. There is no question that the product waslinked to rewards. Therefore, i2G was not a pyramid scheme.

Koskot Standards that Cleared Neora was denied to I2G Defendants.

The Neora Court reviewed the “Koskot” testwith “internal consumption” as the “legal standard” and considered it to be an effective “anti-saturation” measure. The Court noted that an “over-focus on recruiting” standard does not exist and that a “fine line separates legitimate MLMs from pyramid schemes.” The i2G Court, in contrast, denied these considerationsinjury instructions.

Additionally, the I2G Court provided a vague definition of a “pyramid scheme,” which could apply to any MLM. The definition judged the “structure” and the “motivations” of participants. In contrast, the Neora Court declined to assume the participants’ motivations.

Learn More & Support

Unknowing Participation in a Pyramid Scheme a Fraud Offense

The prosecution argued that if they proved a pyramid scheme and the defendants “knowingly participated,” they met their burden. This misrepresented their burden to prove criminal intent. The Court recognized the error but failed to correct or strike it. By that standard, any I2G, Herbalife, Advocare, or Vemma distributors could have faced criminal indictments and possible imprisonment.

“Internal Consumption” as Illegitimate

The government portrayed “retail sales” to the public as the only legitimate product sales, with internal consumption considered illegitimate. The defendants were not allowedto challenge this incorrect legal theorythrough an expert of their own orjury instructions.

The Neora Court, in contrast, recognized “internal consumption” as the legal standard. Support for this is found in the 2022 DSA Amicus brief, FTC guidance in 2006 and 2018, and Congressional language in the failed 2017 and 2018 Anti-pyramid Acts.

Distorted Legal Theories Put All MLM
Distributors at Risk!

 

The i2G case was based on distorted “legal theories” that i2G promoters (distributors) were co-conspirators regardless of criminal intent. In contrast to Neora’s opinion, distributors who didn’t recruit or simply purchased products for personal use were victims of a pyramid scheme.  

I2G was accused of being a pyramid scheme because it relied on endless recruitment despite the government arguing that no recruitment was required.The government’s evidence contradicted its arguments. Through multiple witnesses and exhibits, it proved that “Rewards” (commissions) were earned by bringing customers to purchase i2G products. Casino transactions accrued 25% BV, which was paid into the i2G plan. Unfortunately, the jury was denied the Koskot standards to judge the evidence properly.

Fraud Upon the Court: The Government Manipulated Data and Relied on False Evidence

 

The prosecutors deceived the court by claiming that Reynolds claimed exculpatory commission data was unreliable. However, Reynolds never made such a statement. New data was created two weeks before the trial to exclude $32 million in commission gains. This deliberate omission from the gain-loss representations significantly labeled I2g as a pyramid scheme with a 97% loss rate. Reynolds’ affidavit confirmed that the original data was accurate, contradicting the government’s claims and allegations of losses. The data further proved that it was“fully known” that all funds were accounted for and not “hidden in foreign bank accounts,” as they implied.

The Government Knew Its Data Belonged to a

Separate Company,
XTG1, and Other Data Aberrations

 

The government knowingly presented data from a separate company, XtG1, as belonging to I2G, even though I2G was already closed. When asked by the Court about the significance of an Xtg1 enrollment after the indictment timeline, the government argued that it still showed how I2G operated, even though their witness, Reynold, testified that I2G had stopped operating eight months earlier.

Misused of Key Witness Anzalone’s Guilty Plea as proof of Hosseinipour’s Guilt despite exculpating Hosseinipour

 

The guilty“cooperation plea deal” by the key witness, Anzalone, was misused as evidence against Hosseinipour. Despite his agreement, Anzalone attested to Hosseinipour’s honesty, loyalty, intelligence, and motivation to help others. He emphasized that she would not intentionally mislead or deceive and firmly believed in the company, product, and legal team. He affirmed that Hosseinipour focused on customers and made efforts to offer customer-driven plans to I2G. Dugger and Logan also made similar positive remarks about Hosseinipour. No distributor witnessspoke negatively of Hosseinipour or claimed she lied or misled anyone. Even the Court considered Hosseinipour an “exuberant cheerleader” who “helped everyone.” It expressed the belief that she was “duped.”
 

No reasonable jury could have convicted Hosseinipour beyond a reasonable doubt without aninstructionthrough Anzalone’s plea that criminal intent was not required.
 

Misusing Anzalone’s guilty plea to prove Hosseinipour’s guilt despite his insistence that he never had criminal intent suggested that criminal intent was not required. Anzalone explained that his “great attorney” explained the law to him. The implication was that the legal explanation deemed him guilty without the requirement of criminal intent.
 

The Constitution prohibits broad entrapments through vague laws that prevent knowledge of criminal acts.

Trust in the Prosecution, The Court Instructed to Convict

The court repeatedly expressed its trust in the prosecution, allowing for significant latitude with hearsay, non-relevant, and prejudicial evidence. The court stated that it was “relying on the United States and their good faith, as it regularly worked with these “fine attorneys” who had “excellent credibility.” Unfortunately, this led to a critical error that impacted the jury deliberations.
In criminal trials, the Court cannot comment on the defendant’s guilt or instruct the jury to convict. However, in this case, the court did just that. It referred to non-testifying distributors as “victim investors” and described their alleged purchases as “securities” in both oral statements and written instructions. When it affirmed that a “security” purchase” by a “victim investor” occurred within the statute of limitations, the jury was instructed to convict.

Antipathy for MLM

The negative perception of multi-level marketing (MLM) significantly impacted the defendants in the I2G case. Jeff Olsen’s lawsuit brought attention to the general aversion to MLM. Distributors are trained to expect the standard objection, “Isn’t that one of those “pyramid schemes.” Therefore, it’s unsurprising that a non-MLM jury could view I2G as a “pyramid scheme” when it is referred to as such hundreds of times. Even the Court shared the belief that MLMs are essentially “get-rich-quick schemes,” where early promoters profit at the expense of those who join later.

Appeal Arguments Must Overturn this Alarming Precedent

This critical fight impacts the futures of every MLM participant. Ifconvictions for “participating in an alleged pyramid scheme” without the need for criminal intent become precedent, your future in mlm will never be safe. Distributors must feel safe building a legal business without fear of prosecution. This could also happen to you.

If you would like to support the Defend MLM Freedom fight, please get in touch with defendmlmfreedom@gmai.com

Kenyon Meyer is a Criminal Defense attorney at Dinsmore and Schohlspecializing in federal cases and has a vast understanding of mlm, regulatory and appellate issues.

The convictions have taken asubstantialfinancial and emotional toll on the lives of the I2G participants.

Barnes, 75, an alleged 10% owner, is a church leader, husband, father, and grandfather. He has been imprisoned in critical health with pulmonary fibrosis, diabetes, and heart failure. His wife and daughter,withessential issues of health, are suffering without his support.

Hosseinipour joined I2G along with 20,000 others with “good intent, ” as conceded by the prosecution. Numerous distributors and the I2G attorney, Koerner, attested her honesty, integrity, and good intentions. After suffering eight months in prison, the Appeal Court released her pending appeal, acknowledging significant legal issues raised by Meyer.

]]> https://defendmlmfreedom.com/the-critical-battle-in-the-war-against-mlm/feed/ 0 If it Can Happen to Trump, it Can Happen to You! https://defendmlmfreedom.com/if-it-can-happen-to-trump-it-can-happen-to-you/ https://defendmlmfreedom.com/if-it-can-happen-to-trump-it-can-happen-to-you/#respond Wed, 18 Sep 2024 09:46:21 +0000 https://defendmlmfreedom.com/?p=863
In October 2022, Neora won a crucial legal battle against the FTC, challenging pyramid scheme allegations. The Neora lawsuit against the FTC highlighted the absence of a federal law defining ‘pyramid schemes’ and the unconstitutional efforts to override state laws. The victory was significant for MLM companies, which emphasized the need for clear legal guidelines.

The lawsuit, initiated by Jeff Olsen, argued that MLM companies could not be expected to comply with non-existent laws. This case underscored the importance of fighting unjust persecutions and protecting the rights of MLM participants.

Alarming Precedents: Trump and Hosseinipour Convictions

If it could happen to Trump, based on bending the law to find a criminal statute, it could happen to you! This happened to Hosseinipour, where a “pyramid scheme,” a regulatory contrivance with no criminal law of definition, was manipulated to fit a mail fraud statute. Understand how dangerous case precedents, if not overturned, can impact MLM participants and make your ordinary business activities, such as recruiting criminal offenses.

Learn More

Trump's Conviction

Trump’s case demonstrates the dangers of unfettered allowance to stretch the law to find a crime for political purposes. The same judicial overreach threatens every mlm participant who can be charged in a broad conspiracy if the DOJ alleges your company to be a pyramid scheme.

Hosseinipour's Conviction

The details of Faraday Hosseinipour’s case demonstrate how simple participation in an mlm alleged pyramid scheme could land anyone behind bars for up to 20 years.

The Perilous Story of Doyce Barnes A Good Husband, Father, Grandfather

Support MLM Freedom

Join us in defending the rights of MLM participants. Your support can help prevent unjust prosecutions of well-intentioned distributors and owners. Stand with us to protect MLM freedom and ensure a fair legal landscape for all.

Learn More & Support

A TALE OF TWO CONVICTIONS

Trump vs. Hosseinipour: A Dangerous Precedent

The criminal convictions of President Trump have opened eyes to the reality that anyone can become a criminal defendant with an overzealous prosecutor with motives that exclude justice. The DOJ has been weaponized to target ordinary citizens like Hosseinipour without proof of criminal intent, defying justice and setting a dangerous precedent for MLM participants. The Government claims that criminal intent is unnecessary if you participate in a pyramid scheme. This defies the law. If the precedent holds, unknowingly, MLM distributors will be indicted if the DOJ claims their MLM business is a pyramid scheme. This comparison underscores the need for legal reforms to protect MLM participants and all Americans from judicial overreach and ambiguous legal interpretation.

Read More

THE IMPACT OF MLM ANTIPATHYT

 

Multi-level marketing (MLM) often faces negative perceptions, which played a significant role in the I2G case. The defendants were unfairly judged due to the common misconception that MLMs are inherently fraudulent. This antipathy influenced the jury’s decision, leading to convictions based on bias rather than facts. The case serves as a stark reminder of the challenges MLM participants face and the importance of combating these prejudices to ensure fair treatment in the legal system.

The I2G case illustrates how deep-seated biases against MLM can lead to unjust outcomes. The court’s portrayal of all MLMs as get-rich-quick schemes demonstrates the bias that led to the defendants’ convictions. This negative perception not only affects those directly involved in this case but also poses a threat to the entire MLM industry. It’s crucial for industry leaders and distributors to be aware of these biases and work towards changing the narrative to protect their livelihoods and the future of MLM.

THE URGENCY OF OVERTURNING THE I2G CONVICTIONS

Safeguarding MLM Participants from Unjust Prosecution

 

The recent convictions in the Infinity Two Global (I2G) case have set a dangerous precedent that threatens the entire multi-level marketing (MLM) industry. The court’s decision to convict without requiring proof of criminal intent (mens rea) has created a chilling effect, where any MLM distributor could be at risk of prosecution simply for participating in their business. This alarming development underscores the urgent need to overturn these convictions to protect the rights of MLM participants and ensure a fair legal environment.

Read More
The implications of the I2G case extend far beyond the individuals involved. If this precedent stands, it could lead to widespread fear and uncertainty among MLM distributors, who may feel vulnerable to criminal charges despite their honest efforts to build a legitimate business. The fight to overturn these convictions is not just about correcting a legal wrong; it’s about preserving the freedom and security of every MLM participant. We must advocate for a legal framework that distinguishes between genuine business activities and fraudulent schemes, ensuring that MLM distributors can operate without the constant threat of unjust prosecution.

]]> https://defendmlmfreedom.com/if-it-can-happen-to-trump-it-can-happen-to-you/feed/ 0 I2G Case Documentation https://defendmlmfreedom.com/i2g-case-documentation/ https://defendmlmfreedom.com/i2g-case-documentation/#respond Wed, 18 Sep 2024 05:45:30 +0000 https://defendmlmfreedom.com/?p=809
Hosseinipour Rebuttal Arguments
Barnes Appeal Brief
Barnes Rebuttal Arguments
Insufficient Evidence to Prove a Pyramid Scheme
Insufficient Evidence of Criminal Intent
Ineffective Assistance
Improper Use of Anzalone Plea
I2G Products Were Not Securities
Faraday Statement of Fact Rebuttal

The Legal Battle and Its Implications for MLM Companies

OVERVIEW OF THE I2G PYRAMID SCHEME CASE

Introduction to the Legal Arguments

Watch this 2-minute video to understand the key legal arguments being presented in defense of Faraday Hosseinipour. Learn about the critical issues at stake and why this case matters for the future of MLM businesses.

Stand Up for MLM Freedom

Join us in defending the rights of MLM participants and preventing unjust legal actions. Your support can make a difference.

Support the Cause

LEGAL DEFENSE ARGUMENTS

Defending Faraday Hosseinipour

Explore the comprehensive legal defenses presented for Faraday Hosseinipour, who faces unfounded criminal charges related to a pyramid scheme. Each of the 18 arguments is meticulously detailed, highlighting the flaws in the prosecution’s case and the broader implications for the MLM industry. Learn how these arguments aim to overturn a dangerous precedent and protect the future of legitimate MLM businesses.

Learn More

Kenyon Meyer, with Dinsmore and Schohl, is a Criminal Defense Lawyer who has special expertise in white-collar, mlm, securities, pyramid schemes, and compliance issues.

The arbitrary constructs of a “pyramid scheme” have no federal law or definition and require an expert team that understands the intricacies and fine line separating legitimate mlms from pyramid schemes to defend and protect your rights against unfair or erroneous allegations.

With the rising risk of criminal prosecutions, you need a legal team who can fight for your rights.

R. Kenyon Meyer

Proprietor, Louisvilla KY

]]> https://defendmlmfreedom.com/i2g-case-documentation/feed/ 0