US Marshals: Not Watching Your Assets

Tommy Lee Jones as US Marshall Samuel Gerard in US Marshals.Kopelson Entertainment/Zuma

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The US Marshals Service has sold off millions of dollars worth of seized assets without proper disclosure, according to a report from the Department of Justice’s office of inspector general (OIG). Between 2005 and 2010, the service’s Complex Asset Team disposed of over $136 million in assets with relatively little oversight or documentation, the OIG report alleges. The IG believes the team may have undervalued many of its seized assets and sold them at below-market prices—meaning taxpayers probably got less money than they deserved.

Back in November, an employee of the firm hired to help manage the Marshals’ assets blew the whistle on team leader Leonard Briskman, accusing him of breaching conflict of interest rules. That employee—a CPA and former federal agent named Brian S. Aryai—filed a whistle-blower lawsuit in November against his employer, Forfeiture Support Associates, under the Federal False Claims Act.

Aryai’s suit convinced the OIG to take an interest in the Marshal’s Complex Assets Team. But after clearing Briskman of Aryai’s initial allegations, OIG found other problems, Main Justice reports:

The inspector general reported that in several instances, Briskman valued and sold the same asset himself without supervision by anyone in the marshal’s office. In addition, he failed to publicly announce the sale of some assets, which limited their availability to the general public. In one case, an assistant U.S. Attorney from the Southern District of New York objected to a decision by Briskman to sell assets that had been seized during the Bernard Madoff case–more than one million shares of a pet prescription firm and a 5 percent stake in another investment portfolio–without announcing the sale.

In at least eight of the 55 cases taken up by the asset team between 2005 and 2010, the purchaser or the price of the asset was not recorded. On top of that, the team failed to perform sufficient market research to properly value the assets it was eyeing; for some of them, it couldn’t even provide the OIG with bank statements and other basic documentation. The New York Times reports that Briskman has been transferred to another division of the Marshals Service since Aryai filed his suit, and the OIG cleared him of any criminal wrongdoing. The Marshals Service, meanwhile, says that it has implemented most of the report’s recommendations.

Aryai’s lawsuit is still pending. Among the loose ends waiting to be tied are allegations that assets were sold without public notice or competitive bidding, and that Briskman found buyers through his business contacts. Stay tuned.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate