UK Art Dealer Matthew Green Charged In $9 Million Picasso Money Laundering Scheme

US government officials have charged British art dealer Matthew Green with using a pricey Picasso painting to help launder more than $9.2 million (£6.7 million), a representative for the Department of Justice confirmed to artnet News. Green was arrested in the US last week and is currently being detained.

Investigators allege that the proposed Picasso sale was connected to a $50 million stock scam. Green, who is the son of prominent London dealer Richard Green and was a co-director of the Richard Green Gallery and, more recently, Mayfair Fine Art, is one of ten people and corporations named in the 29-page indictment. The indictment, which was unsealed by the US Attorney’s office on February 28, focuses on the stock manipulation scheme and violations of US law requiring citizens and taxpayers to report offshore and international holdings to the IRS.

 The indictments are the result of work by several undercover FBI agents who recorded their conversations with defendants regarding alleged stock manipulation, money laundering, and falsifying the ID’s of the various offshore account holders.

“As alleged in the indictment, the defendants engaged in an elaborate multi-year scheme to defraud the investing public of millions of dollars through deceit and manipulative stock trading, and then worked to launder the fraudulent proceeds through off-shore bank accounts and the art world, including the proposed purchase of a Picasso painting,” US Attorney Richard P. Donoghue said in a statement.

Two of the other defendants, Beaufort Securities investment manager Peter Kyriacou and his uncle Aristos Aristodemou, suggested to an undercover FBI agent the possibility that he launder the proceeds of his illegal stock manipulation with an art transaction, according to the indictment. Kyriacou and Aristodemou then offered to introduce the agent to Green, and Aristodemou explained that the art trade is “the only market that is unregulated” and advised that art was a profitable investment because of “money laundering,” according to court papers.

The indictment alleges that between March 2014 and February 2018, Kyriacou, Aristodemou, and Beaufort were involved in defrauding investors in various publicly traded companies in the US “by concealing the true ownership” of the companies and “manipulating the price and trading volume in the stocks of those companies.”

Kyriacou, Aristodemou, and Green allegedly proposed that the undercover agent purchase, from Green, Pablo Picasso‘s Personnages (1965). Green “provided paperwork for the painting’s purchase. The money laundering scheme was halted prior to the transfer of ownership of the painting,” according to a statement from the Justice Department.

A Picasso painting matching that title and date was last offered publicly at an Impressionist and Modern evening sale at Christie’s London in 2010, according to the artnet Price Database. At the time it carried an estimate of £3 million to £5 million ($4 million to $7 million) and failed to sell.

Past owners of the painting, as listed in the provenance, or history of ownership, include a Paris gallery, a private collection in Switzerland, a private collection in Sweden, a Berlin gallery, and an unknown buyer who acquired it in 2000. It is not clear when Green acquired the painting or if he was the actual owner or was offering to sell it on behalf of a consignor. A source familiar with the work told artnet News that the painting is currently on loan to a museum in Denmark.

According to the indictment, on or about February 5, the agent met with Kyriacou, Aristodemou, and Green in London. During the meeting the undercover agent “once again explained his involvement in stock manipulation deals.” The defendants proposed that, after buying and maintaining ownership of the painting for an unspecified period of time, Green would arrange for the resale of the Picasso and then transfer proceeds back to the undercover agent through a bank in the US.

During the meeting, Green said that, in part, “it was important for him to make more than a five percent profit on the transaction so that he would not be asked why he was ‘in the money laundering business’,” according to the indictment. He further stated that he would address an invoice for the painting to a company that the undercover agent specified.

Indian authorities are probing a bank fraud case for potential money laundering

India’s Enforcement Directorate, a government agency that fights financial crime, will probe the possibility of money laundering in a $1.77 billion fraud case at the state-run Punjab National Bank (PNB), a finance ministry official said on Thursday.

PNB, the country’s second-largest state-run lender with assets of $120 billion, said in a regulatory filing that the fraud benefited “a few select account holders,” and that it has reported the matter to law enforcement agencies.

This was an isolated case of banking fraud and would be investigated by federal agencies, the finance official told Reuters. He declined to be named as he was not authorized to speak to media.

Separately, India’s Axis Bank said on Thursday that it had dealt in transactions that had been guaranteed with letters of undertaking from Punjab National Bank, but has since sold those transactions.

Shares in PNB, which fell 10 percent on Wednesday, were down more than 5 percent in early trading on Thursday.

A Louisiana man was arrested for allegedly swindling people out of thousands of dollars through a “Nigerian prince” email scam.

Authorities charged Michael Neu, 67, with 269 counts of wire fraud and money laundering after conducting an 18-month investigation, the Slidell Police Department said in a statement.

Police say Neu allegedly operated as the scam’s “middle man,” who wired money from his victims to his accomplices in Nigeria.

The investigation is still pending due to its international reach, but authorities said the money Neu allegedly stole had been wired to a third-party in Nigeria.

Authorities are well-aware of these types of scams.

According to the Federal Trade Commission’s description of the Nigerian email scam, the phishing scam begins with the suspect posing as a Nigerian prince or other high-ranking official seeking money or personal information to access an alleged inheritance.

Although such scams are the butt of jokes on late-night television, people continue to be duped by these types of scams.

“Most people laugh at the thought of falling for such a fraud, but law enforcement officials report annual losses of millions of dollars to these schemes,” the Slidell police said in a statement.

Slidell Police Chief Randy Fandal said that he hopes Neu’s arrest reminds the public not to fall prey to these schemes.

“If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is,” Fandal said in a statement. “Never give out personal information over the phone, through e-mail, cash checks for other individuals, or wire large amounts of money to someone you don’t know. 99.9 percent of the time, it’s a scam.”

How Obama let Hezbollah’s cocaine empire thrive ‘to save Iran nuclear deal’


A Politico investigation has revealed how the administration of former US President Barack Obama attempted to suppress a Drugs Enforcement Agency operation to expose a money-laundering scheme in which “proceeds from Latin American drug-running were being funneled to Hezbollah.”

According to the examination released this week, DEA agents working on an operation codenamed “Project Cassandra” were hoping to prosecute operatives from Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Lebanese militia, involved in cocaine trafficking and money laundering.

But in order to preserve the Iranian nuclear deal, a feature of the Obama legacy that the former administration prides itself on, the operation was “tamped down for fear of rocking the boat with Iran,” the investigation has found.

The nuclear deal saw economic sanctions lifted on Iran in exchange for the alleged suspension of the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program.

The eight-year-long DEA investigation saw agents using wiretaps, undercover operation and informants “to map Hezbollah’s illicit networks, with the help of 30 U.S. and foreign security agencies.”

Politico spoke with Project Cassandra agents, who claim that the Obama administration stifled or undermined the investigation, “allowing [the Hezbollah operatives] to remain active despite being under sealed US indictment for years.”

“This was a policy decision, it was a systematic decision,” David Asher, a financier who helped establish Project Cassandra.

“They serially ripped apart this entire effort that was very well supported and resourced, and it was done from the top down.”

Project Cassandra

Project Cassandra agents claim that officials at the Justice and Treasury departments repeatedly hindered Project Cassandra agents’ attempts to pursue “investigations, prosecutions, arrests and financial sanctions” against key figures in the scheme.

The operation, which made use of law enforcement agencies in seven countries, is believed to have uncovered “evidence that Hezbollah had transformed itself from a Middle East-focused military and political organization into an international crime syndicate that some investigators believed was collecting $1 billion a year from drug and weapons trafficking, money laundering and other criminal activities,” Politico reported.

Project Cassandra highlighted the “the dangerous global nexus between drug trafficking and terrorism”

Hezbollah operatives allegedly used the drug money to buy weapons that have been used in Syria.

The Obama administration seemingly let Hezbollah “off the hook,” Politico surmises. This is despite the US Department of State declaring the Lebanese militia a foreign terrorist organization since 1997.

The 2018 World Cup will only shed more light on corruption in Russia

By: Murad Hemmadi

Scandals have dominated the lead-up to the big event, and there’s little chance of the tournament itself going smoothly

At about 6 p.m. local time on June 14 at Moscow’s Luzhniki Stadium, with Vladimir Putin in attendance and hundreds of millions tuning in around the world, a player will tap the ball to a teammate and kick off the 2018 FIFA World Cup. However the Russian team fares at home, the tournament will likely go down as a bad play by the ruling regime.

Nations treat the hosting of mega sporting events as a marker of “entering the global community [and] being a global player in terms of trade and economics,” says Simon Darnell, an assistant professor at the University of Toronto. They’re looking to be recognized as “a country with international prestige, a leader, forward-looking.” The Putin regime must see the World Cup as a chance to showcase Russia’s resurgence. Instead, reputation-dinging scandals have dominated the lead-up, and there’s little chance of the tournament itself going smoothly.

There’s already the cost: a projected $13.8 billion in government spending. The total expenditure won’t be totted up until well after the tournament, but the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi cost four times as much as initially anticipated. The other side of the balance sheet is in bad shape, too—while the World Cup has traditionally been a commercial bonanza, FIFA has reportedly struggled to sign up large sponsors for 2018.

Meanwhile, European media outlets reported last summer that poorly paid and ill-treated North Korean labourers had been involved in building St. Petersburg’s Zenit Arena; according to a trade union, eight workers have perished on the site, among 17 killed at tournament venues in total.

The hosts have hardly been winning good press in other areas, either. Canadian lawyer Richard McLaren’s independent investigation for the World Anti-Doping Agency found an “institutional conspiracy” to cover up the use of performance-enhancing drugs by Russian Olympic and Paralympic athletes. As a result, the Russian team was banned in early December from competing at the 2018 Winter Games in Pyeongchang, South Korea.

Russian officials have vehemently denied these reports. But staging the World Cup is unlikely to illuminate Russia’s renewed relevance. Instead, it will shine the spotlight on a spectacular mess.

Turkish gold trader details money laundering scheme for Iran

Brendan Pierson

NEW YORK (Reuters) – A Turkish-Iranian gold trader described in a U.S. court on Wednesday how he ran a sprawling international money laundering scheme aimed at helping Iran get around U.S. sanctions and spend its oil and gas revenues abroad.

Reza Zarrab, who has pleaded guilty and is cooperating with U.S. prosecutors in the criminal trial of a Turkish bank executive, told jurors in federal court in Manhattan that he helped Iran use funds deposited in Turkey’s state-owned Halkbank to buy gold, which was smuggled to Dubai and sold for cash.

The testimony, given through Turkish interpreters, came on the second day of the trial of Halkbank executive Mehmet Hakan Atilla, who has pleaded not guilty.

U.S. prosecutors have charged nine people in the case, although only Zarrab, 34, and Atilla, 47, have been arrested by U.S. authorities. Prosecutors have said the defendants took part in a scheme that involved gold trades and fake purchases of food to give Iran access to international markets, violating U.S. sanctions.

The case has fueled tensions between the United States and Turkey, which are NATO allies. Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan’s government has said the case was fabricated for political reasons.

Standing before the jury in tan prison garb on Wednesday, Zarrab drew a multicolored diagram to illustrate the complex series of transactions he said he used to avoid scrutiny of U.S. banks and regulators. He explained how he falsified customs documents to make it appear that gold was bound for Iran, rather than Dubai.

Zarrab said Atilla was “the most knowledgeable person about the sanction rules” at Halkbank, and that he helped develop the scheme. He said Atilla and Halkbank’s then-general manager, Suleyman Aslan, instructed him how to carry it out.

“He made sure that the system and method worked,” Zarrab said of Atilla.

Zarrab said he began working with Halkbank on the scheme in 2012, after bribing Zafer Caglayan, then Turkey’s economy minister, to broker a deal with Aslan. He said Aslan had initially refused to work with Zarrab because he was too well known.

Zarrab said he paid Caglayan bribes amounting to more than $50 million.

Caglayan and Suleyman have also both been charged in the case. Turkey’s government has previously said that Caglayan acted within Turkish and international law. Halkbank has said that all of its transactions fully complied with national and international regulations.

Zarrab testified that before working with Halkbank, he handled Iranian transactions through Turkey’s Aktif Bank. He said the bank initially refused to let him open an account, but relented after Zarrab asked Egemen Bagis, then Turkey’s minister of European Union affairs, for help.

 Zarrab said Bagis set up a meeting between him and Aktif Bank’s general manager and that he was then allowed to open an account. However, Aktif Bank later shut down the account after receiving a warning from the United States, Zarrab said.

Reuters was not immediately able to reach anyone at Aktif Bank for comment after working hours on Wednesday.

Zarrab is expected to continue testifying on Thursday.

Follow the money: Here’s how money laundering works


Special counsel Robert Mueller followed the money to file a criminal conspiracy and money laundering indictment against President Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort and his associate Richard Gates for activities predating their joining the campaign.

Simply put, money laundering is a common technique used by financial criminals and others to hide illegal gains.

“You’re taking ill-gotten gains and ‘washing’ them by transforming them into funds that can’t easily be connected to the original source,” said John Byrne, the former executive vice president of the Association of Anti-Money Laundering Specialists, a crime prevention group.

More than 200 federal crimes can be legal predicates for money laundering Byrne added in a Monday interview.


After amassing illegal gains, financial criminals typically place the money into the financial system in ways designed to avoid drawing the attention of banks, financial institutions or law enforcement agencies. This is the stage of the washing process most vulnerable to detection, according to a 2014 federal inter-agency manual compiled by the Federal Reserve, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and other agencies.

Placement techniques include structuring currency deposits in amounts below the $10,000 reporting requirement for banks, or commingling the illicit funds with money from legal activities.

The indictment filed by Mueller’s team alleges that Manafort laundered more than $18 million he received for acting as an agent of a pro-Russia political party in Ukraine and failed to report the work and income as federal laws require. Gates allegedly transferred more than $3 million from offshore accounts to other accounts he owned.


After the funds enter the financial system, the money is layered, or shifted through a series of transactions designed to create confusion and complicate the paper trail for investigators.

Examples include exchanging monetary instruments for larger or smaller amounts, or wiring or transferring funds through numerous accounts in one or more U.S. or foreign financial institutions.

Some foreign accounts may be so-called “shell companies” — entities that have no physical presence apart from a mailing address and generate no independent economic value, according to advisories from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, part of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

The indictment filed by Mueller’s investment team lists 17 domestic businesses or limited liability companies allegedly owned or controlled by Manafort and Gates. The indictment also identifies 12 entities in Cyprus, and three others in the United Kingdom or the Caribbean islands of the Grenadines.

The indictment also identifies scores of transactions from 2008-2014 in which Manafort allegedly wired more than $12 million from the foreign accounts to vendors for personal expenses without paying taxes on the income.


This final stage is used to help shield financial criminals by providing a plausible explanation for where the money came from. Examples of integration include purchasing and reselling real estate, investment securities, or other financial assets with money from illicit activity.

The indictment lists four Manafort real estate properties and a life insurance policy that collectively are subject to forfeiture because investigators linked them to his alleged illegal activity and money laundering.

The properties include a luxury home in Water Mill, N.Y., part of the Hamptons area on Long Island’s East End, as well as residences in Brooklyn, Manhattan and Arlington, Va.

Trying to crack down on money laundering through real estate transactions, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network in February renewed requirements for title agents to identify all people behind shell companies involved in all-cash deals for expensive properties in New York City, the Miami, Fla., San Francisco, and San Diego area, along with San Antonio, Texas.

Rio Olympic head leaves prison; will face corruption charges

By STEPHEN WADE AP Sports Writer

RIO DE JANEIRO (AP) — Carlos Nuzman left prison on Friday after his arrest two weeks ago on eventual charges that he arranged bribes to land the Olympics he headed last year in Rio de Janeiro.

Nuzman walked from a Rio prison wearing a white polo shirt, accompanied by his defense team and watched by a handful of curious bystanders.

The 75-year-old Brazilian is to stand trial for money laundering, tax evasion, and racketeering, though it’s unclear how long that will take under Brazil’s slow-moving justice system.

 Brazilian and French authorities say Nuzman helped direct about $2 million to Papa Massata Diack to win votes to land the 2016 Olympics.

In the 2009 vote by the International Olympic Committee, Lamine Diack — Papa Massata Diack’s father — was a powerful IOC member from Senegal with sway over Africa’s voting bloc.

Rio’s Olympics, although a sporting success, left behind a half-dozen empty sports venues. The subsequent Paralympic Games needed a government bailout to be staged just weeks after the Olympics ended.

Nuzman’s local organizing committee still owes creditors between $30-40 million, and many of the projects built for the games are linked to corruption scandals blanketing Brazil.

Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice ordered Nuzman’s release, but his passports are being held — he is reported to hold three — and he cannot leave the country. He is also barred from contact with the IOC, the Brazilian Olympic Committee, and the local organizing committee.

He resigned last week from the Brazilian Olympic Committee, and his honorary membership has been suspended by the IOC.

Nuzman’s defense argued that the elderly Brazilian is in poor health and should not be held in prison.

The filings against Nuzman say he has undeclared assets in Switzerland, including 16, 1-kilogram gold bars. Prosecutors estimate his net worth increased 457 percent in his last 10 years as the Brazilian Olympic Committee president.

He headed that body for 22 years and also headed Rio’s 2007 Pan American Games.

“While Olympic medalists chased their dreams of gold medals, leaders of the Brazilian Olympic Committee stashed their gold in Switzerland,” prosecutor Fabiana Schenider said when Nuzman was arrested earlier this month.

Schenider added that the “Olympic Games were used as a big trampoline for acts of corruption.”

Leonardo Gryner, Nuzman’s right-hand man at the organizing committee, has also been charged by Brazilian prosecutors. So have both Diacks, former Rio governor Sergio Cabral, and businessman Arthur Cesar de Menezes Soares Filho.

Brazilian authorities say the country spent about $13 billion to organize the Olympics — a mix of public and private money — though one estimate suggested it spent $20 billion.

Weinstein Co. president linked to felon’s money laundering case

By Gene Maddaus, Variety

David Glasser has been Harvey Weinstein’s right-hand man for the better part of a decade. Now, after Weinstein’s spectacular downfall in a sex harassment scandal this week, Glasser has been put in charge of the mogul’s imploding entertainment company alongside Weinstein’s brother, Bob.

But Glasser, who serves as president and chief operating officer of the Weinstein Co., has long been dogged by legal issues that date back more than two decades. In the most serious case, Glasser’s former company was used to launder the proceeds of a massive stock manipulation scheme which, according to federal prosecutors, was connected to the Genovese crime family. The mastermind of the scheme, Roy Ageloff, pleaded guilty to securities fraud and was sentenced to eight years in prison. Ageloff also helped launch Glasser’s career as a producer, and even tried to produce a film with Glasser about his own life, to be titled “Sold Short.” Glasser was never charged with a crime.

Glasser’s legal problems have hindered his Hollywood career in the past. Two years ago, Glasser announced he would be leaving the Weinstein Co. to seek a “new opportunity.” A few weeks later, he reversed course and announced that he would stay on. According to sources familiar with the matter, Glasser was offered a top executive role at DreamWorks Animation. But after digging into his past, DreamWorks rescinded the offer. The sources say the board felt that Glasser’s legal troubles made it impossible for him to hold an executive job at a publicly traded company.

In a statement to Variety, Glasser says he was 24 when he met Ageloff and was unaware of his misconduct. He also denies that DreamWorks had rescinded the offer due to his legal issues. “This is simply not true, a rumor and you have no one on the record,” he says.

The revelations come as the Weinstein Co.’s future is teetering on the brink of collapse. Industry insiders are speculating about the company’s ability to produce projects, a possible sale or bankruptcy filing, and whether Glasser and Bob Weinstein may be the next to depart. Glasser tells Variety that he has not yet accepted the board’s offer to run the company, and is still weighing whether to stay.

A former child actor, Glasser broke into the producing business in the mid-1990s. In 1997, his company, Cutting Edge Entertainment, produced a film entitled “Fait Accompli.” One of the actors was Ageloff, who played the role of “Murt.” According to federal court filings, Ageloff invested $3.5 million in Cutting Edge in 1997 and 1998. He would go on to have a half dozen minor roles in films, all but one of which were produced by Glasser.

By 1997, Ageloff was already infamous on Wall Street for running high-pressure boiler rooms that touted obscure stock offerings. Ageloff and his partner, Robert Catoggio, ran the brokerage firm of Hanover Sterling, which employed more than 100 brokers in offices in Manhattan and Boca Raton, Florida. In July 1996, Fortune called Hanover a “lowlife brokerage firm,” and noted that the FBI was looking into questionable IPOs. Ageloff and his associates were indicted in June 1999, and accused of swindling investors out of $150 million in a series of “pump and dump” schemes. Prosecutors alleged that Catoggio funneled millions of dollars in proceeds to a captain in the Genovese crime family, whose stepson was one of the brokers who pleaded guilty. Ageloff pleaded guilty in 2000 and was sent to a medium-security prison in Florida in 2001.

At some point, Ageloff came up with an idea for a movie called “Sold Short,” about his career in the brokerage business. He turned to Glasser to produce it. According to a deal memo dated January 2002 — that is, a few months after Ageloff entered prison — Glasser agreed to make the film with a budget between $10 to $25 million. Glasser would pay Ageloff a producer fee of $500,000 upon commencement of principal photography. The film was never made.

According to Glasser, he produced only two films with Ageloff — “Fait Accompli” and “In the Shadows” — and did not become aware of Ageloff’s criminal conduct until much later.

“Years later we found out that he was being indicted for stock fraud on a old business that he had,” Glasser says. “Years later I was contacted by the team who prosecuted him, interviewed and they went through all my emails, correspondence and contracts. It was concluded that I had done nothing wrong other than got in business with the wrong guy and next time I should make sure I know where these investments are coming from. I was young and did nothing wrong here and in hindsight (I) learned a valuable lesson on vetting your investors.”

In September 2002, Glasser signed a note agreeing to pay $1.5 million by 2004 to the Ageloff Education Irrevocable Trust, which Ageloff set up to benefit his children. According to court records, Glasser put up 20% of his new company, Splendid Pictures, as collateral in the deal. A few months later, Glasser took a 20% equity stake in another company, a distributor named Syndicate Films International. Under a confidential agreement, he pledged to give Ageloff half of his proceeds from his stake in the company. The Ageloff trust later filed a federal suit against Glasser, alleging that he failed to pay the debt when it came due. Glasser did not contest the lawsuit, and a default judgment was entered in the amount of $1,622,821.

In 2008, shortly before Ageloff was to be released, federal prosecutors in Florida brought another case against him, alleging that he had hidden assets from the government and laundered money. The indictment does not name Glasser, but it does reference the $3.5 million investment of tainted money into “various movie productions” in 1997 and 1998.

Ageloff pleaded guilty to money laundering and was sentenced to an additional five years behind bars. According to the plea agreement, his brother, Michael, received $160,000 in “movie money” in August 2002 from “an unindicted co-conspirator,” who is not named. The plea also states that Michael Ageloff received a $500,000 payout in 2003 from the sale of Cutting Edge Entertainment. He received two checks, in the amounts of $300,000 and $200,000, which the government alleged was part of the money laundering scheme.

Ageloff’s attorney, Daniel Brodersen, addressed the $3.5 million in movie investments in a pre-sentencing memorandum, arguing that New York prosecutors were aware of it when Ageloff entered his original plea in 2000. “Not all of the monies that the Defendant invested constituted illegal proceeds,” Brodersen wrote. “Furthermore, this investment and the Defendant’s corresponding interest in Cutting Edge Entertainment was fully disclosed to the court, the probation office, and the prosecution in the Eastern District of New York.”

“There has never been any attempt on the part of the Defendant to conceal these monies, his interest in Cutting Edge Entertainment, and the fact that he was defrauded by David C. Glasser, with whom he invested those funds in 1997,” Brodersen wrote.

Under the plea deal, Ageloff forfeited the $1.6 million judgment to the U.S. government.

“The United States was able to identify funds that flowed from that Ageloff trust account to Glasser,” says Dan Eckhart, the former federal prosecutor who handled the case. “Ageloff admitted the trust contained proceeds from his criminal activity in his plea agreement, and we were able to forfeit those assets.”

Glasser was not prosecuted, nor were others who allegedly received tainted money from Ageloff in the laundering case.

“If these weren’t proceeds involved in money laundering, the government wouldn’t have been able to seize them and obtain a forfeiture judgment,” says Eckhart, who is now a criminal defense attorney in Orlando.

Since then, Glasser has been paying down the debt to the government.

Glasser has been sued many other times over the years. Alec Baldwin sued him in 2001, alleging that he and other talent on “The Devil and Daniel Webster” had not been paid. The suit was later withdrawn, and the film was released several years later under a different title. In a 2002 interview with Variety, Glasser said he had always paid up eventually. His motto, he said, was “Be guilty of being late. Don’t be guilty of screwing someone.”

Glasser’s career moved ahead in spite of these issues. He took a job at Yari Film Group, which would later produce the movie “Crash.”

In 2005, Glasser met an investor named Jeff Cooper. In a meeting at Yari Film Group, he urged Cooper to invest in a new film venture, called Hi-Def Entertainment, which would be run by Glasser’s younger brother Phillip, who lived in Tennessee.

“He put on a dog and pony show,” Cooper recalls. “It was one lie after the other.”

Cooper says that he put faith in Glasser’s connections in the industry, and says that Glasser said he could divert promising material from Yari to Hi-Def.

“David was the key man,” Cooper says. “I wouldn’t have done it if it wasn’t for David.”

The only thing that ever came out of the company was a forgettable Jamie Kennedy film, “Kickin’ It Old School.” In 2008, Glasser left Yari Film Group for the Weinstein Co.

“When the opportunity with Harvey came along, Hi-Def Entertainment and I were left sucking pond water,” Cooper says.

Cooper says the recent revelations about Weinstein helped him understand why Glasser fit in there. When the two were at the Cannes Film Festival in 2005, he remembers Glasser making numerous vulgar remarks to women.

“We’d be in a car going down the street, and he’d be shouting obscenities to every girl we passed,” Cooper says. “It was totally unprofessional,” he says, adding that he felt pressured not to raise objections. “I turned the other cheek to it — business is business.”

Cooper lost his entire $500,000 investment, and sued for fraud. The case ultimately settled for a confidential amount.

Glasser disputes Cooper’s account, saying he only met him once and never promised anything.

“[T]his was thrown out of court three times,” Glasser says. “I finally settled with him for a tiny amount as this was a nuisance.”

He also adamantly denies Cooper’s claim about harassing women at Cannes.

Bob Yari, the president of Yari Film Group, had fonder memories of Glasser, who ran foreign sales for him for several years.

“He’s a real go-getter,” Yari says. “He was made for this business, in my opinion.”

Yari says he was well aware of Glasser’s reputation for lawsuits when he hired him.

“I spent a lot of time analyzing it and actually working with him to change those past ways,” Yari says. “I don’t think he was a wrongdoer. He was a wheeler-dealer and got himself into a lot of trouble.”

A True Tale of Drug Cartels, Money Laundering and Horse Racing

A True Tale of Drug Cartels, Money Laundering and Horse Racing


In September 2010, bettors at the All American Futurity race in New Mexico watched the long-shot Mr. Piloto gallop to the million-dollar first prize by less than a nose, the second-closest win in the race’s history. Meanwhile, over the border in Mexico, a gang of drug traffickers from the Zetas cartel cheered the victory with whiskey, from a safe house. Mr. Piloto was registered to the company of a Dallas bricklayer named José Treviño Morales, but the money to buy him had come from his brother Miguel Treviño, alias “El Cuarenta,” a Zeta boss blamed for some of the worst massacres in Mexico’s drug war. Bloodstained dollars had gone from American drug users over the Rio Grande to cartel killers, and then back north into the American racing industry.

The true-life tale of the Zetas’ foray into quarter horses is masterfully recounted by the journalist Joe Tone in his debut book, “Bones.” He shines a light on an often overlooked corner of the blood bath ravaging Mexico: how cartel money is laundered in the United States. In this case, federal agents finally busted the operation, seizing more than 400 “narco horses,” which they auctioned off for $12 million. But with Americans estimated to spend $100 billion a year on illegal drugs, this is probably just the tip of an iceberg.


Miguel Treviño MoralesCreditU.S. Drug Enforcement Administration

In addition to following the drug money, Tone has found a great yarn. His finely-painted cast of characters includes a rookie F.B.I. agent hungry to make his name, a Texas cowboy fighting to keep his family business afloat and a talented Mexican horseman picking winners for a very dangerous boss. Tone weaves the threads together with skillful pacing and sharp prose, marking him as an important new talent in narrative nonfiction.

He is helped along by ample documentation of the case. While much of the narco world remains in the shadows, Treviño and his cronies were brought to trial in Austin, in 2013, in one of the most extensive lawsuits against a Mexican cartel to be heard in an American courtroom. (Major Mexican traffickers often don’t go to trial, because they cut deals.) Even though he builds on the reporting of Ginger Thompson, who broke the story in The New York Times, Tone adds some vivid details, recounting wiretapped phone calls and drawing the full back story from Lawson, the rookie F.B.I. agent who pursued the case. “Lawson could hear the horses if he listened closely,” Tone writes. “He was standing outside the black-iron gate with the horse silhouettes, at the bottom of a long driveway that led up to José’s brick homestead. It was a little after six in the morning, the earliest moment the court would allow them to raid without a judge’s permission.”


Tone digs deep into the colorful world of quarter-horse racing, a variant of the sport developed by white cowboys, Mexican ranchers and Native Americans. He also shows how some players in the horse industry reaped the drug money and went on to enjoy their profits; how those arrested were all Hispanic while some white horsemen doing similar things remained free; how José Treviño’s daughter, a college student who married a Marine, was caught up in the sweep.

Like many journalists of the drug war, Tone sheds doubt on the whole strategy of fighting the trade. “Better answers might lie in the halls of American power and influence — in the way drugs are regulated, drug users treated, drug traffickers sentenced.” He is right to push for more debate on how to stop the billions of drug dollars from funding the crime armies tearing Mexico apart. But law enforcement agents still need to keep hacking at the tentacles of cartel finances that stretch through the United States, where the blood wealth of narcos could be right before your eyes.