Tonight, these defendants are charged with engaging in a systematic scheme to falsify and fabricate loan applications. The little-known story about the only bank prosecuted for mortgage fraud after the financial meltdown. At first, you think that they're here to figure out what's going on for us. We transition to, wait a minute, maybe we're the target.
A family business caught up in a national crisis. I think Americans were upset that the security against which loans were made were often fictitious and in abacus. There was some truth to that too. And fighting to survive. Tom is not easy to be pushed around. And my girls, they're tough. Smart, capable women. It's trying for us because it's our father's legacy. And he's passed that legacy on to us. Right on for fine, from Steve James, the director of Hoop Dreams and the Interrupters. Abacus, small enough to jail.
I owe everything to George Bailey. Help him, dear father. This time I saw his wonderful life, I had tremendous respect for George Bailey, who was the main character. He did so much good for the community. Mr. and Mrs. Martini, welcome home. George was lending money to the community resident to buy houses. Me, Giuseppe Martini, I owe you my own house. And that's exactly the same purpose that when we started the bank, it was our motivation to help a lot of people, a lot of immigrants. This movie touches me so much. The family, the friends. I always watch it. Every year I watch. That makes me cry. If that's the part. I wish this story could end the same way as it's wonderful life. But in reality, it is not that simple.
Today we are announcing the indictment of 19 individuals on charges, including mortgage fraud, securities fraud, and conspiracy. As well as the indictment of Abacus Federal Savings Bank, a federally chartered bank that has been catering to the Chinese immigrant community since 1984. If we have learned anything from the recent mortgage crisis, it's that at some point these schemes unravel and taxpayers can be left holding the bank.
今天我们宣布起诉19名个人,罪名包括抵押贷款欺诈、证券欺诈和阴谋。同时也起诉了阿北银行(Abacus Federal Savings Bank)。这家联邦特许银行自1984年以来一直为华裔移民社区提供服务。如果从最近的抵押贷款危机中我们学到了什么,那就是这些计划最终会破产,纳税人可能会陷入困境。
The DA made such a big parade bringing people from Washington. All these tough law enforcement officers and making such a big announcement that we are part of the cause of an initial crisis of 2008. Almost laughable. Mr. Sun is entitled to his opinions, but in Abacus' loan department, mortgages were based upon false documentation. We have evidence of conspiracy, arsenic, and systemic fraud. If that prosecution goes through, that bank is going to go out of business. There's no question about it. They're going to lose their charter, and it's going to enormously impact that community. Too big to fail turns into small enough to jail, and Abacus is small enough to jail.
I walk around here. Of course, I feel very much at home. This is a very tasty noodle shop. I was born in Shanghai in the year 1935. At the age of 16, I immigrated to the United States. I went to law school, and I moved to Chinatown. There was not many Chinese lawyers, so I did a lot of personal work. This building with the Chinese National Flag is the Chinese Community Center, and in there is the headquarter of Chinese consolidated banana association. I represented the Association for years and years and years. This association sponsored a school, and I obtained the charter from Department of Education. Some people in the community, older people, in particular, remembers me, know what I've done.
Back when I was a lawyer, there was no bank that was owned by Chinese and serving Chinese. This is Chinatown, New York City, warm, colorful, cheerful, a wonderful place for sightseeing. This man is on his way to the bank. What is it about the bank that makes our man feel at home? In the very design, beautifully bright with the primary Chinese colors, and he sees home in the soft, sweet smile of the teller. At that time, banks in this community had several hundred millions of dollars of Chinese deposit, and I went to a bank to try to borrow money, but they do not lend money and deal with the community. He always told us stories that they were willing to take his deposits, but they weren't really to give him credit, loans. So that's why he started the bank, because he felt that wasn't fair to the community.
I remember when we were children, my dad was excited about this venture that he was going to start, and he involved us in the decisions of what would be the symbol for the bank, and I remember we would all try to design something.
Hello, can you open for me? We serve people who've never even dealt with the banking system before, and you try to bring them into the banking system.
你好,你能为我开门吗?我们为从未接触过银行系统的人提供服务,而你尝试将他们引入银行系统中。
An example of that is to save deposit boxes. Have you ever seen so many boxes? There are 8,000 plus boxes in this vault. 8,000, the Chinese people, particularly immigrants, they rent houses in a very tight quarter. There's no place for them to place their variables, except in a bank vault. So it starts with a save deposit boxes, then they really put their money into the bank, and then let the money grow, and then later on they will take that money and use it to buy a home.
At the actual closing, many of the bars bring their whole family with them, and they bring their children and their grandmother, and by the time they walk out, they're all super happy, and you feel good to be a part of that process.
We tried to have the right. I don't remember her working right now. You get them saying, yeah, we're going to go. Ah, come on, oh, yeah. Do you have the chicken feed on there? No, oh, that's always special. Yeah, it's bitter, it's all. It's bitter, it's all. You will do it. That's the butt. You don't want to eat that. I like it. She doesn't eat that much, you can eat it, in part, leading up to the butt.
I never thought my girls would work in Chinatown. Because we lived in Greenwich, Connecticut. Tom would be commuting every day, you know, like an hour and a half each way. So he didn't see them that much in those days. They had no idea anything, not a faintest idea about the Chinese community. In fact, Heather still doesn't. She hates the city, you know. She's like me, we both have headaches.
And at home, when we don't want them to understand we speak Chinese, you always said to me, if you come work for the bank, the benefit will be you have a nine to forge. A hundred, four? He said nine to forge. Yeah, because long time ago people could leave at three for the bank. He said you can have children, you can have a family. You know what he said to me? He said, if you wish to work with me, remember this is your own choice. And don't think it's going to be easy. You gave me two different stories.
You know, people ask me, so why in the world you wanted to get into banking? It's not because I needed a job. I was practicing law. I was busy, but I said to myself, it's time for me to do something for the society. That started from year years time.
Grandpa. Grandpa. Grandpa. He always thought that was the honorable thing to do. That's not unusual. A lot of people in Chinatown, your generation, they believe that was honorable, to be entrusted. And to be trusted. To be trusted with the public funds. Yeah, that's right.
Do you have a copy of the pale letter? Is that me?
你有一份苍白的信的副本吗?那是关于我吗?
This whole five year ordeal began in December of 2009. I had a closing that day involving one of our loan officers, Ken Yu. Ken Yu worked with us around four years. The staff really liked him. He was very popular. He had some charisma.
It was a normal closing. He was the cell of the journey and it was a buyer. But there was a lot of tension in the closing. They weren't getting a loan. They were arguing over things. The attorney asked me a question about additional monies and the borrower said that she was paying. It didn't make sense to me. So I called Ken Yu and I asked him, what are these checks? He just got, oh, blah, blah, blah, hedging and not answering.
Vira was very upset. This girl gave thousands of dollars, I'm told, to this loan officer. And she thought they would be applied to what's her closing course and they weren't. It was very shocking.
I said, this loan cannot close. That was Friday. Then on Monday, Ken came in and I farted him that day because he was lying all over the place. Ken Yu stole money. That he was running a money laundering operation on his own. I'm being asked to everybody here. Obviously committed fraud. I referred the case to our compliance officer and then we hired an outside consultant, a former federal prosecutor who was highly experienced in fraud and anti-monolingering investigations.
During our investigation, we found two other loan officers who were engaged in wrongdoing, nothing at the level of Ken Yu, but we fired them nonetheless. And some other staff also resigned shortly after we notified Fannie Mae.
They actually not only fired the loan officer and canceled the closing, they went straight to the office of thrift management, which was their regulator, and they told them about it. So it was this perfect evidence of a bank finding out something that shouldn't be happening and taking steps to make sure this didn't happen again.
The couple unfortunately lost down payment on this house, which was, you know, quite a chunk of money. It was 10% of the house's price. You were very upset. And at that point, the borrower, she calls me, she's like, you know, there's this money that he's taken from me. So what are you going to do? And I said to her, I remember I was furious. I'm like, what am I going to do? Because I'm thinking to myself, maybe she's in cahoots with Ken Yu to defraud the bank. I said, if you have a problem, you should go file a complaint of the police precinct.
A complaint was filed with the local precinct. The initial DA's office investigation was focused solely on the employee who had been accused of a theft. The DA's office started asking those questions. Everybody who asked us for something, we gave them. We thought we actually went beyond what we were supposed to do. My compliance officer actually put together binders for her staff. And so basically, the beginning of the case was handed to her team in binder form.
At first, you think that they're here to figure out what's going on for us because they're law enforcement. I don't know where and at what point we transitioned to in their mind. And their mind. And then us realizing, wait a minute, maybe we're the target.
We spent a lot of time investigating and ended up absolutely convinced that the loan department was corrupt pretty much through and through. Mr. Wong ran the loan department and widespread fraud was occurring in front of him every day.
In July 2011, two of the policemen went to my house and asked me to go to the district attorney office to have an interview. But I refuse.
在2011年7月,两名警察来到了我的家,并要求我去地方检察官办公室接受访谈。然而,我拒绝了。
The office was convinced that the knowledge of that corruption went up to high enough people in the bank that the bank was legally responsible for it.
办公室相信,银行高层对于那起腐败行为的了解程度已经足够高,以至于银行在法律上应对其负有责任。
Let me assure you that we do not take lightly the charges that we announced today. Now, these defendants, the bank and former employees and managers from its loan department are charged with engaging in a systematic scheme to falsify and fabricate loan applications to the federal National Mortgage Association, commonly known as Fannie Mae.
When the actual indictment occurred, I think the greatest fear was that it would directly involve Jill. And that was something that was incomprehensible to us just knowing how we were raised, that she could ever be guilty of something like that. I mean, I think they definitely were looking, trying to get us to get me. Yeah, because I'm the CEO and president. But they did not charge me individually because they did not have any evidence to support that I was involved in the wrongdoing. We felt that the provable evidence stopped at a certain level, but that the individuals who were charged were high enough of the corporation to charge the corporation.
It was at the district attorney's office as a prosecutor for seven years. The very division that was bringing this prosecution against the family bank. And when I found out what they were doing, I had to go to my beer chief to let him know that, you know, this was going on. There's a potential conflict here. And it made me so angry that that very same office where I had served and been trained to do that, to know that they were doing this against my family who is me. That's where I come from. And then to know that my reputation in the office was one of utmost integrity. It just made no sense.
What was especially interesting was the way the DA pursued the public relations aspect of this prosecution. Reporters in this town were treated to this extraordinary photo opportunity, this almost Stalinist looking chain gang. I'm a former prosecutor. I'm not soft on crime. I've never seen a spectacle like this. These people were humiliated intentionally for no good reason. It is not the district attorney's office's decision whether or not to put people in handcuffs, but people who were brought into court who have been charged with crimes are put into handcuffs. That's a decision that's made by the court officers. I won't go into it more than that because, you know, it's not something I'm involved with.
Court officers don't come outside of the courtroom. They were led down a hallway by district attorney investigators. I got off the elevator and I saw what was happening. I had never seen that in my entire time at the DA's office. I mean, this was like the case of the century. He never would have done that with a black group of employees. You know, I mean, everyone would see that for what it was. And they actually staged it so much so that three of the people that were in that chain had already been arraigned, had already posted bond and were out awaiting trial.
The DA had added charges to Mr. Wong's indictment. Usually you don't even have to go through the process again. They just add the charges. You get a grain again. The bail is transferred and that's that. Instead, they had me turn them in and the next thing you know, I see him chained to 15 other people being hurt like cattle down the hallways of 100 Center Street. I've been doing this for 25 years and I've never seen that happen before. There are security issues behind the decision, but those decisions create feelings that are that don't reflect the view of the office or my view. And to the degree that happened here, I think it was very unfortunate, but it happened. It is a humiliation for me. And that's where I saw incompetence combined with arrogance. My deputy bureau chief, he's always so inspirational and he would always refer to the inscriptions outside 100 Center Street about having faith in justice. But I don't I don't believe that anymore. I decided to leave the DA's office.
检察官在黄先生的起诉书中增加了指控。通常情况下,你甚至无需再次经历整个流程,他们只是会增加指控。你就会再次被拘押,保释金会被转移,就这样。然而,他们让我将他们交出来,接下来,你会看到他和其他15个人被像牛一样拴在100 Center Street的走廊里受折磨。我已经从事这个工作25年了,以前从未见过这种事情发生。这个决定背后存在安全问题,但这些决定引起的感受并不代表办公室或我的看法。在这里发生的程度让我非常不幸,但它确实发生了。这对我的尊严是一种侮辱。我看到了无能与傲慢的结合。我的副局长,他总是如此鼓舞人心,总是提到100 Center Street外面的铭文,鼓励人们对正义保持信心。但我不再相信那些了。所以我决定离开检察官办公室。
It really angered the Chinese community, but so what? We're not going to decide an election for events. This is the social where my great grandfather was. My grandfather, my my dad. Back in the days with the exclusion act, people do not have rights. This is where it would all come. Like Mr. Song, what drives me is the sense of community. Okay, okay, okay. This case is about an attack on our community with easy prey. I think that's what's going on. People have reason to be fearful of authority on what can happen to them. You know, the retribution, the years of oppression that happened from the street vendors, from the small businesses, from people just writing tickets because they can. In the city, I think I'm going to vote Republicans and e Darrell's office. It's more than just advocacy of being clear. It's about exonerating our entire community no matter what we do. Be it the little guy selling fetchables or a bank that's doing business. I told Mr. Song I'm glad they pick on you because you're a fighter.
Cyrus Vance just felt this is easier to attack, especially as a family bank. But he doesn't realize Tom is not easy to be pushed around. And my girls, they're tough, smart, capable women, so courageous. Although this is David versus Goliath, David being Abigail's middle savings bank has a slingshot. And that is, you know, their whole family of lawyers. I was going to be able to fight this. They're almost gleeful. They're like, we're going to have our day in court now. We're actually going to be able to show that they were wrong. They made a decision that they were not going to plead guilty to something that they didn't feel the bank was guilty of. That is a courageous choice. And it's an expensive choice. The DA's office has hundreds of lawyers and took five years to do their grand jury investigations and it is a daunting task to fight the government.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen of the jury. This is a simple case about a bank that was converted into a criminal conspiracy fueled by greed. Defend an Abigail's Federal Savings Bank engaged in an ongoing mortgage fraud conspiracy. They routinely falsified and faked mortgage documents and then deceived the Federal National Mortgage Association, commonly known as Fannie Mae. They took Fannie Mae's money for loans riddled with lies, all the while promising that the loans contained truthful and verified information. The defendants did this over and over and over again. And between 2005 and 2010, the bank earned millions of dollars servicing and selling fraudulent loans to Fannie Mae. The defendants conspired to steal money from Fannie Mae and did in fact steal money from Fannie Mae.
Historians tell us that Abraham Lincoln loved riddles and one of his favorites went like this. If you call a tailor leg, how many legs does a dog have? And the answer is four because calling a tailor leg doesn't make it a leg. Calling Fannie Mae a victim of grand larceny and fraud is like calling a dog's tail a leg. We have no loss. We have no harm. We have no larceny. We have no fraud.
Heather? Heather? You're on speaker. Okay. So how did everything go today? It was very long day. Exhausted. It was a long day. I'm so tired. Don't get me wrong. I think the lawyer all did a very, very good job. But the feeding, the emotion was a little bit lacking. It could touch the emotion of your case. I agree. There were so many other things that could have been said or should have been said. You got to let your attorney at this point who's been living with this case and feels very strongly about you got to let him. I think he was even be let him do it. He spent the most time talking about how we stopped that closing and he showed you what steps we took. After that if you the jury is not convinced by not extremely extreme.
I agree with you. The facts are brought out. He's saying your face is dead. And you said that this is the truth. He's saying you're just this. You keep on interrupting. He has to. We love to trust our feelings. But you don't have to be jumping over. I have him. I've been talking actually. He's talking about to the human. I gotta do work. I have to sign off on loans. That's why I'm sending on my desk. I want to speak in a way. I'm not. I'm just saying I gotta get things done. I'm hanging up on you now. Okay. Okay. Okay. Let's go. Okay. I'll leave you being out. We have to work now. Let's go.
So there were 180 or so counts in this trial. And let's also remember that there were I think 10 guilty pleas here. The DA, his case was built basically on the fact that he arrested all these very low level loan officers. They started going to people's houses. Many people at 6 in the morning knocking on their door and demanding, not forcing, but demanding that people come down to the district attorney's office and speak to them. And they got a lot of statements from a lot of people using that tactic. We're talking about Chinese people, many of whom have come from a police state. And in China, people are terrified of that, the knock on the door. Good morning, Mr. You. Good morning. When the court officers for you and he asked you your name, you said, Chi Bin You. Is there another name that you go by? Can you? Here's this gentleman, Ken Yu, who was how the bank found out about this misconduct in the first place. The guy that the bank fired, not only was he falsifying documents in order to put through loans, he was stealing money from customers. That guy ends up being the DA's office star witness.
Mr. You, I'd like to direct your attention to the aerial cheat case. Miss Chi was the borrower that you stole money from, right? Yes, sir. Isn't it true that you asked Miss Chi for a cash tip as well? No, I never asked her for a cash tip. I don't remember that part. Mr. You, you had a telephone conversation with Ariel Chi. Is that correct? Correct, sir. And at the time, you didn't know that Miss Chi was actually tape recording that conversation with the assistance of the district attorney's office, correct? Yes, sir. The DA's office was trying to get him to implicate the bank. This recording was brought into trial through our attorneys on cross-examination of Can You?
Let's just get right into it. So only after closing, then I'm supposed to go and give you cash, right? Hi, to make things legal. You're not supposed to do that, but, hey, it's after the cold. I mean, everything else is totally not right, so, you know, I think it's another thing. I mean, I'm in a written rule that it's happening to every case that I say. No, it ends and you like, you'd show some appreciation. Does this refresh your recollection that you did ask her for a tip? Yeah. I noticed that he couldn't look at me. That's very telling. Yeah, he couldn't look at me, but I was like, I'm going to look at you. I was like, I'll burn you by. So I was looking at him intently as well, too. I dare you to say what you want to say. He got on the stand and perjured himself over and over and over again. In ways that a defense lawyer just doesn't get in a career more than once or twice, the jury laughed at him multiple times.
Because you tell me that advocate is on mute, right? You don't, we don't say it to the fact. It's just the individuals, the people who work for the fact. I'm an employee of the fact. And the salt is the odds on the writer. So then, okay, but like, advocates like the bank, they know that everybody's thing is made up, right? I will say that. Now you had a long pause there, didn't you, Mr. You? I was driving. So that long pause is because you were driving, you were distracted? That's your testimony? I cannot recall, but I was definitely driving. You'll say that if you get in trouble. Is that what you meant there? I say that because- That's a very, Mr. You, I'm asking you. It's a strange way to answer that question. And I'm asking you what you meant by- I will say that. I will say that. I believe that. Well, the jury can decide what your tone suggests. It became quite clear that he had no trouble lying. If that's how he's comfortable acting, I would have thought that he would be comfortable saying much more to try to directly link Mr. Tam and Mr. Wong and Joel Sung with what had happened, but even he didn't do that. But you also had to not let go of the fact that he didn't get this way overnight. He had years of this type of behavior that was just overlooked on numerous occasions. What role did the bank's management play in what had happened? How much they actually were not aware of what was happening versus turning a blind eye because things were going well and the results were good? Can you was clearly bad egg? By using can you, which is the worst, the worst, the DA's office is saying this is the face of the institution. If the bank was in such cahoots with this person, then why would we fire him? We would want to save him.
What the DA accused Abiguss Bank of was ridiculous and really nothing considering what the big banks were doing. All the too big to fail banks, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase and Citicorp have admitted to massive crimes and they've been accused of even worse. Virtually every major financial company in big bank in this country and many of the foreign banks as well were engaged in a far-ranging fraud scheme whereby they were issuing huge numbers of home loans, particularly the middle and low income borrowers.
Then they were repackaging those loans and selling them to investors but disguising them as high-rated securities. Those were an extremely dangerous toxic loans that were likely to blow up and did blow up and huge numbers after 2008. But there was this notion that we couldn't bring criminal action against them because the collateral consequences of an institution that was so large, so internationally connected that indicting them or bringing criminal charges against them could wreck the entire financial system. So you have these enormous offenders and they commit crimes. We'll just take money. We'll cut a check and make a call go away.
I think every American was upset at the prices that we went through. There was behavior that was less than ethical and I think Americans were upset that the security against which loans were made were often fictitious. And in abacus there was some truth to that too. It's clearly not a big, big bank. And clearly it was not representative of the entire financial community. But I think the principal was the same. It shows, I think, very graphically this difference in how we deal with a certain kind of offender versus everybody else.
Mr. Sung was not offered the same deal. He wasn't offered a chance to just pay a fine. He wasn't offered a chance to plead guilty to some minor thing. He wasn't offered the chance even of deferred prosecution. He didn't get any of that offered to him. The DA told us, you had to accept a plea of guilty, a felony plus a fine. Now what is our choice? They wanted a conviction and Vance was going to go after him.
I think if you were going to pick a bank to pick on a family owned company wedged between a couple of noodle shops in Chinatowns about as easy a target as you could possibly pick. I think the characterizations that this was somehow a cultural bias on the office's part. Entirely misplaced and entirely wrong. We devoted an enormous amount of effort into protecting immigrant communities. I felt that our handling of the bank was consistent with how we would have handled the bank if we were investigating a bank that serviced the South American community or the Indian community. There was nothing different that we did or purposefully designed to treat this bank differently.
It was important for prosecution to show how exactly loan managers knew what was happening. I think the most compelling piece of evidence they had was this seating chart of the Abacus loan department. The loan officers who had been indicted were scattered around the floor and somewhere in the middle was the loan office manager. This was all happening around Mr. Tam's desk. How would he not be aware of this type of behavior when this was going on on a routine daily basis? It's not so simplistic as they would like you to believe as a simple drawing as to where someone sat.
But on top of that, they brought Ken Yu, who was a consummate liar and he speaks a different language than Mr. Tam. He conducts business outside of the bank. Actually, at one point they cross-examined Ken because Ken said, oh, the guy gave me cash. I was counting for him at my table. When the borrower came to testify, the borrower said, no, I met him in the lobby of the bank. We were able to show that the loan officers were taking steps to hide their misconduct from the underwriters and the more senior levels of the bank. They would stop talking when an underwriter would come to the floor. They would forward signatures to make sure the signatures would match up. When the underwriter looked at the file, everything would look normal.
You had loan originators that were going to make commissions by getting these loans through. Then you had people like Mr. Wong who had no incentive whatsoever financially to do this. So they did everything they could to hide their crimes from Mr. Wong because they knew he wasn't involved and that he would deny loans, which he did many times. He would deny people where income couldn't be verified or where it seemed like the income was out of line. There was one denial he did where it were fraudulent documents that he uncovered.
And his denial of loans cost the originators commission. I think the people who went to the bank and got the loan did not have the money to do that. I think that ultimately the unintended losers here were the borrowers in the community. We're actually contributing to the revival of the community. It is absolutely mind-boggling for him to say that.
When the indictment came down, so I as an existential threat to his bank and rightly so because so many institutions failed just from having that indictment. We already went through a crisis in 2003 that almost closed down the bank. The FBI is looking for Carol Lim who ran the Cal Street branch of Abacus Federal Savings, word of the alleged scams and off panic waves among bank customers.
当起诉书出来的时候,我就成了他所在的银行的存在威胁,这是完全合理的,因为有很多机构仅仅因为这起起诉而倒闭了。我们已经经历过2003年的危机,那几乎让银行关门大吉。FBI正在寻找领导Abacus Federal Savings的卡罗尔·林,她负责运营Cal Street分行。有关涉嫌欺诈的消息在银行客户中引起了恐慌。
So in 2003, I happened to be doing a story in Chinatown. My photographer at the time said to me something going on up the block. Chaos in Chinatown as thousands of investors make a run on Abacus Federal Savings Bank demanding their money after hearing that a former bank manager was being investigated for embezzling a million dollars. When the rumors spread in the Asian community, the run for the dough was on. In that short period of time, people withdraw to some like 44 million dollars, putting us in a liquidity crisis. Associated Press reported that we have not seen this type of run since the 30s since the Depression.
You have to understand something about Thomas Sumner. To me, he's like Jimmy Stewart out of it. It's a wonderful life. He's the small town banker for the town of Chinatown. I went to the police department and asked and gave me a bullhorn. I went all the line and I said to them, I'm here. You're thinking of this place all wrong as if I had the money back on a safe. Well, your money's in Joe's house. That's right next to yours. And in the Kennedy House and Mrs. Mikelin's house and a hundred others. And I actually went out and shook hand with them. Feel my warm hand. I'm here. I'm the real person. After I did that, the run subsided. Relative calm in Chinatown in short contrast to Tuesday's mad rush on the Abacus Federal Savings Bank, the CEO of the Bank for Shoring Investors. They knew that everything was okay. The people came back. They came in and deposited money. They thank us. If I did not have that rapport with the people, then I would have been much more worried that the DA indicted the bank. And if verdict is guilty, there is the possibility that Abacus would not survive.
I never supported him with a bank. I have to be honest. I told my husband, I said, banking is not good. I felt his troubles business. There are too many banks. You know, not everyone is successful and not everyone will really appreciate what happens, you know, if something wrong with the bank. When you have a false document, you enhance the ability of Fannie Mae to ask you to take back the loan. I really felt my girls should go to do something else that they like to do. I didn't want them to work at the bank, but they went in, you know, because they want to help their father. They have fiercely loyal to Tom. You agree that income and assets is a material fact that has to be accurately represented. So I had never until now found a motivation really to come work for the bank.
And this year when the trial started, I just, I was having nightmares myself. I mean, Vera and I were sharing a room back at my parents house, Connecticut, and we were both waking each other up. And I realized I was like, I can't go on in my own career right now anymore. I was like, I have to help my family now. Because I think the law is that the doc represents a material fact. I'm saying that if it is truly material, listen to me. If it is truly material, the loan will go in default. Change initiation may not be full. I get really frustrated sometimes. This is probably a factor of being the youngest. But sometimes I just like, whatever I say, it's just not heard. You are not convincing. If that's the form that you choose to use, Papa, if that's the form, hold on, I have a question, Papa. I didn't say that. If that's the form that you choose to use to represent. If that is the form, that's not true. I just told you, there is harm. It's very difficult for my parents. There's nothing more for me to say.
This is my office, sorry. As you can see at my desk is now piled extremely high. But I think it's always been a mess. That's just my personality. My father has always said, as an attorney, you should be neat and organized. Maybe I'm just not cut out to be an attorney.
Tracy, on your desk, anything urgent that I need to get done before the weekend? We haven't been having many closings because of the effect of the trial. I've been waking about five in the morning, getting work done, banging out all these emails, and then go to court. Did you ever tell the person that you spoke to at Abbakah's bank that you were a manager at Becky's nail spa? I was not a manager. The person told me that my income was very low, so it's better I have to be a manager, otherwise I can't get the loan.
The prosecution over and over tried to suggest that the borrowers were innocent, that it was the loan officers who were inducing the borrowers to falsify documents to qualify their loans. On this loan file, why does it say you're a manager? I don't know. Did you tell anyone that you were a manager? Nope. But we were able to show with witness after witness that it was not just the loan officers. Barbers were trying to fool the bank in order to put through loans.
Mr. Len, you had your employer sign the verification of employment form for the loan file. Is that correct? Yes. And he signed as the co-owner of the China sign. Did anybody co-own the restaurant with Mr. Pan? I don't really know. You don't know if Xu Ken Len was also a co-owner of the China Sun restaurant? I only meet this person a few times. I don't know if this person is a co-owner of the restaurant or not. Xu Ken Len, you only met a few times and you don't know if she's a co-owner? They didn't tell me. I didn't ask. Okay. Xu Ken Len spelled S-H-U-Q-I-N-L-I-N. You don't know who that is? I know who that is. You do know who that is. So who is that? You can say she's like a sister. Is she like a sister or is she your sister? She's my sister.
Mr. Len,你让你的雇主在贷款档案的雇佣验证表上签字了,是吗?是的。而且他签字时作为中国太阳餐厅的联合所有人。那么,有人和潘先生一起拥有这家餐厅吗?我不是很清楚。你不知道许肯伦也是中国太阳餐厅的联合所有人吗?我只见过这个人几次,我不知道她是不是餐厅的联合所有人。许肯伦,你也只见过几次,而且你不知道她是否是联合所有人?他们没告诉我。我也没问。好的。许肯伦的拼写是 S-H-U-Q-I-N-L-I-N。你不知道她是谁吗?我知道她是谁。你确实知道她是谁。那她是谁?你可以说她像一个姐姐。她是像姐姐,还是你的真正姐姐?她是我姐姐。
There was a string of witnesses who were just abject liars to the point where it became a concern of ours that the jury's going to think that everyone that the bank deals with, former employees and customers are just full of s***. So the trial's been going on for the ninth weeks now, right? Is it mine? Day 52. Yeah. It's around David and Kathy do. I've been keeping track of the number of days since the jury was, yes, since January 12th. I just cannot believe how this thing could be tracked out so long. Every week's in trial and the expenses involved, the millions of dollars that spent to defend yourself and witness after witness, of course they will know they are lying. So you bring these people out day after day for nine weeks. What is the effect on the community? People get the wrong impression that Chinese are not law abiding. That's just too bad. We can, hopefully, win this case and make a statement.
Well even if you win the case, the damage, the strength on the community is done. Chinese immigrants come from a culture in which so many financial transactions are based on trust and trust that's not underwritten by a piece of paper. On trust that's an intimate understanding, you know, between members of a community or between family members. I don't think any of the borrowers think that they are really committing a crime even if some of these loan documents are falsified. One particular individual had been approved for an $800,000 mortgage loan but on the tax return they were earning only $24,000 a year. I think this was as a couple. There were a lot of guests across the jury panel. How does this even happen? Tax evasion I think lurks in the background of this case. Because they work primarily in a cash economy, a lot of the borrowers had money that they did not report to the IRS. Only when they're purchasing a house did it become necessary for them to prove how much money they had but then they were trapped in this position of not having the paper trail. Maybe folks in that community don't pay 100% of their taxes. These are issues that if they have a problem with any immigrant community that operates in cash, okay, they have the wherewithal to do something about that. The IRS does too. Advocacy isn't the FBI. There's no bank regulations that require the bank to basically serve as a police force against its own customers. There'd be chaos if your bank basically was an IRS. No one would want a bank with any bank.
You can say that our responsibility was to provide credit to the community, not to be a policeman. And I remember Mr. Sung said this to me, the guy comes to him to modernize his restaurant and he said, I don't even need to ask him his income because I eat at that restaurant and I see how full it is. So you know when he comes in and asks me for a loan, I'm ready to give him the money. That's the kind of thing a community bank can do and in the Chinese community, that's what they were doing. They knew their community, they were making these loans.
The prosecution had insisted since the beginning of the trial that many of the documents that were part of the mortgage package were fraudulent and that included in many cases gift letters, gift letters written by relatives or friends. There was knowledge throughout the loan department that what was being put forward as unencumbered gifts were in fact loans and the source of those loans, money that came from who knows where. In Chinese culture, the line between a gift and a loan is very blurry. To the extent where there isn't even really a distinction when it's coming from your parents or your relatives. This is what immigrants have always done. Jewish families did it, Irish families did it, Italian families did it, Chinese families do it. If I receive you know $50,000 from my mother, there isn't a paper document that says I must return that sum. But you know if I end up caring for her in her old age, that's a form of payment.
And I remember sitting in the courtroom, hearing how perplexed they were when they were answering this question when you know repeatedly they were being badgered. You know, is this a gift or is this a loan? Can you clarify? They said well you know if I can't pay it back, I will but you know if I can't, we're a family. So gift letters actually had to be from a relative or spouse. But it came to surface that these loan officers sometimes were listed as the gift donors. These two you at the top of this gift letter certification, it reads that you are making a gift of $9,000 to your cousin, Chizen Chen. Is Chizen Chen your cousin? No. Did you make a gift of $9,000 to Chizen Chen? He gave me $9,000 cash and we went downstairs and got the certified bank check in his name. Tell us how it came to be that Chizen Chen gave you $9,000 and then you gave him a check. This particular customer did not have any credit scores. Can you tell us from this document who approved this loan? That would be Ms. Ware's song. If Ken Yu is signing a gift letter, Ken Yu, that would be disturbing. That's not what happened. The Chinese name Kim is not known, but people just call him Ken. Ken Yu clearly knew that and purposely put his Chinese name on that check for that reason to obfuscate that it was him who had given quote gift to the borrower.
Mr. Yu, what is the commitment letter? That the bank agrees to give this borrower a loan if all the conditions were met. Right. And gift letters, for example, have to be in the file before you close. But not before the commitment letter goes out, isn't that right? You're right, sir. So the verification of employment that you helped fake, the gift letters that you helped fake were done after Vera's song, approved this loan on behalf of the board of directors. Isn't that right? In this case, yes.
It's trying for us because it's our father's legacy. Exactly. And he's passed that legacy on to us. And Vera was, when she was one, she wants to be very mean to me. She'll point out, it happened under your watch, right? So she's going to be very mean to me. No. I'm not. It appears both do you know they're fairly mean? fingers. All right. That's a shit. So much time has gone by. Our father was 75 and now he's 80. People don't understand there's some long-term effects from going through such a traumatic experience.
This bank will surely continue to seek vindication, not simply for the ultimate acquittal of the bank itself, but for the larger Chinese immigrant community that it has served for 31 years. The raw display of power by the DA will always remind this and other minority communities that our human rights can easily be trampled upon. It's a little bit counterintuitive, the way you write it, you want to tell people that you cannot allow something bad to go on. And so you're saying human rights can easily be trampled upon it and I don't read it, I don't want people think you're saying that it can be. In other words, it should be a normative sentence, it should not be trampled upon.
The cost has been great, but it's very different per each member of the family because we all handle stress in a very different way. In each, Chantrell, this is all in here, but he changed my words again and then he didn't put it in properly in here. It would be dry. Because that's the chicken. No mayo, that's why, right? But there's cheese. My father especially is able to handle stress in an incredible way. If you don't like your sandwich, are you okay? Fine, huh? He said it's dry. Yes, he's got an older, I think he feels that he's done what he's wanted to do. He's a little more philosophical and to know that he's done the best that he can do is good for him. If it's too much chicken, you don't have to eat all of it. No. He said it's dry. He complained he said it's dry. They put avocado. They put avocado. But he says it's dry. I don't know, are you? He says it's dry, but I'm easy. This is how he is. He's very calm and I'm like a jumping bean, so I'm always running around. That's how I am and drives me nuts.
My mother, I think, probably feels things the strongest. She's a very emotional person and I think defines herself to a large degree by the perceptions that others have. So it hurts her. I felt I lost my face. You know, Chinese always wanted to save their face. I was embarrassed to even see my friends because nobody knows. I really don't know too much about the banking and how I'm going to explain everything. What I can say is we did not do it. I just couldn't stand people thinking of my children too bad, you know. The prosecutor is saying that Jill lied. So that really bothered me. I felt like screaming. Of course, Vera always tells me, don't talk, don't move. So I had to sit there and just suppress myself, you know. That's why I couldn't even eat lunch yesterday. I had a stomach ache.
Ms. Roman is the federal national mortgage association, otherwise known as Fannie Mae, in the business to make money. Fannie Mae is in the business of providing home ownership. And as a result of that, Fannie Mae does make money. Yes. This whole case ultimately came down to Fannie Mae. Fannie Mae was the alleged victim in the case. The prosecution's premise was that the 30 loans that were in the indictment that we had sold to Fannie Mae were not good, because the documentation themselves were not what they were supposed to be. The bank can do whatever it wants. The bank could keep those loans, it could service those loans, and care not a wit about the documentation. That was the bank's choice. Keep them or sell them. It chose to sell them. In selling the loans to Fannie Mae, they simply passed the risk off to unknowing purchasers.
Ms. Roman, Fannie Mae doesn't want to lose money, does it? Absolutely not. And it doesn't want our lenders to lose money either. And you are familiar with the default rate of abacus loans during the indictment period, correct? Yes, I am. During the five-year period of the alleged fraud, abacus sold a little over 3,000 mortgages to Fannie Mae. The number of defaults of those 3,000 totaled nine. Nine. Would you say that that was a low default rate? The default rate is low. Would you say it's microscopically low? Objection to the characterization. Sustained as to the word microscopic. Abacus Federal Savings Bank had one of the nation's lowest default rates, not the highest, one of the lowest. But that's not what we're looking at. We're looking at, you know, was there, you know, falsified information, and was it sold? And it was. These loans had not lost any money, they're performing. It was clear financially who was benefiting was Fannie Mae from their transaction. People got their loans, they got their houses. It was almost ridiculous. It was almost literally ridiculous.
Larson is about stealing to bring Larson charges against the bank when the supposed victim actually made hundreds of millions of dollars. It's just, it's outrageous. My view is if I take $5 out of your wallet, I've taken your money. If I ultimately, if I give that back to you, or if you don't, at the very end, actually have any loss because the money gets back to you, that's still, in our view, a larceny. If I sold Fannie Mae alone for $5, not only did they get their $5 back on time as what they thought they were going to get it, they also got $3, $4, $5 back in interest, which makes it $10, so tell me how that is considered a larceny.
There are two types of mortgage fraud that generally occur. We call them fraud for profit and fraud for home. There are a certain number of people who commit the crime of mortgage fraud because they lie on their application to get a loan for the home that they want to live in. Is it technically a crime? Absolutely. Is it a crime that is worth the resources of a state or federal government? Absolutely not. These are low default rates on these types of loans. The losses are relatively minor. The other types of fraud. Fraud where there really was never any intention to pay the mortgage. It was just about reaping profit as quickly as possible. Or fraud that went into these complex securities that were built. When the knowledge that there was little to no chance that these loans are going to get repaid, that's where the resources need to go. And throwing your hands up in the air and suggesting that, well, gee, any time a crime is committed, we put all of our resources in to prove it. It's just not true. Today, walking over to my office, the light was red. And I confess, I walked across the street against the red light. I am absolutely guilty of jaywalking and I could have gotten a ticket. Did I get one? No. He would have been a complete waste of the NYPD's resources to issue me a ticket and divert them of the real crime that's going on in the city. And regulators and prosecutors have to act with the necessary discretion of when to bring charges and when not to bring charges.
The appeal is certainly entitled to his opinion. I disagree with the characterization that this was jaywalking because I think it was systemic in over a long term. And ultimately, the risk was passed without notice to third parties. What would it be to be a regulatory punishment for that type of behavior, that a question? But who are the taxpayers that got hurt? Who are the investors that got hurt? Who are the individuals that lost their homes? Who are the people that got tricked into mortgages they couldn't afford and got thrown out on the street? Who lost their life savings? What financial system collapsed? What GDP took a hit because of the actions that Abacus did? And as far as I can tell, none. Frankly, if every bank had had underwritten as well as Abacus during the indictment period, we wouldn't have had a financial crisis.
We really need to talk about one issue right now, which is whether or not we should have Jill testify. It's really difficult. Like we keep switching back and forth. As of yesterday, Rusty believed that she should testify. Kevin took a different position. He was a little bit more hesitant. And Papa feels so far that Jill should testify. Actually, Rusty and Papa have the same opinion. No. Yeah, but I don't want it to pressure her to testify. And Rusty's view was that the jury always wondering why the USO innocent, why would you not testify? Right. A jury might not feel much towards a corporate institution. If you put a personal face to it, such as Jill, they'll begin to see and realize that the consequences of conviction are serious. However, nothing has been truly said of Jill to implicate her in anything. Right. I feel like I have yet to hear a reason to put Jill on. In fact, if you don't put her on, it's not because you're trying to hide anything, but because there's nothing to defend. Excuse me, excuse me, so the line is avoiding the law. Yes, yes, the law there is speaking. They still have no opinion of how. That's a very good question.
She's not here right now. She didn't even want to have this conversation. The feeling that we got from her was that if she needs to testify, she will. But she would feel terrible. If she somehow she didn't testify well, and that would result in a negative outcome. Yeah, and she would blame herself. I just wanted to pop because I know you feel strongly about Jill testifying and I had felt the same way. I actually am not so wrong in the strongly shifting off. I changed your mind. Yeah. So how would we feel if Jill didn't take the stand and we do not win the case? Would we have regrets? I can't answer that. I have given the matter a careful and thorough analysis if the outcome is not for me. I do not, I should not feel regretful.
They have said that these kinds of documents are so obviously false that Mr. Tam and Mr. Wong and the banks on their underwriters should have caught that. And the fact that they didn't catch them suggested that they were involved in the fraud. That's what they are telling you ladies and gentlemen. But here's the problem. Fannie Mae, the best underwriters in the country. All they do, all day, every day is look at loan files from all over the country. They are the gold standard and they didn't see anything wrong with these documents. So if the best there is doesn't see anything wrong, how can that be criminal? It's not. And here I'm going to show you again Fannie Mae's email from 2012. We recognize that you have very unique needs that are closely linked to the borrowers you serve. While doing anything customized in this environment is very difficult, the team is committed to doing whatever we can to develop solutions that meet the needs of your culturally unique clientele.
Ladies and gentlemen, Fannie Mae itself is conceding here that this is Chinatown. It's thousand small businesses, first generation, special needs, and the bank serves that community. Does that pose challenges to the bank? Absolutely. It would be a lot easier to deal with a bunch of investment bankers who have W2s and tax returns all the time. That would be easier. But the bank has chosen to serve this community, challenges and all. Advocacy's own narrative that they are trying to give you is that they are trying to assist hardworking, first generation immigrants live the American dream as a community service. That's admirable. And it's great. An abacus Federal Savings Bank is free to do that and then hold the risk on their own books.
What they are not free to do is take risks with other people's money and not tell them. They cannot take those risks and pass it off to somebody else without telling the truth. She tried to say that these loans seem to be representative of our entire loan portfolio, which is not true. She literally rolled her eyes at your mission and billing this bank for the community to serve the community and tell these people to serve the American dream. She just cast it aside. That's a blessing. Did you observe in the beginning that the honorable San Dans himself attended the beginning? I have seen him on TV. He's much smaller in person. As a family, we've always been very close. But we've unified even more during this time, which is great. Why are you laughing? She was just in tears and now she's bursting out laughing. The way he said he has to save his voice from the jury charge because that's going to be a few hours. Are you not human, you're right? Are you on the diet?
No. Jurors, your responsibility in this case is extremely important. However, it is limited to this case. You have not been asked to make some general assessment of corporate governance in America or whether banks are good or not. You are not here to send a message to anyone. You're here to determine whether the people have proven, be on a reasonable doubt that the defendants here on trial are guilty of one or more of the crimes, charged in this case. If they were going to vindicate all of us, we would hope that it happened quickly. You know what I mean? They'd be like, oh, we heard this evidence, it's not worth it. Just vindicate everybody. This is a really nerve-wracking time. Not knowing what the jury is going to decide and wondering how come they didn't come back already. At this point now, I think it's really bothering me. It's like, why can't they see what seemed so apparent in the trial? I think it's really important to have a lot of work. I hate waiting in court. It's boring and annoying. I'd rather be doing work. But our lawyers want us to be here in court. Kids of jury have questions. They want the jury to see we're still here and we can help pick out the documents.
Day after day, the jury did not come back. And in fact, the jury was asking for various documents, some unfavorable for that prosecution, some unfavorable for the defense. The first note came back and they said they wanted the list of the loans that the DA's office was claiming were bad. And then they wanted all the loan files for those loans. And then they wanted all the denial files. I got to the point when we were actually trying to analyze the handwriting on the notes.
I think it's impossible that we're from Tia or the Holocaust. Is it impossible? We're driving ourselves mad trying to speculate, oh, this person must be thinking this and maybe they're thinking quite the opposite.
There was three different occasions where we were a hung jury. Everyone felt very strongly in their view on it and had good substantial enough evidence to why. Where we had the toughest time was the falsified business records because there was too many hands that were touched throughout the bank for the loan approval process for things to go unnoticed.
There was one specific juror, not Jessica, who felt that we as a jury had a sort of broader responsibility given the context of the financial crisis in 2008 to make an example out of this bank. That we were somehow doing a disservice to the public to maybe the criminal justice system by allowing them to walk free.
We sent a note on June 3rd to the judge that we were hopelessly deadlocked. Eight were on the not guilty side. Four was on the guilty. I was one of the four on the guilty. I was waiting for the judge to be in the office.
Hi, okay, so they were dismissed for the note again saying that they are deadlocked and that both sides are adamant. So the judge gave them what they call an Allen charge, which basically said go back and try to do this. So that means that by the end of tomorrow, either there will be a verdict or there will be a mistrial. Probably the last day, whether or not there's a losing unanimous verdict.
LSI bans an infinite wisdom, decides to retry the case. Jill, what are you calling going on? I'm sort of about Papa's well-being. He's 80 years old and he's been up to 5.30 a.m. and he has nothing to eat for dinner. We need to get you home. So let's get you some food. Papa, you do. Can you hear mom? So we're going to put him on a trip. He will go home now, mommy. You got to go home, Papa. Mommy's worried. But you got to eat and then take a bath. Don't drink it in subway. Okay, we'll eat. You got to eat now. You're almost in a mess. Okay? You're not a young kid anymore. I see you every day for the last 5 years. This day is still with you. Still with you.
After such a long trial and so many charges against them, it's going to be very little possibility that the bank will be completely exonerated. The jury's going to find them guilty of something. If we go down on one, it's a defeat. It's got to be 80 to nothing. If you're convicted on one felony, it would be very serious ramifications for the bank. New York Times article on Friday, June 5, 2015. After a four-month trial, a jury found Abigail Federation Bank and two of his senior officers not guilty of grand law and other charges on Thursday. Rejecting the Manhattan District Attorney's attempt proved that the bank systematically lied for years to the Federal National Mortgage Association. After the court clerk read the 240 counts and repeated words, not guilty after each one, members of the son family, weapon and embrace one another. How do we feel? I feel really so many emotions. Of course. Very, very, very, very much. But I was told not to express any feelings. No, no, no, no. The jury is not allowed. Now you can express your feelings. My father, we had to text him, and actually you got it. He didn't respond to the text, so then I called him. He answered the phone and just sort of took a step back and started microwaving his vegetables and said, what? There's a verdict? Oh, should I come? You're not processing.
I didn't feel great about it, but I wouldn't have felt great if the verdict had been guilty. The way that the law was read to us is that under each charge, all of the different elements had to be met. In my mind, there were quite a significant few that three of the four requirements were met, but not all of them. And that's where the change came for the four of us to move over to the not guilty side. It was doing the right thing. Advocacy was not exonerated. Exoneration is when a person is proven innocent. I don't think there's anything here that says that Advocacy was proven innocent. Poor loser comes to mind. There's a right thing to say when a prosecution office loses a case. We respect, although we disagree with the verdict, we respect the jury's verdict. Exactly. Period.
The bank's founder, Thomas Sung, 79, said, This wrongful prosecution has exhausted a small community bank such as ours. This is a gross injustice, not only to a small bank, but is casting a shadow on our community. This is totally prejudicial and incorrect. We Chinese have to learn from other minorities. When it comes to the community's interests, you must let those who are in power know that this shall never happen again.
I'm very happy that this will be a very difficult situation. American justice has become an honor for us. Superimposed on you. Yes. Superimposed. Gondody. That's it.
We're going to have a good night. Hiya. I'm so glad you're all here in a very happy occasion. And I want to thank everybody's support and dedication. This last five years, and let's look for happier days to come. Okay. Let us see cake. Let us see cake.
How is this really good? It's a twingy, black bean green tea. There's many different flavors. It's not really a celebrate. I mean, we were vindicated, and that's great. But our goal was never to go through a criminal trial and be vindicated. Our goal was to serve our community, right? So this is such a waste. It's a tragedy. We have a lot of cake. We may have too much cake.
The fact that they find innocent gives all of us hope that the American that we believe in still, you still have a chance. But it'll cost you $10 million.
The Chinese has a saying. If you want a really hard, sharp steel, make a sore, you have to go through fire. This experience should make my daughters stronger, make them better person.
I got a text from a friend she said that she looked at the news this morning and felt proud of being a Chinese American. So that actually makes all of this worthwhile. Thank you.
For more on this and other Frontline programs, visit our website at PBS.org slash Frontline. Frontline's Apicus Small Enough to Jail is available on DVD. To order, visit shoppbs.org or call 1-800-PLAY-PBS. Frontline is also available for download on iTunes.