Andrew Sekela, FBICriminal complaint and affidavit, Diane GustusNovember 7, 2007

AO 91 (Rev. 5/85) Criminal Complaint

United States District Court For The District of Columbia

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA V. DIANE GUSTUS




DOB: April 26, 1953

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

CASE NUMBER:

I, the undersigned complainant being duly sworn state the
following is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

COUNT ONE (Mail Fraud)

Between in or about November 2004 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
DIANE GUSTUS, having devised and intended to devise any scheme and
artifice to defraud, and for obtaining money and property by means of
false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, for the
purposes of executing such scheme and artifice and attempting to do so,
placed in any post office and authorized depository for mail matter, any
matter and thing whatever to be sent and delivered by the Postal
Service, and deposited and caused to be deposited any matter and thing
whatever to be sent and delivered by any private or commercial
interstate carrier, and took and received therefrom, any such matter and
thing, and knowingly caused to be delivered by mail and such carrier
according to the direction thereon, and at the place at which it is
directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such
matter and thing. (Mail Fraud, Aiding and Abetting, in violation of
Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 1341, 2).

COUNT TWO (Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud)

Between in or about November 2004 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
DIANE GUSTUS and others conspired to commit the offense of mail fraud,
in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. (Conspiracy to Commit the Offense of
Mail Fraud, in violation of Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 1341, 1349).

COUNT THREE (Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property)

Between in or about November 2004 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
DIANE GUSTUS transported, transmitted, and transferred in interstate and
foreign commerce goods, wares, merchandise, securities and money of the
value of $5,000 or more, knowing the same to have been stolen,
converted, and taken by fraud. (Interstate Transportation of Stolen
Property, Aiding and Abetting, and Causing an Act to be Done, in
violation of Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 2314, 2).

COUNT FOUR (Laundering of Monetary Instruments)

Between in or about November 2004 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
DIANE GUSTUS, (a) knowing that property involved in financial
transactions represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity,
conducted and attempted to conduct such financial transactions that in
fact involved the proceeds of specified unlawful activity (1) with the
intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity; and
(2) knowing that the transactions were designed in whole and part to
conceal and disguise the nature, the location, the source, the
ownership, and the control of the proceeds of unlawful activity; and (b)
transported, transmitted, and transferred and attempted to transport,
transmit, and transfer monetary instruments and funds from a place in
the United States to and through a place outside the United States and
to a place in the United States from and through a place outside the
United States (1) with the intent to promote the carrying on of a
specified unlawful activity; and (2) knowing that the monetary
instrument and funds involved in the transportation, transmission, and
transfer represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity and
knowing that such transportation, transmission, and transfer was designed in whole and in part to conceal and
disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership, and the
control of the proceeds of a specified unlawful activity. (Laundering of
Monetary Instruments, Aiding and Abetting, Causing an Act to Be Done, in
violation of Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 1956(a)(1)-(2), 2).

COUNT FIVE (Conspiracy to Launder Monetary Instruments)

Between in or about November 2004 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
DIANE GUSTUS and others conspired to commit the offense of laundering
monetary instruments, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956. (Conspiracy to
Commit the Offense of Laundering Monetary Instruments, in violation of
Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 1956(a)(1)-(2), 1956(h)).

COUNT SIX (Engaging in Monetary Transactions in Property Derived
from Specified Unlawful Activity)

Between in or about November 2004 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
DIANE GUSTUS knowingly engaged or attempted to engage in monetary
transactions in criminally derived property that was of a value greater
than $10,000 and was derived from specified unlawful activity. (Engaging
in Monetary Transactions in Property Derived from Specified Unlawful
Activity, Aiding and Abetting, and Causing an Act to Be Done, in
violation of Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 1957, 2).

COUNT SEVEN (Conspiracy to Engage in Monetary Transactions in
Property Derived from Specified Unlawful Activity)

Between in or about November 2004 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
DIANE GUSTUS and others conspired to commit the offense of engaging in
monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful
activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957. (Conspiracy to Commit the
Offense of Engaging in Monetary Transactions in Property Derived from
Specified Unlawful Activity, in violation of Title 18 U.S.C., Sections
1957, 1956(h)).

COUNT EIGHT (Bank Fraud)

Between in or about June 2007 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
DIANE GUSTUS knowingly executed, and attempted to execute a scheme or
artifice (1) to defraud a financial institution and (2) to obtain money,
funds, credits, assets, securities, and other property owned by, and
under the custody and control of, a financial institution, by means of
false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises. (Bank
Fraud, Aiding and Abetting, and Causing an Act to Be Done, in violation
of Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 1344, 2).

COUNT NINE (Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud)

Between in or about June 2007 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere,
DIANE GUSTUS and others conspired to commit the offense of bank fraud,
in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1344. (Conspiracy to Commit the Offense of
Bank Fraud, in violation of Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 1344, 1349).

COUNT TEN (Conspiracy) 

Between in or about November 2004 and the present in a
continuing course of conduct, DIANE GUSTUS and others conspired to
commit offenses against the United States, including, but not limited
to,

• Mail Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
  § 1341;
• Interstate Transportation of Stolen
  Property, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314;
• Laundering of Monetary Instruments,
  in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956;
• Engaging in Monetary Transactions in
  Property Derived from Specified Unlawful Activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957; and
• Bank Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
  § 1344,

and one or more of such conspirators did an act to effect
the object of the conspiracy. (Conspiracy, in violation of Title 18
U.S.C., Section 371).

I further state that I am Andrew Sekela, Special Agent
with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and that this complaint is
based on the following facts:

See Attached Affidavit

Continued on the attached sheet and made a part hereof:  

Signature of Complainant

Andrew Sekela, Special Agent, Federal
Bureau of Investigation

AUSA, Timothy G. Lynch, (202) 353-4862

AUSA, Geoffrey L.J. Carter, (202) 353-2457

Sworn to before me and subscribed in my presence,

Date _____ at Washington, D.C.

Name & Title of Judicial Officer, Signature
of Judicial Officer

Back to top of page

---

AFFIDAVIT

I. PRELIMINARY INFORMATION

1. I, Andrew Sekela, Special Agent,
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), being duly sworn, depose and
state as follows:

2. I am a Federal Agent, authorized to investigate
violations of the laws of the United States, and I am a law enforcement
officer with authority to execute arrest and search warrants issued
under the authority of the United States.

3. I have been a Special Agent (SA) with the FBI,
Washington Field Office, for approximately three and a half years, and I
have been assigned the responsibility for conducting white collar crime
investigations since July 2004. White collar crimes are considered by
the FBI to be those illegal acts characterized by fraud, concealment, or
a violation of trust and that are not dependent upon the application or
threat of physical force or violence. I have received formal and
informal training regarding the conduct of white collar crime
investigations. Since 2004, I have been assigned as case agent on
numerous white collar crime investigations involving violations of
federal law that include, but are not limited to, public corruption,
government fraud, antitrust violations, bribery, and conspiracy.

4. The information set forth in this Affidavit is known
to me as a result of investigation personally conducted by me and by
other law enforcement agents. Thus, the statements contained in this
Affidavit are based in part on information provided by Special Agents (SA’s)
and other employees of the FBI; SA’s from the Internal Revenue Service;
SA’s from the Government of the District of Columbia (DC), Office of Tax
and Revenue (OTR), Criminal Investigation Division (CID); SA’s from the
DC Office of the Inspector General (OIG); and criminal investigators responsible for Internal Security
matters from the DC Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), Office
of Integrity & Oversight (010). Statements are also based in part on
review of records obtained by federal grand jury subpoenas, documents
gathered during the course of the investigation, interviews,
consensually recorded conversations, surveillance, and on my experience
as a Special Agent..

5. This Affidavit is being submitted for the limited
purposes of supporting criminal complaints and establishing probable
cause to obtain search warrants and arrest warrants. Thus, I have not
set forth each and every fact learned during the course of the
investigation. In addition, where conversations or statements are
related herein, they are related in substance and in part except where
otherwise indicated.

6. This Affidavit is respectfully
submitted in support of applications for the issuance of the following:

a) search warrants for certain premises
and electronic mail (e-mail) accounts as set forth in Exhibit A to this Affidavit and included
herein by reference; and 

b) arrest warrants for certain
individuals as set forth in Exhibit B to this Affidavit and included herein by reference.

7. The facts and circumstances set forth below in this
Affidavit demonstrate that there is probable cause to believe that there
is presently contained within the properties set forth in Exhibit A of
this Affidavit, records, files, correspondence, memoranda, computers,
computer disks, bank and other financial records, data, and other
materials that constitute evidence of, the fruits of, or instrumentalities of criminal violations of
Title 18, United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 1341 (Mail Fraud),
Section 1349 (Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud), Section 1344 (Bank Fraud), Section 371 (Conspiracy), Sections 1956 and
1957 (Money Laundering and Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering), and
Section 2314 (Interstate Transport of Stolen Property).

8. The facts and circumstances set forth below in this
Affidavit demonstrate that there is probable cause to believe that the
individuals set forth in Exhibit B of this Affidavit have violated the
federal criminal laws, including but not limited to, Title 18, United
States Code (U.S.C.), Section 1341 (Mail Fraud), Section 1349
(Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud), Section 1344 (Bank Fraud), Section
371 (Conspiracy), Sections 1956 and 1957 (Money Laundering and
Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering), and Section 2314 (Interstate
Transport of Stolen Property).

II. SUBJECT BACKGROUND INFORMATION

9. JAYRECE ELAINE TURNBULL was born on xxxxxxxx xx, xxxx
and has Social Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx. TURNBULL resides at xxxx
xxxxxxxxxx xxxxx, Bowie, Maryland xxxxx. No employment information or
wage history could be located for TURNBULL. TURNBULL has a large number
of bank accounts, including accounts in the names of "Chappa Home
Services," "Legna Home Services," and variants of those
names, among others. On a D.C. tax return she filed in 2002, TURNBULL
described Legna Home Services as a cleaning service.

10. HARRIETTE WALTERS was born on xxxxxxxxx xx, xxxx and
has Social Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx. HARRIETTE WALTERS resides at
xxxx xxxxxx xxx xx, Washington, DC. HARRIETTE WALTERS has been employed
by the DC Government since 1981 and has been the Manager of the District
of Columbia Real Property Tax Administration Adjustments Unit (RPTAAU),
a part of the District of Columbia Office of Tax and Revenue (OTR) since
2004. -OTR is located at 941 North Capitol Street NE, Washington, DC,
20002. As Manager of the RPTAAU, one of HARRIETTE WALTERS’s duties is to
authorize or decline property tax refund requests. – HARRIETTE WALTERS’s
annual salary as a District of Columbia employee is $81,000. From
September 2000 to the present, HARRIETTE WALTERS spent over $1.4 million
at Neiman Marcus, the retailer.

11. DIANE GUSTUS was born on xxxxx xx, xxxx and has
Social Security Number xxx-xxxxxx. GUSTUS resides at xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxx,
Clinton, Maryland. She is employed by the DC Government in OTR as a Real
Property Program Specialist, with an annual salary of $55,212. 12.   K.K.,
nee K.F., was born on xxxx xx, xxxx and has Social Security Number
xxx-xxxxxx. K.F. resides at xxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxx, Upper Marlboro,
Maryland. K.F. is employed by the DC Government in OTR as a Customer
Service Specialist for the DC Office of the Chief Financial Officer,
with an annual salary of $48,241.

13. C.W. was born on xxx xx, xxxx and has Social Security
Number xxx-xx-xxxx. C. W. resides at xxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx, xxx. xxx,
Oxon Hill, Maryland. C.W. is employed by the DC government in OTR as a
Real Property Program Specialist, with an annual salary of $55,212.

14. G.R. was born on xxxxxx x, xxxx and has Social
Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx. G.R. resides at xxx xxx xxxxxx xx,
Washington, DC. G.R. is employed by the DC government in OTR as an
Accounting Technician, with an annual salary of $45,560.

15. C.H. was born on xxxx xx, xxxx and has Social
Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx. C.H. resides at xxxx xxxx xxxxxx,
Hyattsville, Maryland. C.H. is employed by the DC government in OTR as a
Tax Sales Manager, with an annual salary of $85,860.

16. S.J. was born on xxxxxxx xx, xxxx and has Social
Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx. S.J. resides at xxxxx xxx xxxx xxx,
District Heights, Maryland. S.J. is employed by the DC Government in OTR
as an Accounting Technician, with an annual salary of $58,631.

17. CONNIE L. ALEXANDER was born on xxxxxx xx, xxxx and
has Social Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx. ALEXANDER lives at xxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx xxxxx, Bowie, Maryland 20721.¹ ALEXANDER has a bank account
in the name of "Aurora Re Enterprises." 

18. W.J.
was born on xxx xx, xxxx and has Social Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx. W.J.
resides at x xxxxxx xxx xxxxx, Essex, Maryland, xxxxx. From xxx x, xxxx
to xxxxxxxx x, 2007, W.J. was an employee at Bank of America. When Bank
of America terminated W.J.’s employment on xxxxxxxx x, 2007, W.J. held
the position of Assistant Branch Manager at the xxxx xxxxx xxxx branch
located at xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx, Baltimore, MD xxxxx.

19. RICHARD J. WALTERS was born on xxxxxxxx xx, xxxx and
has Social Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx. RICHARD WALTERS resides at xxxx
xxxxx xxxx, Bowie, Maryland, xxxxx. RICHARD WALTERS has a bank account
in the name of "Helmet’s Plumbing and Heating."

20. R.W. was born on xxxxxxx xx, xxxx and has Social
Security Number xxx-xx-xxxx. R.W. resides at xxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx, Fort
Washington, Maryland, xxxxx. R.W. has a bank account in the name of
"[R.W.] d/b/a Provident Home Services."

21. In short, HARRIETTE WALTERS, GUSTUS, C.W., K.F., and
G.R. are District of Columbia employees. HARRIETTE WALTERS, TURNBULL,
R.W., and RICHARD WALTERS have a family relationship.²

III. THE SCHEME

22. There is probable cause to believe that TURNBULL,
HARRIETTE WALTERS, GUSTUS, ALEXANDER, W.J., RICHARD WALTERS, and R.W.
and others are involved in a scheme to steal tens of millions of dollars
from the District of Columbia by approving and issuing fraudulent
property tax refund checks from OTR. In sum, there is probable cause to
believe that HARRIETTE WALTERS, GUSTUS, and other DC government
employees were involved in preparing or approving fraudulent property
tax refund requests to generate over forty separate fraudulent refund
checks averaging, at this stage of the investigation, over $388,000.
Those fraudulent tax refund checks were deposited primarily into sham
corporate accounts controlled by HARRIETTE WALTERS’s relatives, including
TURNBULL’s "Chappa Home Services" and "Legna Home
Services" accounts, RICHARD WALTERS’s "Helmet Plumbing and
Heating" account, and R.W.’s "Provident Home Services"
account. The fraudulently obtained funds were then distributed through
cash, cashier’s checks and wire transfers to the coconspirators and
family members, who used the funds to, among other things, purchase
homes, vehicles, jewelry, luxury clothing and houseware items, and other
real and personal property. For example, as noted above, from September
2000 to the present, HARRIETTE WALTERS spent more than $1.4 million at
Neiman Marcus. Moreover, some of the money stolen from the District of
Columbia has been sent to a money exchange institution in the Dominican
Republic that has no bank branches in the United States.

23. HARRIETTE WALTERS abused her position of authority as
Manager of the District of Columbia Real Property Tax Administration
Adjustments Unit (RPTAAU) to approve fraudulent property tax return
requests. HARRIETTE WALTERS would approve refund request packages that,
on first glance, had the veneer of legitimacy. Many of the voucher
request packets identified to date in this scheme have various attached
pages purporting to justify the property tax refund, including copies of
checks payable to the District of Columbia for tax liabilities. On
closer inspection, however, the attached pages often do not match the
name of the company on whose behalf the fraudulent tax refund was
purportedly sought. Moreover, the conspirators often used the names of
legitimate companies or their agents as the lead payee name on the
check, again to make it appear that the fraudulent requests were true
and accurate. Thus, a number of the fraudulent voucher requests list a
legitimate (or apparently legitimate) company name but also list as a
co-payee a person or entity connected with the conspiracy, so the check
generated through the scheme could be deposited into one of the
bank accounts controlled by the conspirators. None of the fraudulent tax
return voucher request packets has a legitimate Order from the Superior
Court Tax Division directing that a tax refund be paid. Significantly, a
number of the vouchers use the exact same documentation to support
different vouchers applying to different properties. The conspirators
were also aided in their scheme by W.J., who, as an assistant bank
manager, was able to assist the conspirators in moving money among and
between accounts.

24. The extent of the scheme and magnitude of the fraud
are still being assessed. Based on the investigation by the FBI, OIG,
and OTR to date, there is probable cause to believe that the scheme has
generated at least 42 fraudulent checks, with a financial loss to the
District of Columbia of more than $16 million. That amount may continue
to grow as the investigation continues and additional fraudulent checks
are discovered. Moreover, of that $16 million, less than $2 million in
bank accounts have been located thus far.

A. DC Property Tax Refund Process

25. Under the normal and appropriate process by which
property tax refunds are requested and issued in the District of
Columbia, a legitimate tax refund occurs only when a taxpayer has paid
more in taxes than is owed. Overpayments occur because a property is
assessed incorrectly or where taxes are prepaid on a property that is
later sold, among other reasons.

26. A legitimate property tax refund request typically
includes a Court order from the Superior Court of the District of
Columbia Tax Division indicating the Tax Docket Number and the exact
amount of the refund. Property tax return voucher request paperwork also
normally includes details about the property for which a refund is
requested, such as the "square" and "lot" numbers of
the property on which taxes were assessed and the property owner or
agent.

27. Before a property tax refund check is issued, the
request must be signed by four DC employees: (1) an RPTAAU employee,³
who prepares the tax refund request by completing a Refund Research Form
and a SOAR Revenue Refund Voucher form, the latter being a
computer-generated form; (2) an RPTAAU manager, who verifies the Refund
Research Form and approves the Voucher; (3) the person who enters the
data into the disbursement system (from Revenue Accounting); and (4) a
Revenue Accounting manager (who verifies that the data was entered
correctly). Only the first two employees’ signatures relate to actual
review and approval of the tax refund request; the latter two signatures
relate only to the accurate entry and verification of data into the DC
government disbursement system. If the taxpayer qualifies for a refund,
the RPTAAU submits a request for a refund check to be issued for the
taxpayer.

B. Execution of the Scheme

28. As detailed below, the conspirators in this scheme
obtained millions of dollars in fraudulent property tax refunds by
submitting applications for property tax refunds with false information,
including false applicant names and false property information. The
scheme succeeded because corrupt District of Columbia government
employees knowingly approved fraudulent property tax refund
applications.

29. To obtain a refund check from the DC government, the
conspirators had to submit property tax refund applications and receive
approval of those applications. As discussed above, to generate a refund
check, the scheme required the creation of a refund voucher within the
RPTAAU. The voucher essentially requested the refund of a property tax
overpayment.

30. One of the indicators used by OTR investigators to
identify fraudulent refund checks in this case was a comparison of the
square and lot number listed on the voucher requesting a property tax
refund to the property owner information on record. If the property
owner name did not correspond with the square and lot number, this
provided evidence that the refund request may have been fraudulent. For
most, if not all, of the checks issued in this scheme, the payee name on
the refund check did not correspond with DC records regarding the owner
of a particular square/lot number. Additionally, the scheme succeeded
because HARRIETTE WALTERS used her position of authority to approve each
fraudulent refund voucher, knowing that the vouchers were fraudulent.
These approvals resulted in the issuance of fraudulent checks.

31. Upon approval of a property tax refund voucher by
HARRIETTE WALTERS, a refund check was issued by a different branch of
OTR. The fraudulent refund checks generally were not mailed to taxpayers
or their representatives. Instead, the checks were labeled "Hold
for Pickup" and maintained in a DC government office. One of the
conspirators, or someone acting on their behalf, picked up the
fraudulent refund checks and arranged for them to be deposited into one
of the accounts controlled by the conspirators. Records obtained from
OTR reflect the signature of HARRIETTE WALTERS as having picked up a
number of the fraudulent property tax return checks she approved. The
illicit funds were laundered through those accounts and distributed
among and between the conspirators.

C. Fraudulent Checks Identified To Date

32. Exhibit C to this Affidavit, which is incorporated
herein by reference, is a table containing information regarding the
fraudulent checks in this scheme that have been identified to date.
Exhibit C demonstrates that, of the 42 fraudulent property tax return
checks identified thus far, all were approved by HARRIETTE WALTERS; 33
indicate that they were prepared by GUSTUS; six indicate that they were
prepared by G.R.; two indicate that they were prepared by C.W; and one
indicates it was prepared by a former employee.

33. Moreover, of the 42 fraudulent property tax return
checks identified thus far, two list "Legna Home Services" or
a variant of that entity as a payee or co-payee; 14 list "Chappa
Home Services" or a variant as a payee or co-payee; five list
"Provident Homes Services" or a variant as a payee or
co-payee; three list "Helmet Corporation" or a variant as a
payee or co-payee; and two list "Aurora R.E. Enterprises" or a
variant as a payee or co-payee.

34. Once the conspirators obtained the fraudulent
property tax refund checks, they deposited them into bank accounts they
controlled, including at bank branches in Maryland. Of the 42 fraudulent
property tax refund checks identified thus far, 30 were deposited into
accounts with TURNBULL’s name listed as an account holder; three were
deposited into an account with RICHARD WALTERS’s name listed as an
account holder; six were deposited into an account with R.W.’s name
listed as an account holder; and two were deposited into an account with
ALEXANDER’s name listed as an account holder.

35. A number of the fraudulent property tax return checks
were successfully cashed and deposited even though the payee name on the
refund check did not match the account holder’s name on the bank
account.

36. Below is a discussion of eight of the checks that appear
within Exhibit C, which establish probable cause to believe that the checks in question are
fraudulent.

1. Refund Voucher 2337

37. On February 25, 2005, HARRIETTE
WALTERS authorized Voucher 2337, which called for a refund of real
property taxes to an entity identified as "1301 Limited
Partnership, c/o Chappahome Services, Inc." GUSTUS is indicated as
having prepared (on February 23, 2005) the Refund Research Form for
Voucher 2337, and HARRIETTE WALTERS verified that form on the same date.
Based on HARRIETTE WALTERS’s authorization, on March 11, 2005, the
District of Columbia issued Check No. 6243600, payable to "1301
Limited Partnership, c/o Chappahome Services Inc." in the amount of
$350,000.00. The check was designated "Hold for Pick-Up."

38. Voucher 2337 and its underlying
Refund Research Form are materially deficient in several respects that,
taken separately and in the aggregate, provide probable cause to believe
that the Voucher was created as part of the conspirators’ scheme to
defraud. For example:

a) Voucher 2337 purports to authorize a
refund of real property taxes paid for square/lot number 2183-0812.
However, available DC property records do not list a property with that
square/lot number;

b) The Refund Research Form lists a
different square/lot number (2138-0812) than the square/lot number on
Voucher 2337. Square and lot number 2138-0812 is a valid number
corresponding to a property located at 2500 Calvert St NW, in Washington
DC. The actual taxpayer for this property is "Omni Acquisition
Corp., Omni Hotels Treasury," 420 Decker Dr, Irving, TX 75062-3951.
The entity that received a property tax refund based on Voucher
2337–"1301 Limited Partnership, c/o Chappahome Services
Inc."—has no known association with the Omni Hotel or to
square/lot number 2138-0182;

c) The Refund Research Form does not include legitimate
justification (e.g., a court order or other formal document explaining
the basis for the refund) for a real property tax refund of $350,000.00.
To the contrary, the Refund Research Form lists "tax due,"
"amount paid" and "overpayment" figures that do not
correspond to the supporting documentation;

d) The Refund Research Form is
internally inconsistent, as it lists the "tax due" as "$1,220,091.67" at the top of one of the
columns in the one-page document, and

"$1,320,091.67" at the bottom of that column
without any calculations or explanations accounting for the $100,000.00
difference in the two tax-due amounts;

39. On March 13,
2005, Check No. 6243600, in the amount of $350,000.00, was deposited
into Bank of America Account No. xxxxxxx3993, an account under
TURNBULL’s control. 40. TURNBULL distributed money from Bank of America
account number xxxxxxx3993 to several co-conspirators/beneficiaries of
the scheme to defraud, including, but not limited to:

a) HARRIETTE WALTERS ($205,000.00), the
DC Government employee who authorized Voucher 2337;

b) GUSTUS ($10,000.00), the DC
Government employee who is indicated as having prepared the Refund
Research Form underlying Voucher 2337;

c) K.F. ($10,000.00), a DC Government
employee who works in a different section of OTR than HARRIETTE WALTERS,
GUSTUS, C.W., and G.R.;

d) C.W. ($8,000.00), a DC Government
employee who works in the same office as HARRIETTE WALTERS, GUSTUS, and
G.R.; and

e) R.W. ($11,200.00), a relative of
HARRIETTE WALTERS.

41. TURNBULL also used Bank of America account number
xxxxxxx3993 to make payments that, by inference, directly or indirectly
benefited HARRIETTE WALTERS. For example:

a) TURNBULL directed payments to a number of HARRIETTE
WALTERS’s relatives, including H.W. ($4,500.00), the deceased sister of
HARRIETTE WALTERS; and N.W. ($10,000.00).

42. The following chart summaries the
various withdrawal transactions that TURNBULL completed to distribute
the proceeds of the fraudulently obtained District of Columbia funds:

2. Refund Voucher 2431

43. On April 15, 2005, HARRIETTE WALTERS
authorized Voucher 2431, which called for a refund of real property
taxes to an entity identified as "BGW, LLP, c/o Wilkes and Artis,
LLC." GUSTUS is indicated as having prepared the Refund Research
Form for Voucher 2431, and HARRIETTE WALTERS verified that form on April 14,
2005. Based on HARRIETTE WALTERS’s authorization, on May 4, 2005, the
District of Columbia issued Check No. 6282221, payable to "BGW, LLP,
c/o Wilkes & Artis, LLC," in the amount of $329,913.31. The
check was designated "Hold for Pick-up."

44. Voucher 2431 and its underlying
Refund Research Form are materially deficient in several respect that,
taken separately and in the aggregate, provide probable cause to believe
that the Voucher was created as part of the conspirators’ scheme to
defraud. For example:

a) Voucher 2431 purports to authorize a
refund of real property taxes paid for square/lot number 0850-0217.
However, available DC property records do not list any property with
that square/lot number;

b) The Refund Research Form lists a different square/lot
number (0217-0050) than the square/lot number on Voucher 2431. Square
and lot number 0217-0050 is a valid number corresponding to a commercial
office building located at 1425 K St NW, Washington DC and owned by BGW
LLP. However, Jayrece E. Turnbull, d/b/a Legna Home Services, the
account into which the $329,913.31 property tax refund was deposited,
has no known relationship with BGW LLP or Wilkes & Artis LLP;

c) The Refund Research Form does not
include legitimate justification (e.g., a court order or other formal
document explaining the basis for the refund) for a real property tax
refund of $329,913.31. To the contrary, the Refund Research Form lists
"tax due," "amount paid" and "overpayment"
figures that do not correspond to any supporting documentation. The
documentation includes copies of checks from two different entities,
from two significantly different locations: (1) a check for $307,580.87
from BGW Limited Partnership, Suite 1200 Bender Building, 1120 Connecticut Avenue NW, Washington,
D.C. 20036; and (2) two checks from Gables Residential, c/o Gables
Residential Services, 777 Yamato Road, Suite 510, Boca Raton, FL 44542,
one in the amount of $223,530.38 and the other in the amount of
$71,287.90. The total of those checks is $602,399.15, a figure that
appears nowhere on the Refund Research Form and does not correspond to
the $964,813.31 indicated on the Refund Research Form as having been
paid in property taxes on square/lot 0217-0050;

d) The Refund Research Form is
internally inconsistent. In the top of the tax due column, the Form
lists $654,900.00, but at the bottom of that column the tax due is
listed as $634,900.00; but the form provides no calculations explaining
that $20,000 difference.

45. On May 23, 2005, Check No. 6282221, in the amount of
$329,913.31, was deposited into into Bank of America Account No.
xxxxxx3993, an account under TURNBULL’s control (and the same account
used to deposit the refund check that resulted from Voucher 2337).

3. Refund Voucher 2358

46. On March 17, 2005, HARRIETTE WALTERS authorized
Voucher 2358, which called for a refund of real property taxes to an
entity identified as "JAD Associates, Inc., c/o Chappahome
Servicing." GUSTUS is indicated as having prepared the Refund
Research Form for Voucher 2431 on March 15, 2005, and HARRIETTE WALTERS
verified that form on the same date. Based on HARRIETTE WALTERS’s
authorization, on March 30, 2005, the District of Columbia issued Check
No. 6258376, payable to "JAD Associates, Inc., c/o Chappahome
Servicing," in the amount of $379,000.00. The check was designated
"Hold for Pick-Up." 47.   Voucher 2358 and its
underlying Refund Research Form are materially deficient in several
respects that, taken separately and in the aggregate, provide probable
cause to believe the Voucher was created as part of the conspirators’
scheme to defraud. For example:

a) Voucher 2358 purports to authorize a
refund of real property taxes paid for square/lot number 0223-0021.
However, available DC property records do not list a property with that square/lot number;

b) The Refund Research Form lists a
different square/lot number (0322-0021) than the square/lot number on
Voucher 2358. Square and lot number 0322-0021 corresponds to a property
located at 1101 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington DC and owned by JAD
Associates. According to government records, JAD Associates already has
an agent: Spaulding & Slye, not "Chappahome Servicing" or
TURNBULL. Neither 1101 Pennsylvania Avenue, JAD Associates, nor
Spaulding & Slye has a known association with "Chappahome
Servicing," the entity listed on Voucher 2358 and that received the
resulting $379,000.00 tax refund check;

c) The Refund Research Form does not include legitimate
justification (g., a court order or other formal document explaining the
basis for the refund) for a real property tax refund of $379,000.00;

d) The one supporting document attached
to the Refund Research Form is a check from a corporation in Dallas,
Texas, First American Controlled Disbursements, that lists in the memo
line of the check "Loan 030220739." The date of that check is
April 26, 2004, whereas the Refund Research Form lists the date of
payment for that amount as March 31, 2004 (and puts that date in the
column marked "Batch Number," not the "Date Paid"
column). Finally, the Refund Research Form lists a tax amount of
$846,719.10 purportedly paid on September 15, 2004, but attaches no
check or other documentation supporting such a payment.

48. On April 22, 2005, Check No.
6258376, in the amount of $379,000.00, was deposited into Bank of
America Account No. xxxxxxx7785, an account under TURNBULL’s control.

49. TURNBULL distributed money from Bank
of America account number xxxxxxx7785 to several co-conspirators and
beneficiaries of the scheme to defraud, including, but not limited to:

a) HARRIETTE WALTERS ($100,000.00), the DC Government
employee who authorized Voucher 2358 (HARRIETTE WALTERS and TURNBULL
appear to have shared this amount); and

b) TURNBULL ($343,000.00), who used $100,000.00 of these
funds to purchase four cashier’s checks that were sent out of the
country. All four of these cashier’s checks were deposited through
Mellon National Bank, Hileah, Florida, with the endorsement reading as
"deposit only agente de cambro commercializadora de capitales, SA
xxxxxxx5069." "Cambro Commercializadora de Capitales SA"
is a money exchange/check cashing business in the Dominican Republic that is not licensed to do business in
the United States. Therefore, the business does not have branches in the
United States. However, the company does have a checking account at
Mellon Bank, Account No. xxxxxx5069, that the company uses to process
checks it cashes in the Dominican Republic. The company uses a courier
service to transport the checks from the Dominican Republic to its
branch in Florida. Frequently, people take checks in U.S. dollars to the
business and exchange the checks for pesos.

50. The following chart summarizes the
various withdrawal transactions that TURNBULL completed to distribute
the fraudulently obtained DC Government funds.

4. Refund Voucher 3715

51.   On April 21, 2007, HARRIETTE WALTERS
authorized Voucher 3715, which called for a refund of real property
taxes to an entity identified as "Chappahome Inc., c/o Wilkes Artis,
LLC." C. W. is indicated as having prepared the Voucher. HARRIETTE
WALTERS verified the Refund Research Form on April 20, 2007. Based on
HARRIETTE WALTERS’s authorization, on April 26, 2007, the District of
Columbia issued Check No. 6741804, payable to "Chappahome Inc., c/o
Wilkes Artis, LLC," in the amount of $398,680.00. The check was
designated "Hold for Pick-Up."

52. Voucher 3715 and its underlying
Refund Research Form are materially deficient in several respects that,
taken separately and in the aggregate, provide probable cause to believe
that the Voucher was created as part of the conspirators’ scheme to
defraud. For example:

a) Voucher 3715 purports to authorize a
refund of real property taxes paid for square/lot number 0702-0825.
However, available DC property records do not list a property with that
square/lot number

b) The Refund Research Form lists the same invalid
square/lot number (0702-0825) that is on Voucher 3715. However, one of
the documents (a printout of a computer screen, titled "Client
Financials") attached to the Refund Research Form references a
different square/lot number (0720-0825). Although 0720-0825 is a valid
square/lot number corresponding to property located at 600 2nd Street
NE, Washington DC and owned by Second Street Holding LLC Louis Dreyfus
Property Group, the property owner has no known association with
Chappahome Inc., the entity listed as the primary payee on the refund
check;

c) The Refund Research Form does not
include any justification ( ., a court order or other formal document
explaining the basis for the refund) for a real property tax refund of
$398,680.00. To the contrary, the Refund Research Form lists "tax
due," "amount paid" and "overpayment" figures
that do not correspond to the supporting documentation. For example, one
of the supporting documents is a check in the amount of $145,145.32 (an
amount that nowhere appears on the Refund Research Fund) on the account
of DC 17th Street Corporation c/o Insignia/ESG, Inc. (a company with no
known association with Chappahome). Moreover, the check itself has in
handwritten print the words "Lot #0093 – Sq #0162"—which
does not correspond to the lot/square information listed on the Voucher
or Refund Request Form (0702/0825).

53. On May 4, 2007, Check No. 6741804,
in the amount of $398,680.00, was deposited into Bank of America account
number xxxxxx2467, an account under TURNBULL’s control.

54. From May 4, 2007 to May 28, 2007, TURNBULL
distributed money from Bank of America account number xxxxxx2467 to
several co-conspirators/beneficiaries of the scheme to defraud,
including, but not limited to:

a) HARRIETTE WALTERS ($180,000.00), the
DC Government employee who authorized Voucher 3715; and

b) R.W. ($20,000.00), a relative of
HARRIETTE WALTERS.

The following chart summarizes the various withdrawal
transactions that TURNBULL completed to distribute the fraudulently
obtained DC Government funds.

5. Refund Voucher 3755

55. On May 11, 2007, HARRIETTE WALTERS authorized Voucher
3755, which called for a refund of real property taxes to an entity
identified as "Helmet, Inc., COP, c/o David Fuss, Esq." C.W.
is indicated as having prepared the Voucher. HARRIETTE WALTERS verified
the Refund Research Form for Voucher 3755 on May 10, 2007. Based on
HARRIETTE WALTERS’s authorization, on May 23, 2007, the District of
Columbia issued Check No. 6756039, payable to "Helmet, Inc., Cop,
c/o David Fuss, Esq.," in the amount of $541,100.74. The check was
designated "Hold for Pick-Up."

56.   Voucher 3755 and its underlying
Refund Research Form are materially deficient in several respects that,
taken separately and in the aggregate, provide probable cause to believe
that the Voucher was created as part of the conspirators’ scheme to
defraud. For example:

a) Voucher 3755 purports to authorize a
refund of real property taxes paid for square/lot number 0002-0067.
However, available DC property records do not list a property with that square/lot number;

b) The Refund Research Form lists a
different square/lot number (0220-0067) than the square/lot number on
Voucher 3755. Although 0220-0067 is a valid square/lot number
corresponding to property located at 875 15`h Street, NW, Washington DC
and owned by Bowen Building LP, that property owner has no known
association with Helmet, Inc. COP, the entity listed on Voucher 3755 and
on the resulting refund check. The address listed for Bowen Building LP
in government records is in Paramus, New Jersey;

c) The Refund Research Form does not
include any justification ( g., a court order or other formal document
explaining the basis for the refund) for a real property tax refund of
$541,100.74. To the contrary, the Refund Research Form lists "tax
due," "amount paid" and "overpayment" figures
that do not correspond to supporting documentation. Indeed, the only
documentation attached to the Refund Research Form is three copies of
the same exact check to the D.C government in the amount of
$1,265,538.75 from Charles E. Smith Real Estate Services LP. That amount
does not appear on the Refund Research Form;

d) The Refund Research Form lists information about the
purported taxpayer that is different from the information on Voucher
3755 and check #6756039. Specifically, although the voucher and check
identify the taxpayer as "Helmet Inc., COP, c/o David Fuss,
Esq.," the Research Refund Form refers to "Helmet In (sic)
COP, c/o Wilkes Arts, Esq. 1501 K Street Washington DC";

e) The entries in the "amount paid" column of
the Refund Research Form ($852,522.55 and $719,847.86) do not add up to
the total "amount paid," which is listed as $2,113,471.15.

57. On June 5, 2007, Check No. 6756039, in the amount of
$541,100.74, was deposited into Bank of America account number
xxxxxx1389, an account under RICHARD WALTERS’s control and under the
name of "Richard Walters d/b/a Helmet’s Plumbing &
Heating."

6. Refund Voucher 3701

58. On April 5, 2007, HARRIETTE WALTERS
authorized Voucher 3701, which called for a refund of real property
taxes to an entity identified as "First American Home, c/o David
Fuss, Esq." GUSTUS prepared the Refund Research Form for Voucher
3701, and HARRIETTE WALTERS verified that form. Based on HARRIETTE
WALTERS’s authorization, on May 23, 2007, the District of Columbia
issued Check No. 6756040, payable to "First American Home, c/o
David Fuss, Esq.," in the amount of $410,000.00. The check was
designated "Hold for Pick Up."

59. Voucher 3701 and its underlying
Refund Research Form are materially deficient in several respects that,
taken separately and in the aggregate, provide probable cause to believe
that the Voucher was created as part of the conspirators’ scheme to
defraud. For example:

a) Voucher 3701 purports to authorize a refund of real
property taxes paid for square/lot number 0042-0109. However, available
DC property records do not list a property with that square/lot number;

b) The Refund Research Form lists a
different square/lot number (0214-0109) than the square/lot number on
Voucher 3701. Although 0214-0109 is a valid square/lot number
corresponding to property located at 1120 Vermont Ave., NW, Washington
DC and owned by 1120 Vermont Avenue Associates, LLP c/o Sylvan C.
Herman, that property owner has no known association with "First
American Home," the primary payee listed on Voucher 3701 and on the
resulting refund check;

c) The Refund Research Form does not
include any justification ( g., a court order or other formal document
explaining the basis for the refund) for a real property tax refund of
$410,000.00. To the contrary, the Refund Research Form lists "tax
due," "amount paid" and "overpayment" figures
that do not correspond to supporting documentation. The supporting
documents include checks from four different entities, none of which has
a known relationship to 1120 Vermont Avenue Associates LLP c/o Slyvan C.
Herman or "First American Home": (1) a check from GMAC
Mortgage in the amount of $1,453,607.95; (2) a check from Prudential
Asset Resources in the amount of $1,253,642.02; (3) a check from Trammel
Crow Company in the amount of $543,390; and (4) a check from TC
Midatlantic Inc. in the amount of $417,743;

d) The memo line on the check from TC
Midatlantic Inc. states "Sq. 537, Lot 011," which does not
correspond to the square/lot numbers on the Voucher or the Refund
Research Form;

e) The Trammel Crow and TC Midatlantic checks attached as
purported support for Voucher 3701 are also attached as purported
support for Voucher 2525, which lists as the payee "Franklin
Towers, LLP c/o David Fuss, Esq., Hold for Pick-Up;"

f) The Trammel Crow and TC Midatlantic checks attached as
purported support for Voucher 3701 are also attached as purported support for
Voucher 3296, which lists "1120 Vermont Street Associates, Ltd. c/o
Chappahome LLC Hold for Pick-Up" as the payee;

g) The Trammel Crow and TC Midatlantic checks attached as
purported support for Voucher 3701 are also attached as purported
support for Voucher 3842, which lists "Aurora R.E. Enterprises,
Inc. c/o Jeff Nadel, Esq." as the payee;

h) The GMAC check attached as purported
support for Voucher 3701 is also attached as purported support for
Voucher 2936, which lists "Thirtenth [SIC] Street Associates c/o
Chappahome, Inc., Hold for Pick-Up" as the payee;

i) The Refund Research Form lists
information about the purported taxpayer that is different from the
information on Voucher 3701 and check #6756040. Specifically, although
the voucher and check identify the taxpayer as "First American
Home, c/o David Fuss, Esq.," the Research Refund Form refers to
"1120 Vermont Associates, c/o Chappa Home David Fuss, Esq.."

60. On or about June 18, 2007, Check No. 62756040, in the
amount of $410,000.00, which was created in the District of Columbia on
or about May 23, 2007, was deposited into SunTrust bank account number
xxxx8316, an account under TURNBULL’s control, at the Bowie Town Center
Branch of Sun Trust Bank, 4100 Northview Drive, Bowie, Maryland 20716.
This deposit posted to TURNBULL’s account on or about June 19, 2007,
and was made at the SunTrust Bank Bowie Town Center Branch, located at
4100 Northview Drive, Bowie, Maryland, 20716. 61.   From
June 25, 2007 to September 24, 2007, TURNBULL has made repeated efforts
to access the fraudulently obtained money that she deposited into
SunTrust bank account number xxxxx8316, by taking the following steps,
among others:

a) On June 25, 2007, TURNBULL wrote a check from SunTrust
Bank account xxxx8316 in the amount of $200,000 and attempted to deposit
it into Bank of America account number xxxxxx22467 (owned by TURNBULL,
d/b/a CHAPA INTERIORS). The check notation read
"reimbursement";

b) On or about June 27, 2007, a SunTrust Bank employee
spoke with David Fuss (the "care of’ addressee on check #6756040)
and determined that Mr. Fuss is a real estate attorney who is engaged,
in part, in obtaining refunds of property tax overpayments for clients
in D.C. Mr. Fuss stated that neither "First American Home" nor
TURNBULL is one of his clients;

c) On July 9, 2007, a SunTrust Bank employee met
personally with TURNBULL and advised her that SunTrust Bank needed
information about her business to verify her claim to the funds from the
property tax refund in Check No. 6756040. TURNBULL was asked to provide
copies of business tax returns, a business license, and any bank
references. TURNBULL accused the SunTrust Bank employee of illegality
but nevertheless stated that the nature of her business was making
investments in real estate and vacation rental properties abroad;

d) On July 10, 2007, SunTrust Bank asked TURNBULL to
provide documentation, such as articles of incorporation, to prove that
she was an authorized agent of "First American Home." The next
day, July 11, 2007, at the Assessor’s Office for the Government of
Prince George’s County, Maryland, TURNBULL filed a trade name
application for "First American Home," wherein TURNBULL listed
herself as the owner of the business using the trade name "First
American Home." The application described the business as a
"project management service" with an address of xxxx
xxxxxxxxxx xxxxx, Bowie, Maryland 20721, which is TURNBULL’s home
address. A separate form titled "Application for Identification
Number" and signed by TURNBULL stated that the business was
started in April 2007;

e) On July 12, 2007, TURNBULL forwarded copies of the
Trade Name Application and Application for Identification Number to
SunTrust Bank. SunTrust Bank personnel observed that these documents
were filed in Prince George’s County Maryland, one day after SunTrust
Bank requested them, and more than two weeks after the DC property tax
refund Check No. 6756040 (the source of the funds in the SunTrust Bank
account) was issued;

f) TURNBULL made a number of conflicting statements when
explaining the nature of the business of "First American Home" to
SunTrust Bank. In addition to claiming she invested in real estate and
vacation properties abroad, TURNBULL indicated that the business entity
known as "First American Home" was moved from the District of
Columbia to Maryland. TURNBULL also stated that Check No. 6756040 was
proceeds of a "tax sale." When asked to elaborate, TURNBULL
further described the check as proceeds of a "real estate
sale";

g) In furtherance of the scheme and in response to a
request from SunTrust Bank to provide information about "First
American Home" and the nature of its purported business with the DC
Government, TURNBULL hand delivered a letter on September 17, 2007, to a
SunTrust Bank branch in Laurel, Maryland. The letter was written on
Government of the District of Columbia letterhead, dated September 14, 2007, and was
addressed to "First American Home, xxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxx, Bowie,
Maryland 20721;"

h) The letter, which was signed by C.H.,
"Real property Tax Sale manger [sic]," states:

"Please be advised that the Real Property Tax Sale
Unit at the request of Ms. Jayrece Turnbull, representative for First
American Home, is providing confirmation of their participation at our
annual real property tax sale.

"We acknowledge that Ms. Jayrece Turnbull,
representative for First American Home, has been registered as a tax
sale purchaser for several years with the Office of Tax and Revenue,
Real Property Tax Administration. Ms. Turnbull is fully registered with
the Office of Tax and Revenue as a representative of First American Home
for business transactions related to the District of Columbia tax sale,
inquiries, refunds and tax sale cancellations.

"If additional information is needed, Ms. Turnbull
can contact Ms. S.J., Lead Tax Sale on 202-442-xxxx or Diane Gustus,
Lead Program Specialist on 202-442-xxxx."

i) The letter was mailed in a D.C. Government envelope
with a return address of "Government of the District of Columbia,
Office of Tax and Revenue, 941 North Capitol Street N.E., Washington, DC
20002." The envelope had a postmark date September 14, 2007 and a
post office cancellation stamp which indicated it was mailed from zip
code 20002; it was addressed to TURNBULL d/b/a First American Home, 2206
Bermondsey Drive, Bowie, MD 20721;⁶ and

j) On September 24, 2007, TURNBULL spoke further with a
SunTrust Bank employee. The employee explained to TURNBULL what type of
documents she needed to provide to remove the hold from her SunTrust
Bank account. TURNBULL advised the employee to put the request in writing and send it to her
at her electronic mail (email) address: [email protected].⁷

7. Refund Voucher 3787

62. On May 31, 2007, HARRIETTE WALTERS
authorized Voucher 3787, which called for a refund of real property
taxes to an entity identified as "Aurora Re Enterprises, LLC, c/o
Wilkes Artis, Esq." GUSTUS is indicated as having prepared the
Voucher on May 31, 2007. GUSTUS prepared the Refund Research Form for
Voucher 3787, and HARRIETTE WALTERS verified that form on May 31, 2007.
Based on HARRIETTE WALTERS’s authorization, on June 15, 2007, the
District of Columbia issued Check No. 6770965, payable to "Aurora
Re Enterprises, LLC, c/o Wilkes Artis, Esq.," in the amount of
$459,990.00. The check was designated "Hold for Pick-Up."

63. Voucher 3787 and its underlying
Refund Research Form are materially deficient in several respects that
that, taken separately and in the aggregate, provide probable cause to
believe that the Voucher was created as part of the conspirators’ scheme
to defraud. For example:

a) Voucher 3787 purports to authorize a
refund of real property taxes paid for square/lot number 0063-0886.
However, available DC property records do not list a property with that
square/lot number;

b) The Refund Research Form lists a different square/lot
number (0036-0858) than the square/lot number on Voucher 3787. However,
available DC property records do not list a property with that
square/lot number;

c) The Refund Research Form does not
include any justification (g., a court order or other formal document
explaining the basis for the refund) for a real property tax refund of
$459,990.00. To the contrary, the Refund Research Form lists "tax
due," "amount paid" and "overpayment" figures
that do not correspond to supporting documentation. For example, the
purported supporting documents include items from two different
entities, neither of which has a known association with "Aurora Re
Enterprises": (1) a $49,615.04 check from Homecomings Financial, a
Dallas, Texas corporation; and (2) a $308,396.91 check stub from Hyatt
Corporation, as Agent of Hyatt Equities LLC, d/b/a Park Hyatt
Washington.

64. On June 18, 2007, Check No. 6770965,
in the amount of $459,990.00, was deposited into SunTrust bank account
number XXXX1382, an account under ALEXANDER’s control.

8. Refund Voucher 3842

65. On July 24, 2007, HARRIETTE WALTERS
authorized Voucher 3842, which called for a refund of real property
taxes to an entity identified as "Aurora R.E. Enterprises, Inc.
cc/o (sic) Jeff Nadel, Esq." G.R. is indicated as having prepared
the Voucher. HARRIETTE WALTERS verified the Refund Research Form for
Voucher 3842 on June 24, 2007. Based on HARRIETTE WALTERS’s
authorization, on August 9, 2007, the District of Columbia issued Check
No. 6805521, payable to "Aurora R.E. Enterprises, Inc., c/o Jeff
Nadel, Esq.," in the amount of $345,500.00. The check was addressed
to be mailed to 8700 Georgia Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20815, but the
Voucher used a specific code to indicate that the check was to be held
for pick-up.

66. Voucher 3842 and its underlying
Refund Research Form are materially deficient in several respects that,
taken separately and in the aggregate, provide probable cause to believe
that the Voucher was created as part of the conspirators’ scheme to
defraud. For example:

a) Voucher 3842 purports to authorize a
refund of real property taxes paid for square/lot number 0227-0041.
However, available DC property records do not list a property with that
square/lot number;

b) The Refund Research Form lists a different square/lot
number (0027-0075) than the square/lot number on Voucher 3842. However,
available DC property records do not list a property with that
square/lot number;

c) The Refund Research Form does not
include any justification ( g., a court order or other formal document
explaining the basis for the refund) for a real property tax refund of
$459,990.00. To the contrary, the Refund Research Form lists "tax
due," "amount paid" and "overpayment" figures
that do not correspond to supporting documentation;

d) The supporting documentation for
Voucher 3842 includes the same TD Midatlantic and Trammel Crow checks
that were used to support Vouchers 2525, 3071, and 3296;

e) The supporting documentation for
Voucher 3842 also includes the same GMAC Mortgage check that was used to
support Vouchers 2936 and 3701.

67. On August 13, 2007, Check No.
6805521, in the amount of $345,500.00, was deposited into SunTrust bank
account number xxxx1382, an account under ALEXANDER’s control.

D. Additional Fraudulent Refund Vouchers
and DC Employee Coordination

68. On June 30, 2006, HARRIETTE WALTERS
approved a voucher, Voucher 3194, that is indicated as having been
prepared by G.R. There is probable cause to believe that this voucher is
part of the same fraudulent scheme. The Voucher purports to be providing
a property tax refund for square/lot number 3849-0802, whereas the
Refund Research Form purports to be calculating the refund for
square/lot number 3894-0820. As with the other Vouchers described above,
the supporting documentation does not match the calculations on the
Refund Research Form. The documentation includes three copies of the
same two checks from 1201 F Street LLC III c/o Carr Realty L.P. Neither
1201 F Street LLC nor Carr Realty has a known association with
Bellarmine Home, LLC.

69. On June 30, 2006, HARRIETTE WALTERS drafted a
memorandum to an employee in Financial Management Services, the
organizational component responsible for cutting checks, that states:
"Attached, please find the refund voucher [3194] prepared for a
refund (Square 0384 Suffix Lot 0804) (sic) [.] Please process this
voucher, as an expedited payment to be printed no later than July 13,
2006. Upon completion, would you kindly hold this check for pick-up and
contact [G.R.] 202-442-xxxx."

70. On August 24, 2006, HARRIETTE
WALTERS approved Voucher 3296, which is indicated as having been
prepared by GUSTUS. There is probable cause to believe that this Voucher
is part of the same fraudulent scheme. The Refund Research Form
indicates that it was prepared by GUSTUS and that it was verified by
HARRIETTE WALTERS on August 24, 2006. The square/lot number for Voucher
3296 is 0412-0109, whereas the square/lot number on the Refund Research
Form is 214/109. The supporting documentation for Voucher 3296 contains the same TC Midatlantic and Trammel Crow checks used to
support the other vouchers, as discussed in greater detail above.

71. On August 24, 2006, HARRIETTE WALTERS drafted a
memorandum to an employee in Financial Management Services that states:
"Attached, please find the refund voucher prepared for a return
(Square 0412 Suffix Lot 0109)[.] Please process this voucher, as an
expedited payment to be printed no later than August 29, 2006[.] Upon
completion, would you kindly hold this check for pick-up and contact
Diane Gustus 202-442-xxxx." 72. Also on August 24, 2006, HARRIETTE
WALTERS approved Voucher 3297, which is indicated as having been
prepared by GUSTUS. The Refund Research Form is indicated as having been
prepared by GUSTUS and it was verified by HARRIETTE WALTERS on August
24, 2006. There is probable cause to believe that this Voucher is part
of the same fraudulent scheme. The square/lot number on the Voucher is
0611/0073, whereas the number on the Refund Research Form is 116/73. The
payee on the Voucher is 1919 M Street Associates, LLC c/o Provident
Home, and the Voucher generated a tax refund check of $375,815.00. The
figures and calculations on the Refund Research Form do not correspond
to the supporting documents. Moreover, the supporting documents have no
known association with 1919 M Street Associates LLC or Provident Home.
Thus, one of the supporting documents is a copy of a check stub from
Farragut Center; the address of that entity is 1725 Eye Street NW, not
1919 M Street. The other supporting document is a copy of a check from
the Teamsters National Headquarters Building Corporation. The national
headquarters of that union is located at 25 Louisiana Avenue, NW, not
1919 M Street.

73. On August 24, 2006, HARRIETTE WALTERS drafted a
memorandum to an employee in Financial Management Services that states:
"Attached, please find the refund voucher prepared for a refund
(Square 0611 Suffix Lot 0073)[.] Please process this voucher, as an
expedited payment to be printed no later than August 29, 2006[.] Upon
completion, would you kindly hold this check for pick-up and contact
Diane Gustus 202-442-xxxx."

74. The District of Columbia employees
involved in this scheme have 7:00 a.m. start times at work.

E. Bank of America Employee Involvement

75. In November and December 2006, W.J.,
an Assistant Branch Manager for Bank of America at xxxc xxxxx xxxx
branch located at xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx, Baltimore, MD xxxxx, made
deposits totaling $91,000 into two Bank of America accounts he owns,
account numbers xxx7901 and xxxxxx8788. Approximately $60,000 of these
deposits was in cash. W.J. failed to report any of this income on his
2006 tax return, which indicated only $7,274 in taxable income and a tax
due and owing of $728.

76. In or about xxxxxxxx 2007, Bank of
America security personnel learned that W.J., an Assistant Branch
Manager for Bank of America at the xxxx xxxxx xxxx branch, was making a
large number of high-dollar withdrawal transactions from TURNBULL’s Bank
of America accounts when TURNBULL was not present. In the course of its
investigation of this issue, Bank of America discovered the following:

a) W.J. conducted transactions in
several Bank of America Accounts owned and/or controlled by TURNBULL,
including: (1) account number xxxxxxxx7785 (owned by JAYRECE TURNBULL
d/b/a CHAPA INTERIORS); (2) account numbers xxxxxxxx2467 and xxxxxxxx1359 (owned by JAYRECE E. TURNBULL d/b/a CHAPA
INTERIORS); (3) account number xxxxxxxx2655 (owned by JAYRECE E.
TURNBULL); and (4) account number xxxxxxxx8610 (owned by JAYRECE E.
TURNBULL and another individual).

b) On or about January 25, 2007, W.J.
caused the following cashier’s checks to be issued on behalf of
TURNBULL:

c) In or about November and December
2006, W.J. deposited approximately $91,000 into two Bank of America
accounts he controlled, account numbers xxx7901 and xxxxxx8788. Bank of
America investigators found these deposits to be highly irregular
because the amount exceeded substantially W.J.’s income as an assistant
branch manager.

77. Bank of America security personnel
interviewed W.J. on xxxxxxxx x, 2007. W.J. said that TURNBULL conducted
her financial transactions at Bank of America exclusively with W.J..
Whenever W.J. transferred from one Bank of America location to another,
TURNBULL followed him to the new location to maintain their ongoing
financial relationship.

78. W.J. said TURNBULL authorized him
(contrary to Bank of America policy) to carry out Bank of America
withdrawal transactions on her behalf. Accordingly, W.J. withdrew money
from TURNBULL’s accounts without obtaining TURNBULL’s signature on the
withdrawal paperwork (instead, W.J. wrote "per customer
request" on the signature line). After obtaining the funds, W.J.
would wait for one of TURNBULL’s designees to pick up the funds, or he
would deliver the funds personally to TURNBULL.

79. W.J. told Bank of America security
personnel that TURNBULL gave him $145,000.00 to assist him in paying off
some debts. He also provided a signed, written statement, dated
xxxxxxxxx x, 2007, that reads as follows: "All transactions I, [W.J.],
have done for Ms. Jayrece Turnbull, was (sic) authorized by the
customer. I have done w/d [withdrawal] and other transactions without
the customer being present in the office. She have (sic) given me monies
($145,000 in three months) as gifts."

80. Shortly after their interview of W.J.,
Bank of America security personnel spoke with TURNBULL. TURNBULL stated
that she authorized W.J. to conduct the transactions in question.
TURNBULL also stated that she gave W.J. money, and maintained that Bank
of America did not need to know why she had done so.

81. Bank of America terminated W.J. on
xxxxxxxx x, 2007 for violating Bank of America’s employee standards of
conduct.

F. Additional Evidence Relating to
Distribution of Embezzled Funds

82. On or about July 4, 2006, GUSTUS
purchased a 2006 GMC Envoy or $40,456.00 from Winegardner Pontiac GMC
of Prince Frederick, in Prince Frederick, Maryland. To pay for the
truck, GUSTUS obtained through GMAC a loan in the amount of $34,935.12,
which called for 72 payments of $485.21 commencing on August 4, 2006.
Even though she listed her annual salary on the loan application as
$50,761, GUSTUS paid off the entire nearly $35,000 loan by July 20,
2007. Payment records reveal that GUSTUS made large payments on this
loan through cashier’s checks on the following dates and in the
following amounts:

83. GUSTUS purchased the cashier’s
checks she used to make those payments and erase nearly $35,000 in debt
within one year by using proceeds of her scheme with HARRIETTE WALTERS
and the other co-conspirators, through the following series of financial
steps: (1) HARRIETTE WALTERS withdrew funds from TURNBULL’s Chapa Home
Services Account No. xxxxxxx2467; (2) HARRIETTE WALTERS used those funds
to purchase cashier’s checks payable to GUSTUS; (3) GUSTUS held onto the
cashier’s checks from HARRIETTE WALTERS for a period of time; (4) even
though GUSTUS receives her salary through direct deposit into an account
at PNC Bank, GUSTUS would cash the cashier’s checks she received from
HARRIETTE WALTERS at a Bank of America branch; and (5) GUSTUS would take
some of the proceeds from the cashier’s checks in cash, and she would
use the remaining funds to purchase new cashier’s checks for payments on
her GMAC loan and for other bills.

84. As reflected on Exhibit C, during
the period of time when GUSTUS made those 11 loan payments, her name is
indicated as having prepared ten vouchers approved by HARRIETTE WALTERS:
Vouchers 3296, 3297, 3362, 3363, 3395, 3396, 3538, 3701, 3787, 3788.

85. Based on my training and experience,
the training and experience of other investigators working on this case,
and on the facts described above, I know that it is common for
individuals involved in financial crime to maintain financial documents
and records relating to their personal and business affairs. These
documents will show the acquisition, conversion, movement, secretion,
transfer, and distribution of currency, real property, and personal
property. It is also common for such persons to maintain financial
instruments that are the proceeds of, or facilitating property of, the
illegal activity. These documents, records, and financial instruments
are often retained for long periods of time in secure and accessible
locations, including in residences; businesses; vehicles; work spaces, desks, and
file cabinets; office and home computers and personal communication
devices; safe deposit boxes; banks; and storage facilities. 

86. Based
on my training and experience, and the training and experience of other
agents, I also know that conspirators in a financial scheme often keep
separate sets of books to record the transfer of funds into and out of
the conspiracy and to keep track of how the proceeds are distributed
among and between the conspirators.

87. Based on the number of fraudulent
documents created, the number of purported supporting documents used to
justify large property tax refunds, and the number of supporting
documents that were used to justify more than one property tax refund
for different properties, there is probable cause to believe that there
would be evidence of, the fruits, of, or instrumentalities of the crimes
being investigated in this case in the homes, vehicles, and office
spaces of the individuals named above.

88. Given that the Vouchers used in the
scheme were created on computers, there is probable cause to believe
that there will be records or data on personal, business, and office
computers that constitute evidence of, fruits of, or instrumentalities
of criminal violations.

89. The records and documents created
and retained by individuals involved in financial crime also often
include correspondence with co-conspirators; U.S. Postal Service and/or
next day carrier services documents and receipts; investor records;
contracts; Rolodex files; photographs; appointment books; notes; airline
and other travel tickets and receipts; bank accounts records; and
financial instruments.

90. Individuals involved in financial
crime create such documents, records, and information by various means,
including, but not limited to, computers, printers, telex machines,
facsimile machines, and telephones, telephone answering machines,
cellular phones, and cameras. These individuals also maintain such
documents, records, and information in various forms, including but not
limited to, electrical, magnetic, photographic, and tangible. 

91. In
light of the evidence of over one million dollars worth of purchases at
high end retail stores such as Neiman Marcus, facilitated at least in
part by funds obtained through the scheme to defraud, there is probable
cause to believe that there will be jewelry, furs, designer apparel,
stemware and housewares, as well as records relating to such purchases,
that constitute evidence of, fruits of, or instrumentalities of criminal
violations.

VI. CONCLUSION

92. Based on the facts set forth above, your Affiant
submits respectfully that there is probable cause to believe that there
is presently contained within the properties set forth in Exhibit A of
this Affidavit, files, correspondence, memoranda, computers, computer
disks, bank and other financial records, and other materials that
constitute evidence of, the fruits of, or instrumentalities of criminal
violations of Title 18, United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 1341 (Mail
Fraud), Section 1349 (Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud), Section 1344
(Bank Fraud), Section 371 (Conspiracy), Sections 1956 and 1957 (Money
Laundering and Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering), and Section 2314
(Interstate Transport of Stolen Property). Your Affiant respectfully
requests that search warrants be issued for the premises referenced in
Exhibit A of this Affidavit, as prayed.

93. Based on the facts set forth above, your Affiant
submits respectfully that there is probable cause to believe that the
individuals as set forth in Exhibit B of this Affidavit have violated
the federal criminal laws, including but not limited to, Title 18,
United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 1341 (Mail Fraud), Section 1349 (Conspiracy to Commit
Mail Fraud), Section 1344 (Bank Fraud), Section 371 (Conspiracy),
Sections 1956 and 1957 (Money Laundering and Conspiracy to Commit Money
Laundering), and Section 2314 (Interstate Transport of Stolen Property).
Your Affiant respectfully requests that arrest warrants be issued for
the individuals referenced in Exhibit B of this Affidavit, as prayed.

FURTHER YOUR AFFIANT SAYETH NOT.

Andrew Sekela

Special Agent

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Sworn and subscribed to this ___ day of
November 2007.

United States Magistrate Judge 

District of Columbia

1. ALEXANDER has used the alias "C.L." TURNBULL
has a minor child named A.L. ALEXANDER and TURNBULL live in the same
neighborhood in Bowie, Maryland, within a quarter of a mile of one
another. 

2. On July 26, 2006, an obituary for H.R.W. was published
in the Virgin Islands Daily News. The obituary stated that
H.R.W. had
three sisters (HARRIETTE WALTERS, C.B. and C.S.) one brother (RICHARD
WALTERS), two adopted sons (R.W. and E.C.), and two nieces (TURNBULL and
S.S.).

3. The RPTAAU is a division of the DC
Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), Office of Tax and Revenue
(OTR).

4. To date, all fraudulent checks identified as part of
this scheme were issued from Bank of America Account No. xxxx2547,
registered to the Government of the District of Columbia. This account
is used by the DC Government as a "disbursement account."

5. This check was endorsed "for deposit only" by
Harriette M. Walters and deposited into Bank of America account number
xxxxxx5677. Bank of America records indicate account number xxxxxx5677
is registered to Harriette Monica Walters, xxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xx,
Washington, DC 20015.

6. Based on this use of the mails, your
Affiant has probable cause to believe TURNBULL has used the United
States mail in furtherance of this scheme to defraud. 

7. Based on this use of an electronic-mail address, your
Affiant has probable cause to believe TURNBULL has used this e-mail
address in furtherance of this scheme to defraud.