Fraud, Embezzlement, Bad Checks Thief by Conversion or Securities Fraud

[thebrat]

I provided a substantial amount of money to a man over two
years ago. He was to invest the money in real estate --
but it never happened and he has not repaid me. I was
contacted by the sheriffs department and they asked that I
turn over all the documentation and sign a complaint
against this person as I am not the only person who he has
done this to. My dilema is that, my personal attorney
wants to sue this person in civil court, which of course
would cost me and I believe I will never see any of this
money again no matter what. I am torn between going with
the state and allowing them to handle this case and filing
a civil action. I very simply want to know the pros and
cons of both actions. Please someone help me. I realize
that if the state takes the case it is completely out of my
hands and this man will have no inclination to repay me,
but I feel an obligation to have him go through the
difficulties of this and perhaps stop him from doing this
to others (it's not the money with me, I am reconciled to
the fact it is gone) -- but I do not want him to do this to
others. This would be filed in two separate counties in my
home state as these 'investments' were given to him from my
home and my business. And he also has a criminal action for
this same type of action ongoing in another county in this
state. On the other hand, if I go criminally, I am able to
stop the action at any time and perhaps he would pay up.
Please give me the pros and cons on whether I should go
criminally or civily or first criminally and then civilly,
or first civilly and then criminally. I really need some
advice from someone who has no interest or bias in this
situation.

 

[freebird]

If this were me, I'd be happy that the state has stepped in. This is because then all the evidence collected will have been done at the expense of the state, not yours. Additionally, if there is a conviction, it can be used as the basis for your civil case and it will be a slam dunk from there. On the other hand, if the prosecutor flubs the case then it might slightly affect your civil case although the evidence has still been collected. The burden to successfully make a civil case is not as high as criminal (more likely than not versus beyond a reasonable doubt) which is why you can truly consider the case civilly despite any potential acquittal in the criminal case.

If it were me I'd file in civil and adjourn the case until the state's case is concluded. It's a no lose situation. Additionally, the choice of going civilly or criminally is not yours. The state handles criminal matters and the decision to proceed is theirs.

Originally posted by thebrat
I provided a substantial amount of money to a man over two
years ago. He was to invest the money in real estate --
but it never happened and he has not repaid me. I was
contacted by the sheriffs department and they asked that I
turn over all the documentation and sign a complaint
against this person as I am not the only person who he has
done this to. My dilema is that, my personal attorney
wants to sue this person in civil court, which of course
would cost me and I believe I will never see any of this
money again no matter what. I am torn between going with
the state and allowing them to handle this case and filing
a civil action. I very simply want to know the pros and
cons of both actions. Please someone help me. I realize
that if the state takes the case it is completely out of my
hands and this man will have no inclination to repay me,
but I feel an obligation to have him go through the
difficulties of this and perhaps stop him from doing this
to others (it's not the money with me, I am reconciled to
the fact it is gone) -- but I do not want him to do this to
others. This would be filed in two separate counties in my
home state as these 'investments' were given to him from my
home and my business. And he also has a criminal action for
this same type of action ongoing in another county in this
state. On the other hand, if I go criminally, I am able to
stop the action at any time and perhaps he would pay up.
Please give me the pros and cons on whether I should go
criminally or civily or first criminally and then civilly,
or first civilly and then criminally. I really need some
advice from someone who has no interest or bias in this
situation.