Interesting that he was one of the few that profited from his investment in Madoff's "fund".
-harry
That's not quite true. As with Ponzi schemes in general, many people made serious profits investing money with Madoff. That's why they kept investing. But the ones who made money were smart enough, perceptive enough, or lucky enough to pull their money out before the operation imploded.
Also, not everything Madoff's firm did was illegal. According to the article, the branches that Mark and Andrew worked in were completely and unquestionably legal, and apparently produced quite impressive results -- well above the Wall Street average. That was something I didn't know until I read the article.
Maybe Bernie intentionally shielded the sons from the illegal side. Or maybe he hoped that the profit from the firm's legal ventures would eventually transform the Ponzi scheme into an actual fund, but the lagging economy and the demands of investors for disbursements caused the "fund" to collapse before that could happen.
Of course, that's just speculation. But I do like to read articles like this one, even if they're sad, because I'm interested in the human dimension of these sort of stories once you get past the headlines.
I already know one side of the story in a very human way because quite a few of my clients lost fortunes with Madoff, and a few were essentially ruined. Getting a glimpse of the other side doesn't change that, nor does it change the fact that even if what the sons did was perfectly legal, they still profited from the illegal activities as well.
So I believe the trustee is right to go after Andrew's money and Mark's estate. Perhaps not all of it, as at least some could be considered rightfully theirs as reasonable compensation for actual, completely legal work that they did. But some
major portion has to go toward restitution, in my opinion. They may have been honest, but unfortunately, they worked for a crook.
-Rich