The Inquirer-Home

US spam king admits stock fraud

Spam botnet used to defraud
Tue Jun 23 2009, 10:36

US SPAM KING Alan Raksky has admitted charges that he and others committed fraud by manipulating the prices of dodgy Chinese stocks.

PC World reports that Ralsky, 64, and seven co-conspirators allegedly engaged in a spam campaign during 2004 and 2005 to pump up the prices of thinly-traded Chinese penny stocks on US exchanges. After trading volumes and prices of the over-the-counter 'pink sheet' stocks rose, the spam gang sold off all their shares.

Spammer kingpin Ralsky, who was convicted of bank fraud in 1995 and once boasted of sending 70 million spam emails per day, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, violating the US CAN-SPAM Act and money laundering along with four other defendants on Monday in US District Court in Detroit.

Ralsky, of Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, faces a possible sentence of 87 months in federal prison along with a $1 million fine. His son-in-law, Scott Bradley, 38, pleaded guilty to the same charges and is looking at 78 months porridge plus a $1 million fine.

John Brown, 45, of Fresno, California admitted to creating a botnet to distribute the spam and pleaded guilty to the same charges plus conspiracy to commit computer fraud. He is facing 63 months in gaol and a $75,000 fine.

William Neal, 46, also of Fresno, and James Fite, 36, of Culver City, California, also pleaded guilty in the case. The five defendants will be sentenced on October 29. Charges are still pending against three more defendants.

Alas, the US doesn't have the death penalty for spammers. µ

Share this:

Comments

There are no comments submitted yet. Do you have an interesting opinion? Then be the first to post a comment.

aboutus
Advertisement
Subscribe to INQ newsletters
Advertisement
INQ Poll

Authorities in several countries raided Megaupload recently, shut down all of its services, seized hundreds of servers and arrested several of its executives on criminal charges.

Do you think the move was justified?