Christopher Loaiza Salazar is a convicted TelexFree scammer in Peru.
Stemming from a TelexFree related criminal case opened in 2016, Salazar and “certain of his relatives” were found guilty of aggravated fraud.
On the basis those he scammed did or should have filed a claim with the Trustee, Salazar now seeks to overturn his conviction.
Salazar petitioned the TelexFree Trustee for financial records on May 24th.
The requested records pertain to three TelexFree promoters Salazar recruited;
- Marcia Cecilia Cardenas Alvarez;
- Maria Elena Callapina Condori; and
- Jose Antonio Callapina Condori
Salazar describes his recruits as “willing” participants in TelexFree, a $3 billion Ponzi scheme.
In their criminal complaint, Salazar’s recruits alleged they’d been deceived by Salazar and his relatives.
The basis of this was Salazar keeping funds invested by those he recruited. This was a common practice among TelexFree scammers, as it allowed them to bypass TelexFree for a quick payday.
To fool those they recruited scammers would create accounts and transfer internal balances (that didn’t exist), to reflect amounts their recruits had invested.
As part of their investigation, Peruvian officials reached out to the DOJ for financial information on Salazar’s recruits.
This resulted in a match for Tania Rocio Delgado Monge, a fourth recruit and complainant.
As a result of the information provided by the DOJ, Monge was disqualified as a complainant in Salazar’s criminal case.
Tania’s appropriate remedy was to file a proof of claim form and receive whatever recovery to which she was entitled under the confirmed Plan.
Salazar essentially argues that his victims filing a criminal complaint against him isn’t proper. They should have instead participated in the victim claim process established by the Trustee.
Monge showing up on financial records suggests she might have.
Salazar is adamant records exist for Alvarez and the Condoris, suggesting their names might have been misspelled.
Salazar was quite surprised that Marcia, Maria, and Jose were not also eliminated from the Peruvian criminal action for the same reason as Tania.
Specifically, they should have been identified as registered participants and the funds delivered on their behalf should have been recorded in the TelexFree records and, as such, their appropriate remedy should have been to file a proof of claim form, as it was for Tania.
Salazar believes that full proper names of Marcia, Maria, and Jose were likely keyed into the spreadsheets provided with the April 6th DOJ Letter with misspellings common when translating the Spanish language to English language.
Salazar believes that additional information must exist in TelexFree’s books and records that will establish that they were registered with TelexFree, that the funds at issue were delivered to TelexFree (and not diverted by Salazar), and that each had an opportunity to file a proof of claim for as the remedy for their losses.
Salazar believes if Avarez and the Condoris information can be found, he’ll be able to
prosecute the appeal of his conviction in Peru, a conviction for which his [sic] is now facing significant time in prison.
Neither the Trustee, DOJ or SEC have opposed Salazar’s motion. A decision on the petition motion remains pending.
It should be noted that Peru’s Superintendency of Banking and Insurance banned TelexFree operating locally in 2013. This included promotion of the Ponzi scheme.
Update 14th June 2022 – Salazar’s motion was approved on June 13th.