Jury deliberations begin in the William and Rhonda Liddle AEA fraud trial

PHOENIX -- Final update 10 p.m. — The jury began its deliberations Thursday morning, the 13th day of the federal court trial of William and Rhonda Liddle.

Each faces 68 counts of conspiracy, money laundering, wire transfer and fraud in a case stemming from millions of dollars in bad loans Liddle approved while he was head of AEA’s business lending department. In turn the Liddles allegedly received more than $1 million in a kickback scheme that included cash, a house and two vehicles.

Rhonda Liddle’s attorney, Mark Paige, wrapped up his closing arguments first thing Thursday morning. He reminded the jury that it had to find two things: There was a high probability that his client knew the money she was depositing in the couple’s joint account was obtained illegally and that she deliberately avoided learning the truth.

Paige maintained that the government failed to support either finding, reminding the jury that Rhonda Liddle, a high school graduate and a housewife, had no involvement in the alleged criminal activity and no knowledge of it. She was busy maintaining a home for her family and raising the couple’s two daughters, he said.

U.S. assistant attorney Raymond Woo then presented the final statements for the prosecution, continuing to support the government’s allegations that both Liddles were involved in and benefited from the alleged kickback scheme.

On Wednesday, Liddle’s attorney, David Eisenberg, likened the case to “Alice in Wonderland.”
In his final statement, Woo said that was indeed true — with one difference.

“The Liddles were living within their means,” Woo said. “Then in 2007 they went down the rabbit hole. They received one-quarter million dollars in cash, cars for free and a half-million-dollar house free and clear. You can follow the money to the Liddles. They were living the life of fraud.”
As evidence, Woo displayed the Liddles’ credit card statements, pointing that before 2007, they weren’t paying them off each month. After 2007, Liddle was paying his American Express bill in full each month, often with a balance that was more than his salary.

Woo showed several deposit slips filled out by Rhonda Liddle for thousands of dollars in $100 bills at a time. It was money, he said, that she had to have known was not coming from her husband’s paychecks.

“When one-quarter million dollars in cash passes through your hands, you don’t need a financial background to know where it wasn’t coming from.”

In support of the allegations of the kickback scheme, Woo offered further examples of Liddle approving a loan or loan increase for either Frank Ruiz or Dan Thelen, one of them withdrawing money from the loan shortly after, followed by Rhonda Liddle making a cash deposit in the same amount often on the same day.

Between them, Thelen and Ruiz received $30 million in loans that ended in bankruptcy.
In mid-2009, the Liddles paid cash to purchase the house they were renting from Ruiz, with Liddle testifying it was money the couple had shipped from Japan where they had lived for several years.

But Woo noted that the Liddles opened a trust account at that time and three days later deposited $564,000 — money transferred by Thelen, which was then used to pay off the house.

Woo finished his statements at 9:40 a.m. and the case was sent to the jury. It will resume its deliberations Friday morning.

The charges against the Liddles include one count of conspiracy, 44 counts of federal credit institution fraud, three counts of wire fraud, 14 counts of misapplication of financial institution funds and six counts of transactional money laundering as well as aiding and abetting for each count.

Update 7:51 p.m.:

PHOENIX — The jury began its deliberations on Thursday morning, the 13th day of the trial in federal court of William and Rhonda Liddle.

They each face 68 counts of conspiracy, money laundering, wire transfer and fraud in a case stemming from millions of dollars in bad loans Liddle approved while he was head of AEA’s business lending department. In turn the Liddles allegedly received more than $1 million in a kickback scheme that included cash, a house and two vehicles.

Rhonda Liddle’s attorney, Mark Paige, wrapped up his closing arguments first thing Thursday morning. He reminded the jury that it had to find two things: there was a high probability that his client knew the money she was depositing in the couple’s joint account was obtained illegally and that she deliberately avoided learning the truth.

Paige maintained that the government failed to support either finding, reminding the jury that Rhonda Liddle, a high school graduate and a housewife, had no involvement in the alleged criminal activity and no knowledge of it. She was busy maintaining a home for her family and raising the couple’s two daughters.

U.S. assistant attorney Raymond Woo then presented the final statements for the prosecution, continuing to support the government’s allegations that both Liddles were involved in and benefited from the alleged kickback scheme.

On Wednesday, Liddle’s attorney, David Eisenberg, likened the case to “Alice in Wonderland.”

In his final statement, Woo said that was indeed true with one difference.

“The Liddles were living within their means,” Woo said. “Then in 2007 they went down the rabbit hole. They received one-quarter million dollars in cash, cars for free and a half-million dollar house free and clear. You can follow the money to the Liddles. They were living the life of fraud.”

As evidence, Woo displayed the Liddles’ credit card statements, pointing that before 2007, they weren’t paying them off each month. After 2007, Liddle was paying his American Express bill in full each month, often with a balance that was more than his salary.

Woo showed several deposit slips filled out by Rhonda Liddle for thousands of dollars in $100 bills at a time. It was money, he said, that she had to have known was not coming from her husband’s paychecks.

“When one-quarter million dollars in cash passes through your hands, you don’t need a financial background to know where it wasn’t coming from,” Woo said.

In support of the allegations of the kickback scheme, Woo also offered further examples of Liddle approving a loan or loan increase for either Frank Ruiz or Dan Thelen, one of them withdrawing money from the loan shortly after, followed by Rhonda Liddle making a cash deposit in the same amount often on the same day.

Between them, Thelen and Ruiz received $30 million in loans that ended in bankruptcy.
In mid-2009, the Liddles paid cash to purchase the house they were renting from Ruiz, with Liddle testifying it was money the couple had shipped from Japan where they had lived for several years.

But Woo noted that the Liddles opened a trust account at that time and three days later deposited $564,000 — money transferred by Thelen, which was then used to pay off the house.

Woo finished his statements at 9:40 a.m. and the case was sent to the jury. It will resume its deliberations Friday morning.

The charges against the Liddles include one count of conspiracy, 44 counts of federal credit institution fraud, three counts of wire fraud, 14 counts of misapplication of financial institution funds and six counts of transactional money laundering as well as aiding and abetting for each count.