Summation:

While it could be said that our Client was somewhat naive in squandering his money on something as worthless as one of Boada’s phony titles, the reader should bear in mind that the same could be said for the multitude of people who were convinced to invest their finances in penny shares, worthless companies and collectibles with no value. Even the wisest and most experienced of traders can, and often has, easily been ‘taken’ by a clever con man. Our Client isn't the first, and he undoubtedly won't be the last.

Antonio Boada, Lord of Larceny, Prince of Thieves, and Baron of No Place in Particular, is a "con artist". This Cuban refugee has taken advantage of the opportunities thus afforded to him by preying upon the dreams and gullibilities of our citizens.

As a result of investigative inquiries, interviews conducted and statements received during the course of this investigation, it is apparent that Boada constantly maintains an unwavering modus operandi, in his business dealings. Aided, and perhaps abetted, by the London based Law Firm of Pitts-Tucker and Co., Boada brokers the sale of fraudulent securities in the form of bogus titles of nobility sold for large sums of money. The recipe for successful trade with Boada and BFI appears to be that the client should buy whatever Boada has to sell, often for large sums of money, and then unquestionably believe him when he states that the item is genuine. Questions on the veracity of the documents are invariably met with the same response. At first, Boada will portray the illusion of being willing to help satisfy the concerns of the client that the item is genuine, while frantically evading the ultimate question: “can you prove to me that the title I purchased is genuine?”

When the question can no longer be avoided, the client is often met with intimidation such as threats of legal action from Pitts-Tucker for simply asking questions and ridiculous comments such as Caveat Emptor (Buyer Beware). This, of course is nonsense, as it would be impossible for anyone to know if a noble title is genuine until the “title” itself is received and authenticated. Threatening legal action for simply asking questions is about as ludicrous as it gets.

Verifying that Boada did indeed own the title in question, in order for him to be legally entitled to sell it, should be an easy task, as the title must generally have been conveyed to Boada in some legal manner prior to his selling it to the client. The reader must wonder why Boada simply doesn’t supply his client with a copy of the legalized Deed of Transfer between the original owner and himself, permitting the client to contact the original title holder to confirm the transaction, thereby proving that Boada was the legal owner of the title and authorized to convey it to his client. It appears that the answer is blatantly obvious, in that such a document is not supplied when requested because no such document ever existed.

On the subject of Caveat Emptor, it is interesting to note that a decoy operation initiated by our Client, where BFI was contacted by a fictitious character on the pretense of being interested in purchasing a title was met with a response of outrage by Boada when questions were asked regarding whether Boada could prove the title he was attempting to sell the decoy was genuine. It would appear that questions related to the veracity of Boada’s titles are not permitted either before or after the transaction.

<< Previous   Contents   Next >>