Score:   1
Docket Number:   D-UT  1:18-cr-00075
Case Name:   USA v. Mouritsen
  Press Releases:
SALT LAKE CITY – A federal indictment unsealed Thursday charges Robert Glen Mouritsen, age 71, of Kaysville, with using a position of prominence to induce friends and fellow church members to give him money to further a financial fraud scheme he called “The Project.”  The fraud scheme started in 2006 and continued through Aug. 29, 2018, the indictment alleges.

According to the indictment, Mouritsen represented to victims that The Project involved a series of complicated international transactions that would replace fiat money (legal tender by government decree) with an asset-backed currency system – for example, the U.S. dollar tied to the value of a commodity like gold. Mouritsen represented to victims that The Project involved governments in Asia and Europe and required the help of attorneys and bankers.  He also told them it was expensive to keep The Project moving forward.  The indictment also alleges Mourtisen told investors The Project was subject to extremely strict confidentiality agreements and he could not disclose many details. 

The indictment charges Mouritsen with three counts of wire fraud and three counts of money laundering. The indictment outlines representations made to three victims of the alleged fraud scheme.

The indictment alleges he told an individual identified as Victim #1 that the investment would be short term and would yield significant investment returns. When Mouritsen failed to return the initial investment in a short amount of time, he attempted to lull Victim #1 into a false sense of security about the investment by representing that The Project was almost done, but he needed additional money to continue.  Over the years, Victim #1 provided a total of $326,399.51 to Mourtisen for The Project with the most recent investment occurring in and around 2016.   

The indictment alleges that in or around 2017, Mouritsen asked Victim #2 to provide money for The Project.  He told the victim that The Project was nearing completion. He told the victim that compensation was being held up by the Patriot Act because the money was overseas.  He represented that the money would arrive “any day now,” according to the indictment.  Mouritsen also asked Victim #2 for more money to keep the attorneys working on getting his money into the United States. Over the years, Victim #2 provided a total of $165,000 to Mourtisen for the project.

According to the indictment, Mouritsen asked Victim #3 to invest in The Project in late July 2008. He provided the victim with a promissory note with a 12 percent annual return due in one year.  When Mourtisen failed to repay Victim #3 within one year, he told the victim he needed more money to pay attorneys to complete The Project.  He told the victim that attorneys were working to bring money into the United States, but they were having difficulty due to issues with Homeland Security.  For years, according to the indictment, Mouritsen represented that money would be coming soon.  Over the years, Victim #3 provided $33,000 to Mourtisen for The Project, with the most recent investment occurring on or about Sept. 19, 2013.

The indictment alleges Mourtisen failed to tell investors, among other things, that The Project had failed to produce any returns in over a decade and that he used a significant portion of investor money for his own personal use and benefit.  

The indictment seeks a forfeiture judgement of approximately $1.5 million representing the proceeds traceable to the scheme to defraud.

A federal arrest warrant was issued for Mouritsen based on the charges in the indictment.  He had an initial appearance Thursday.  He entered a plea of not guilty to the charges.  A one-week jury trial was set for Nov. 4, 2018, before U.S. District Judge Tena Campbell. Mouritsen was released from custody on conditions of pretrial release. The potential maximum penalty for each count of wire fraud is 20 years in federal prison. Money laundering has a potential penalty of 10 years per count.

Indictments are not findings of guilt.  Individuals charged in indictments are presumed innocent unless or until proven guilty in court. 

Special agents of the FBI and the IRS-Criminal Investigation Division are investigating the case.  Attorneys in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Salt Lake City are prosecuting the case.

     

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C93JpyBycs6Wlop3IYWa5dBA8Mf51bRT4De2SKTcZIo
  Last Updated: 2024-04-01 12:16:13 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E