Let's look at those dates:
- 2/13/08 Purchase of the subject home by Mr. Romney's company.
- 2/19/08 Sale of property by Mr. Romney to the man who posed as Bernardo Barrera. The state alleges that a HUD-1 closing statement was faxed to the lender indicating that the earnest money was already paid.
- 2/20/08 Citi mortgage wire transferred loan proceeds to attorneys trust account.
- 2/21/08 Michael Martinez purchases a cashiers check for $123,530.56 made payable to attorneys trust account.
- 2/22/08 Proceeds from the closing were disbursed to seller (Romney).
- 2/27/08 Cashiers check purchased by Martinez is deposited into the attorneys escrow account.
I'll leave you with the following issues to ponder till tomorrow:
- Why were essential details regarding the possession of the cashiers check representing the "earnest money" required for the closing intentionally left out of the arrest affidavit?
- If indeed the attorney was in on the fraud, why was a cashiers check for the "earnest money" even required?
- If indeed the attorney was in on the fraud, why was it necessary to involve another conspirator who was paid an additional $10,000 for his involvement out of Romney's cut of the profit?
- For that matter, If the attorney was in on it, why did they need an impostor to go to the closing and pose as Bernardo Barrera?
- And most importantly, If indeed the attorney was in on the fraud, as the state alleges, why can't I find any proof in the states case file of a "payoff" to the attorney for her involvement?