On July 20, 2017 I posted Trapped In A RICO Chamber, noting first that a Suspicious Activity Report prepared for the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre had been written by Dave Sweigert and published online, featuring his findings against James de la Boursodiere AKA Chinada3. I was amused that one of the submissions of evidence dealt with some doves which were seen in a home YouTube video, deemed by Sweigert to be a health hazard to the surrounding area of Brossard. Reference was also made to the alleged implication of his subject in “several grand thefts occurring in the United States” involving “alleged deceptive collection of wire fraud funds” based on complaints made to Ripoff Reports.com.
So who is this Chinada3, who has had various and sundry videos removed from YouTube by Dave Sweigert? A June 18, 2017 submission to VOAT.co by Chinada3 gives insight into a possible prior history of comment exchanges between himself and Dave Acton aka Dave Sweigert. I am not sure how far back their first contacts with each other goes, or what started this adversarial relationship, but at this point Dave Sweigert is displaying the Litigator aspect of his personality.
Chinada3 says in the above comment, “If you look into Dave Acton on YouTube you can see he has been manipulating YTcreators behind the scenes as a troll for about 6 years or since 2011, during Sandy Hook he also humiliated people who made videos about the Fakery”. He goes on to say that “dave(sp) primary role on youtube is a channel stalker”. Chinada3 gives a link to a Ripoff Report complaint which references his Canadian father’s legal trademark in the USA, plus other internet links which tie in with his comments.
In response to these comments, a letter to the CEO of VOAT Inc. was written and published online by Dave Sweigert, M.Sci. Evidence Preservation Analyst and Expert Witness.The subject line of this undated letter is VOAT user “Chinada3“, and the first line states, “This is your pre-litigation spoliation notice to preserve and safely archive all documents, electronic evidence and other artifacts associated with the subject VOAT user account. As you are well aware, this includes logs of audit trails, registration information for the account holder, access and authentication times, traffic and visitor logs, etc. In short, all electronic evidence (files, messages, etc.) created as part of the subject’s account”.
Dave Sweigert advises that “the subject has been named as a defendant in a wire fraud and racketeering lawsuit alleging crowd-stalking activity in violation of several federal and state civil and/or criminal laws”. The last paragraph of this letter is highlighted WARNING TO OFFICERS OF VOAT, and states, “You are hereby WARNED that VOAT,INC. may be identified as a primary defendant in a wire fraud and racketeering lawsuit, with the subject listed as a co-defendant. It is a prudent and wise action to DELETE this account and remove all offending unfounded and meritless entries posted by the subject. In the alternative, VOAT,INC. should expect litigation in this matter.”
It should be noted that Dave Sweigert had not dated this letter, and there is no proof shown in the public domain that this letter was sent. In fact, the copy which I have quoted has a marking across it, indicating it was on hold. This leads to an interesting question in regard to the sentence which includes this phrase describing James de la Boursodiere being “named as a defendant in a wire fraud and racketeering lawsuit”. Using my PACER account, I do not see that a lawsuit has yet to be filed in Federal Court.
And again, as this blog has noted before, it is a strange act on Sweigert’s part to publish in the public domain a draft of a letter involving intent to sue, but using language which leaves the reader wondering if a lawsuit had already been filed. I do not know if his targets have personally received a formal letter at their home addresses stating his pre-litigation intentions to file a lawsuit. The public impression that is left, is that a not-so-amusing game is being played, as Sweigert publishes various documents and videos in the public domain, and then shortly thereafter, removes them.
Here Sweigert mentions in his letter to VOAT, the specific sentences in the VOAT/Chinada3 comment thread, which concerned him the most.
Towards the end of his letter he denies all of the allegations in their entirety, describing them as “falsehoods, misrepresentations and slanderous material” and “directed at injuring the person and career of the undersigned. Personal information has been revealed with a directed call-to-action to harass the undersigned. Unfounded, meritless, and frivolous accusations concerning “cyber-stalking” are made by the subject and hereby DENIED in their entirety.” What Sweigert does not detail in his letter to VOAT is the Suspicious Activity Report which he had prepared for Canadian officials, and which I first noticed on his slideshare account on June 17, 2017, the day prior to the date of Chinada3’s VOAT comments. Context is always an important factor to consider in any controversy.
OK, so let us return to the Suspicious Activity Report which was created by Sweigert on James de la Boursodiere AKA Chinada3. In this document, which I have no proof that it was ever sent, only that it was published for a time on the internet, we see a reference to the “alleged deceptive collection of wire frauds”, based on two complaints on Ripoff Report.com. I found 3, so we will consider the third one also, especially since Chinada3 linked to it in his VOAT comment. The real estate complaints were also found on other similar type websites, compounding the problem if these are false reports.
The first report noted, #1317341, says that this report was filed under Dog Breeders, by TrowBoyd of Santa Monica, CA on July 17, 2016. It targets James de la Boursodiere, and gives a partial USA address and the webpage cowboyd.ca. The comment states, “James de la Boursodiere was odd but took him as a caring Breeder. Not everyone can devote their lives to animals. he seemed genuine, enough and the pics and videos of puppies were beautiful. After a couple of weeks I sent him $4,000 and had my assistant pick up my soon to be my beautiful Bullmastiff pups. Unfortunately, the puppies were Labradore mixes with shepered or something and James de la Boursodiere would not answer the phone, replace my $4,000 or exchange the pups for the Bullmastiffs I paid for. AVOID THIS WEIRDO AT ALL COSTS!”
This comment offers information which is so ludicrous, that one hates to even analyze the falsity of it. First of all, Sweigert lists this report under “alleged deceptive collection of wire fraud funds”. There is nothing in this comment that specifies that the $4,000 was sent via wire or any other type of payment method.
The Ripoff Report complaint references a Canadian website, but gives a partial USA address. Fraudulent internet communications fall under the category of wire fraud, but this complaint does not provide any evidence to prove that any part of this transaction actually took place. One wonders why some person in California who cannot spell basic words, but manages to get a long name spelled correctly, would want to purchase dogs from the other side of the continent. The subject of this complaint, who originates from Quebec, appears to reside in Florida. There is no realism in this complaint scenario, whatsoever.
The Second Ripoff Report #1314072 was submitted on June 28, 2016 by Burnt Toast of Calabasas, CA and gives a business address in Naples, FL for Cowboyd Realtors/Sun Realty. The headline reads, James de la Boursodiere Jamie, Chinada3, Cowboyd Realties, Sun Realty Scam Real Estate Fraud SWITCH-A-ROO BAIT AND SWITCH Naples Florida.
Burnt Toast, who claims familiarity with the online aliases of James de la Boursodiere, but does not state their own legal name, states, “Cowboyd aka Jamesdelab1 aka chinada3 aka Chinada Unstoppable aka Sun Realty advertises properties and services that are VERY appealing. Unfortunately, the sweet promises are nothing but lies! I lost $785,000 on this bogus front of a company. They work out of Naples, Florida and supposedly from Canada. My money went into escrow and this guy “Cowboyd” or “Boyd” with his BIG HOKEY cowbiy hat and huge grin vanished once money was in escrow. the property was not on the up and up. AVOID THIS AT ALL COSTS!!!”
Where have I just read in all caps, AVOID THIS ___AT ALL COSTS! Could it be that we are dealing with the same writer who filed the dog complaint? Now for some reason, which we might be able to guess, Dave Sweigert does not reference the other Realtor complaint, #1314089 which was also lodged against the business, Cowboyd, at the same Florida address. The Complainant on this other Realtor complaint, Art Jennings of Fort Lauderdale, FL submitted his report June 28, 2016, THE SAME DAY as complaint # 1314072 by Burnt Toast. This other report has a rebuttal, proclaiming it to be a bunch of malicious lies.
Perhaps Sweigert did not list this other Realtor complaint in the Suspicious Activity Report so that the Canadian Anti-Fraud Division would not wonder about the odd coincidence that two Realtor complaints were filed the same day, when no other complaints are on record against this target whatsoever.
The “unmentioned” complaint (#1314089) states, “Found Boyd and his “son” James online during the finalization of my divorce and relocation. They were hospitable, even charming. They showed me many properties in Florida and even a few in Quebec. They are lovers, I’m certain of it. Found an Apartment building for a great price and all seemed almost too easy, and it was. Sale went thru, $565,444 in escrow pending health dep final approval and code city approval for remodel. Calls stopped being returned and after a month of getting no straight answers I went down to the office at Sun Realty and they were GONE. Vanished! money gone unless the police can recover it. Learn from my naivete. These jokers are conmen.”
There were two rebuttals as shown below:I looked up the Canadian company, and also Sun Realty USA, which is owned by a different person from the father of James de la Boursodiere. Both these businesses have a stable history, and there is no indication that anyone has vanished or could not be reached.
Again, the stories are improbable scenarios. Anyone who has cash in the six digit range would most likely be an astute business minded person who would not depart from standard real estate procedures for closing a sale. Additionally, if this were not a straight cash sale, no finance company is going to fund a real estate transaction until all the paperwork is in order, as arranged by a bonded title company.
And if there had been such an actual fraud, the loser of such enormous amounts of money would be pursuing the realtors with criminal and civil complaints. I could not locate in the public domain of online information anything to substantiate that such crimes had a basis in reality. The reports filed with Ripoff Reports would appear to be acts of defamation, which give rise to the question as to who submitted these complaints in the first place?
As we can see, many allegations which are made by one party against another, when examined using common sense, melt like snow in a spring thaw.