ILNews

Prosecution wants 20-year sentence for Conour, now accused of stealing nearly $7 million

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Citing his lack of remorse for the theft of nearly $7 million from clients over the years, federal prosecutors want former wrongful-death and personal-injury attorney William Conour sentenced to the maximum term of 20 years Thursday, according to a sentencing memorandum filed Tuesday.

Conour “stole nearly $7 million … from his clients to finance his lavish lifestyle,” the government says. Previously, Conour had been accused of defrauding more than 25 clients of at least $4.5 million.

The federal government says Conour should be sentenced Thursday to the maximum term of 20 years in prison and that seven of his victims should have the opportunity to offer victim-impact statements.

“He has never shown remorse for his actions nor truly accepted responsibility for his conduct,” the government says. Factors including the vulnerability of victims, number of victims and Conour’s deception of the court support imposing the maximum penalty, according to the filing.

Michael Donahoe, Conour’s court-appointed public defender, could not be immediately reached for comment.

“The scheme began by at least 2008 and continued until at least 2012. ... Thus, through the use of the trust accounts and settlement agreements, the defendant was able to execute his scheme and avoid detection for four years while he defrauded 36 victims of almost $7 million,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason Bohm wrote in the memorandum.

Conour is scheduled to be sentenced at 2 p.m. Thursday by Chief Judge Richard Young of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. While Young hasn’t acted on the request to allow victim statements, he previously indicated in court that he would be inclined to let victims have their say.

Conour pleaded guilty to a single count of wire fraud in July, days after Young ordered Conour’s bond revoked for dissipating assets without court approval. Conour has been in the Marion County Jail since.

Tuesday’s filing characterizes a few of his victims. “A man, paralyzed as the result of his accident, now requires state aid for medical treatment rather than money he should have received. A woman died indigent in a nursing home, while more than $200,000 sat in a 'trust' account for her benefit. A mother and her children struggle to get by after their husband and father’s death. The money that should have supported them and paid for college is gone. Some funds have been recovered for these victims. It is unlikely, however, that they will be made whole.”

To date, about $500,000 has been contributed to a court fund for restitution. That includes $450,000 from Indiana University, which returned a contribution for the naming of the former William and Jennifer Conour Atrium at the Robert H. McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis, as well as $30,000 from the Indiana Trial Lawyers Association.

One of Conour’s daughters, identified in court papers as A.K., also this week received court approval to donate $20,000 to the court fund. The fund also will be supplemented with the post-sentencing sale of Conour’s assets — mainly home furnishings, art and home furnishings.
 
The prosecution’s sentencing memorandum says Conour presented himself in promotional videos for his former law firm as a professional and ethical attorney dedicated to helping clients, but who in reality was stealing from those victims to feed a lifestyle of Bentley, Mercedes-Benz and Porsche automobiles, mansions and horse farms.

“Rather than serving his clients, the defendant understood the legal system and consistently exploited it to his advantage,” the sentencing memorandum says. “His clients were largely naïve to the legal system and relied on the defendant to navigate the system for them. They also relied on the settlements of their claims for compensation to replace either their inability to work or the permanent loss of a wage earner.

“In exchange for ‘his services,’ the defendant generally took 40 percent of the settlement in attorney’s fees. For the 36 identified victims in this case, the defendant was paid nearly $3.5 million dollars in attorney’s fees and nearly $100,000 in expenses. The defendant, however, stole another $6.7 million from his clients through the use of false annuities, fraudulent trusts, and general deception. He used that money to further his lavish lifestyle and to pay other clients for previous settlements, similar to a Ponzi-scheme.”

The sophistication of the scheme and Conour’s violation of a court order support an enhanced sentence, the government argues in objecting to the confidential presentence investigative report prepared by the federal probation department.

“In this case, the defendant’s complex and intricate use of trust accounts and structured settlements demonstrates that his scheme involved more planning and concealment than a typical fraud. As part of the scheme, the defendant created at least 14 separate trust accounts with an Ohio financial institution, even though his personal injury practice was located in Indiana,” according to the government.

“When he negotiated settlements on behalf of his personal injury clients, he convinced many of those clients to accept a structured settlement rather than a lump-sum settlement. The use of the trust accounts and the structured settlements allowed the defendant both to execute his scheme and to avoid detection.

“More specifically, it allowed him to execute his scheme based on the trust agreement that he had negotiated with the Ohio financial institution. The agreement allowed him to fund the trusts on a yearly basis with funds only sufficient to enable the financial institution to issue monthly checks for a year, thereby allowing the defendant to illegally retain the bulk of the settlements for his own purposes,” the sentencing memorandum says.  

The filing notes that Conour told the court that the failure to pay clients was a cash flow problem. “The truth, however, is that the defendant did not steal his clients’ money because of cash flow problems or business expenses. He stole it to fill his wine cellar with Dom Perignon and Cristal. He stole it to take trips around the world. He stole it to enrich himself.”
    

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • My license to satire
    John, yep, me and Lenny Bruce. No awards http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tw0q9A9-pE0
  • LOLs
    Bryan, for jokes like that you would lose your license as a comedian, too!
  • Credit where credit is due
    Sara, it is good that the proper authorities were on their toes, else Conour might have gotten away with it his entire life instead of a mere dozen or so years.
  • What?
    William Conours scheme started at least as early as 1998 or 1999 when he settled the case for my son! And my son is a victim; I surely hope we have the chance to speak because he needs to hear how his selfish ways effected the victims!
  • Say I say I say boy
    “That’s a joke, I say that’s a joke son” (Almost satire that is, satire, son) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTwnwbG9YLE
  • On the bright side
    I think I speak for all of the leading judicial bureacrats in Indy when I say THANK ZEUS attorney Conour was not so evil as to file a motion to recuse a judge or so craven as to send a private letter criticizing a judge. At least he does have that going for him as to mitigation.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

    2. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

    3. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

    4. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

    5. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

    ADVERTISEMENT