It is against federal law to engage in such conduct against certain financial institutions. For a jury to find you guilty of this crime they must be convinced that the government has proven each of these things beyond a reasonable doubt:
- A scheme, substantially as charged in the indictment, to defraud a financial institution or to obtain a financial institution’s money by means of false or fraudulent pretenses.
- A defendant’s knowing and willful participation in this scheme with the intent to defraud or to obtain money by means of false or fraudulent pretenses.
- The financial institution was federally insured or was a federal reserve bank or a member of the federal reserve system.
A scheme includes any plan, pattern or course of action. The term “defraud” means to deceive the bank in order to obtain money or other property by misrepresenting or concealing a material fact. It includes a scheme to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.
The term “false or fraudulent pretenses” means any false statements or assertions that concern a material aspect of the matter in question, that were either known to be untrue when made or made with reckless indifference to their truth and that were made with the intent to defraud. They include actual, direct false statements as well as half- truths and the knowing concealment of facts.
A “material” fact or matter is one that has a natural tendency to influence or be capable of influencing the decision of the decisionmaker to whom it was addressed. a defendant acted “knowingly” if they were conscious and aware of their actions, realized what they were doing or what was happening around them, and did not act because of ignorance, mistake or accident.
An act or failure to act is “willful” if done voluntarily and intentionally, and with the specific intent to do something the law forbids, or with specific intent to fail to do something the law requires to be done; that is to say, with bad purpose either to disobey or to disregard the law.
Intent or knowledge may not ordinarily be proven directly because there is no way of directly scrutinizing the workings of the human mind. In determining what a defendant knew or intended at a particular time, a jury may consider any statements made or acts done or omitted by a defendant and all other facts and circumstances received in evidence that may aid in the jury's determination of a defendant’s knowledge or intent. A jury may infer, but is certainly not required to infer, that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of acts knowingly done or knowingly omitted. It is entirely up to a jury, however, to decide what facts are proven by the evidence received during this trial.
The government need not prove that the scheme was successful, that the financial institutions suffered a financial loss, that the defendant knew that the victim of the scheme was a federally insured financial institution federal reserve bank; member of the federal reserve system or that the defendant secured a financial gain.