Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

'Flight Risk' and 'Dangerous' -- But Judge Loosens Bail For CEO of DHB Ind.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 04:52 PM
Original message
'Flight Risk' and 'Dangerous' -- But Judge Loosens Bail For CEO of DHB Ind.
Edited on Tue Jun-17-08 05:02 PM by maddezmom
Source: WNBC

POSTED: 4:10 pm EDT June 17, 2008


NEW YORK -- Just days after a convicted CEO faked his own death and fled to avoid prison, a federal judge on Long Island reduced bail conditions for a separate accused corporate crook even though prosecutors maintain he is a "flight risk" and "dangerous."

Judge Joanna Seybert reduced restrictive bail conditions for David Brooks, who ran DHB Industries -- a company that sold bulletproof vests to the military.

Brooks is accused of looting funds and committing securities fraud to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Prosecutors said he then funneled his ill-gotten gains to accounts overseas.

Even though Seybert called Brooks a "danger to the community" because of past threats he allegedly made, she agree to loosen his home confinement. Her new order allows Brooks to leave his Manhattan home unescorted between the hours of 9 a.m. and 10 p.m.

Read more: http://www.wnbc.com/investigations/16634682/detail.html



Is this any way to support the troops?
NBC did a report tonight of the U.S. Army's refusal to switch from Interceptor body armor, which has been in use for decades, to state-of-the art "dragon skin" armor, made by a company called Pinnacle, which in March of 2006 was banned by the Army for use by its soldiers, two months before it was tested, and even though top generals and other dignitaries were knowingly protected by troops who were issued dragon skin, and the CIA also issued the superior dragon skin to its operatives in Iraq. Even the inventor of the Interceptor armor told NBC that dragon skin is far superior to his design, because it's flexible and covers more of the body's vital parts, and that if he were deployed to combat, he'd choose dragon skin.

After listening to the report on Countdown, I decided to do a little bit of digging. What I found is nothing new, just as the reports of our troops being issued defective body armor isn't new (not least to the troops themselves). But new or not, here it is:

Interceptor body armor is manufactured by a company called Point Blank Body Armor, which is a division of DHB Industries out of right down here in Pompano Beach, Florida (they also have offices in Deerfield Beach, Oakland Park, Jacksboro, TN and Washington D.C).

DHB has a retired 4 star general as its president, a retired California State Senator (William Campbell) as its chairman of the board, and as of March of this year, and a retired Marine general (Lt. Gen. Martin Berndt) as one of its directors. The company announced that it had received some $248 million in contracts to supply the U.S. Army with body armor. According to a January press release:


January 16, 2007

DHB INDUSTRIES ANNOUNCES $82 MILLION IN CONTRACT ORDERS WITH THE U.S. ARMY AND UPDATES 2006 CASH RECEIPTS

Pompano Beach, Florida – DHB Industries Inc. (OTC Pink Sheets: DHBT.PK), a leader in the field of protective body armor, announced today that it had received orders for approximately $82 million to supply the U.S. Army with the Deltoid Axillary Protection System (DAPS) and the Enhanced Side Ballistic Insert (ESBI). These orders came under contracts awarded to Point Blank Body Armor, one of the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiaries.

New Orders

The Company received an order of approximately $51 million to supply the United States Army with DAPS. The Company anticipates it will begin shipping product against this new order in May 2007 and complete shipments in October 2007. This order is part of the approximately $239 million contract awarded in June 2004, which was subsequently modified to approximately $248 million. Potential orders now remaining on the DAPS three-year contract are about $67 million.
Oh, and the DHB in DHB Industries? It stands for David H. Brooks. A bit about him:
From an article by Katrina Vanden Heuvel published in The Nation on my birthday in 2005:

more:
http://blog.reidreport.com/2007/05/is-this-any-way-to-support-troops.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Tab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. The "dragon skin" stuff has been controversial
and I don't know enough about it in detail to go there, but if the Interceptor product is good, we should use it. If the company president is screwing us we should put him in jail, but that shouldn't detract from the product (given how few alternatives there are). That said, I'm sure there are plenty of people who can run that company more legitimately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tandalayo_Scheisskopf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Dragon Skin is controversial not because it isn't better...
Because it is better. Even the inventor of The Interceptor armor says so. It is controversial because a lot of CYA players in the Pentagon, who awarded the contracts, are loathe to revisit said contracts.

Dragon Skin is clearly superior protection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. It may well be. There are definitely proponents for it.
I was just putting out a disclaimer that I didn't know enough to argue about the merits of one kind of armor over another.

That said, NO company should be ripping off the gov't to that degree, product quality aside. I'm just saying, forget the argument over the merits of the product and just focus on their ethical behavior (such as it is). If he's overcharging and sending overseas, particular money of that quantity, I don't give a goddamn if he invented the cure for cancer. He needs to be held to justice just like you or I would.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. "Forget the argument over the merits of the product".
I wonder if you'd sing the same tune if your ass depended on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. My ass doesn't depend on it and I don't feel qualified to venture an opinion
I would like them to have the best safety equipment available. But this is turning from a discussion of how someone overbilled the army and shoved money away into a discussion of the merits of the product WHICH I DON'T FRICKIN' KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT TO VENTURE AN OPINION ON. What is the discussion? Scamming the government or how good their product is? Even if he was in charge of whatever company it is that makes Dragon Skin it still wouldn't be acceptable to let him overcharge like that and squirrel money away.

Let's try to confine ourself to the question at hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue State Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. For your concideration. Dragon Skin Live Fire Testing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS0pSwdQfbY

Clearly superior. And the general that wrote the letter outlawing DS for the troops was invested in it's competition.

They also threatened the death benefits of soldiers injured or killed wearing DS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. our legal is system is a fucking joke..
so this guy fakes his own death, is deemed a "danger to the community" because of past threats he allegedly made and he's still allowed to leave his home confinement. what a fucking wonderful country we live in. good thing he wasn't in possession of a little weed, otherwise he'd be rotting in a cell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. The article is a little confusing on that point.
He's not the guy who faked his death. A couple of days ago, it was another CEO, in business with the chimps cousin.

This is the same clown who threw a $16 million birthday party for his daughter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. ahhhhh. reading comprehension..
it's what's for dinner! i'll need to do a reread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-17-08 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
9. Bulletproof-less vests
January 7, 2006
New York Times

Pentagon Study Links Fatalities To Body Armor

“A secret Pentagon study has found that as many as 80 percent of the marines who have been killed in Iraq from wounds to the upper body could have survived if they had had extra body armor.

“The ceramic plates in vests now worn by the majority of troops in Iraq cover only some of the chest and back. In at least 74 of the 93 fatal wounds that were analyzed in the Pentagon study of marines from March 2003 through June 2005, bullets and shrapnel struck the marines' shoulders, sides or areas of the torso where the plates do not reach.

“The shortages come down to money and priorities. In 1998, Interceptors (state of the art vests) were available and issued to armies around the world."


The Rise and Fall of a War Profiteer

by Sarah Anderson, AlterNet
July 13th, 2006

In November 2005, bulletproof vest maker David H. Brooks made national headlines when he blew a pile of his war windfalls on a celebrity-studded bash in New York City’s Rainbow Room. For Brooks, the highlight of the $10 million gala was a performance by rockers from Aerosmith. So pumped was the middle-aged Long Island businessman that he reportedly donned a hot pink, metal-studded suede pantsuit to cavort onstage with Steven Tyler.

While Brooks was enjoying his rock star fantasy, dark clouds were forming over him and his company, DHB Industries. The stock was in the toilet, the Securities and Exchange Commission was investigating him, and then there was the mood-killing matter of the military recalling his company’s bulletproof vests over concerns about their bulletproofness. In hindsight, the pink-suited Brooks showed all the symptoms of a man who feared his partying days were numbered.

...

Getting shoved out of a company you named after yourself has gotta sting. But Mr. DHB’s forced vacation hardly makes up for the troubles he’s caused shareholders, taxpayers and soldiers as he capitalized on the “War on Terror.”

...

Jim Magee, a retired Marine colonel and former head of DHB’s Point Blank subsidiary, recently told the Washington Post that by hiring only DHB, rather than spreading the work around to the 20 or so qualified companies, the military created a bottleneck that kept many troops in Iraq from having state-of-the-art body armor until nine months after the war began.

...

Over the course of 2005, the Marines and Army recalled a total of 23,000 vests – all of them produced by DHB -- after an investigation by the Marine Corps Times revealed that the vests had failed ballistics tests for stopping 9 mm bullets. The exposé showed that Pentagon officials had dismissed repeated warnings by inspectors.

CorpWatch - Read Full Text

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC