An indirect victim of Walter Noel

French banker Thierry de la Villehuchet’s suicide

After my story appeared, Monica complained she didn’t like the social criticisms it had made about the family–namely that they had tried to get into the Shinnecock Hills Golf Club, and had been blackballed from the Bathing Corporation of Southampton. These seemed to be her chief concerns. So imagine my dismay when something I’d heard a couple of weeks ago was confirmed two days ago–too late to be included in the original piece, but not too late to state here, or on MSNBC’sMorning Joe yesterday morning.

Thierry de la Villehuchet, the 65-year-old French-born financier who tragically killed himself on the night of December 22 in the New York offices of Access International, had sold–and subsequently lost–a $1.4 billion fund with exposure to Madoff to many of his French and European friends. It was recently explained to me that he had also invested his own money with Fairfield Greenwich. (When an F.G.G. spokesperson was asked about this, he responded, “A senior officer at Fairfield Greenwich has searched its records and found that the company has no shareholder of record in any Fairfield Greenwich funds by his name or his fund’s name.)

Suddenly the Noels’ concern with their social status seemed glaring. Why focus on criticisms of your social life when a man who was a friend and client of the family business is dead and others who invested with you have been financially ruined?


Filed under Uncategorized

2 responses to “An indirect victim of Walter Noel

  1. PrimeTimeMom

    I can’t even find words to describe the Noel’s mindset. Egregiously narcissistic, entitled sociopaths committing social suicide come to mind although “pond dredge” is probably a more apt term. Ugh, if there is an afterlife I hope I do not spend it in proximity to the Noel’s. I feel dirty being on the other side of the country from them.

    :::off to take an aromatherapy bath:::

  2. waltssoninlaw

    Now they are estimating Bernie’s fraud may have only been a mere $20 billion. Which means FFG % of Bernie’s overall fund may have been as high as 30%.
    Still don’t understand the $60 million FFG claims to have “lost”. Why is it such a small amount? If FFG was paid approx $250m per year from Bernie – why would they only have a personal exposure of only $60m and did that $60m actually include fees owed rather than personal investment? In other words, were the FFG gang lining their pockets with client fees but did not believe enough in Bernie to put the majority of their own money in his hands? That will be an interesting question from the prosecution.

    My bet… Bernie will cut a deal – he’s already 70 so he probably won’t last even 10 years in the can. So I bet they offer him a reduced sentance to 10 years and let Ruthie keep some of her ill gotten cash – enough so she doesn’t have to work at the make counter at Macy’s – if Bernie helps nail all these Feeder Fund clowns – Jaffe, Noel, the bumbling sons in law, the guy in LA who was stealing from A list actors, etc. Could be more fun if he does co-operate.