CyberCriminal.com

John Monarch

We are investigating John Monarch for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury.

PARTIES INVOLVED : John Monarch

ALLEGATIONS : Perjury, Fraud, Impersonation

INCIDENT DATE : 27 Sep 2021

INVESTIGATED BY : Ethan Katz

TOOLS USED : Lumen, SecurityTrails

CASE NO : 6894/A/2024

CRIME TYPE : Intellectual Property Scam

PUBLISHED ON : 18 Mar 2025

John Monarch
Due Diligence
Get everything we know about John Monarch in one downloadable PDF document
Is This About You?
We encourage you to share details of the actual perpetrators and get your story straight.

What We Are Investigating?

Our firm is launching a comprehensive investigation into John Monarch over allegations that it has been suppressing critical reviews and unfavorable Google search results by fraudulently misusing DMCA takedown notices. These actions, if proven, could constitute serious legal violations—including impersonation, fraud, and perjury.

We conducted comprehensive analyses of fraudulent copyright takedown requests, meritless legal complaints, and other unlawful efforts to suppress public access to critical information. Our reporting sheds light on the prevalence and modus operandi of a structured censorship network, often funded and used by criminal enterprises, oligarchs and criminal entities seeking to manipulate public perception and bypass AML checks conducted by financial organisations.

The fake DMCA notices in this investigation appears to have been strategically deployed to remove negative content from Google search results illegally. Based on this pattern, we have reasonable grounds to infer that John Monarch - or an entity acting at its behest - is directly or indirectly complicit in this cyber crime.

In most such cases, such ops are executed by rogue, fly-by-night 'Online Reputation Management' agencies acting on behalf of their clients. If evidence establishes that the subject knowingly benefited from or facilitated this scam, it may be deemed an 'accomplice' or an 'accessory' to the crime.

What are they trying to censor

John Monarch—a name that once carried the allure of blockchain innovation but now serves as a cautionary tale of alleged financial misconduct, regulatory clashes, and image control. Monarch, the former CEO of ShipChain, has been at the center of multiple controversies, including regulatory enforcement actions and accusations of financial fraud. Yet, despite the glaring red flags, there seems to be a deliberate effort to rewrite history—or at least bury it deep enough that only the most persistent investigators can uncover it.

The ShipChain Debacle: When Ambition Outpaces Compliance

Monarch’s most notable venture, ShipChain, started with grand promises of disrupting the logistics industry through blockchain technology. The concept was enticing: greater transparency, improved efficiency, and reduced costs in supply chains. But like so many blockchain startups during the ICO boom, ShipChain’s aspirations quickly collided with regulatory reality.

In December 2020, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) charged ShipChain with conducting an unregistered securities offering. The company had raised $27.6 million through its ICO—without the necessary registration, making the offering illegal. As part of the settlement, ShipChain agreed to pay a $2.05 million penalty and cease operations. Investors were left holding the bag, watching their investments evaporate into the void of regulatory non-compliance.

The $100 Million Bank Fraud Allegation

Just when you thought Monarch’s troubles couldn’t get any worse, reports linked him to a $100 million bank fraud scheme. While details around this case remain murky, the mere association with such an enormous financial scandal raises serious concerns about his business ethics. This alleged involvement further taints his credibility and raises red flags about his potential future ventures.

The Online Reputation Scrub: Burying the Evidence

In a textbook case of image laundering, Monarch appears to have deployed aggressive reputation management tactics to suppress negative content about his past. When digging deeper into his digital footprint, the scarcity of critical media coverage compared to the scale of the allegations is striking.

Here’s what appears to be happening behind the scenes:

  1. Flooding with Positive Content:
    There’s an influx of polished, self-promotional content painting Monarch as a tech-savvy entrepreneur and logistics visionary. This content, often filled with buzzwords like “innovative” and “trailblazer,” attempts to crowd out the negative press.

  2. DMCA Takedown Abuse:
    Monarch has reportedly filed multiple fraudulent Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notices. These notices target negative articles, alleging copyright infringement to have them removed from search engines. This strategy, while legally questionable, is a popular tool for reputation management firms looking to sanitize the web.

  3. Fake or Duplicate Websites:
    Another tactic commonly used in such cases is the creation of fake or duplicated websites that mimic genuine news sources. These copies are backdated to predate original, unfavorable reports. This creates a false claim of copyright ownership, allowing them to file fraudulent DMCA notices against the legitimate content.

  4. Legal Threats and Intimidation:
    Some whistleblowers and journalists have reported receiving legal threats from Monarch’s representatives. This intimidation strategy seeks to silence critics and prevent the spread of damaging information.

The Veneer of Legitimacy: The Carefully Curated Personal Brand

If you visit John Monarch’s personal website today, you’ll be greeted with a sleek, professional platform showcasing him as a technology and supply chain expert. The site is meticulously curated with professional headshots, carefully worded bios, and blog posts positioning him as a thought leader in logistics and blockchain.

No mention of ShipChain’s SEC troubles. No references to the bank fraud allegations. Just a picture-perfect entrepreneur, seemingly unfazed by his turbulent past.

This glaring disconnect between the digital persona and the documented reality is a classic indicator of online reputation manipulation.

The Investor’s Dilemma: Why It Matters

For potential investors or business partners, the John Monarch case underscores a vital lesson: always look beyond the surface. It’s easy to be seduced by the glossy personal branding and tech jargon, but the trail of regulatory actions and financial controversies tells a different story.

Would you trust your money with someone linked to a failed ICO mired in legal trouble? Would you do business with an individual allegedly connected to a $100 million bank fraud? If the answer is no, you’re already ahead of the game.

The Call for Regulatory Oversight

While the SEC’s enforcement action was a step in the right direction, Monarch’s ongoing efforts to sanitize his image reveal a systemic issue. Regulatory bodies must not only punish financial misconduct but also remain vigilant against tactics designed to erase public accountability.

Moreover, tech platforms and search engines need to tighten their verification processes for DMCA claims. Abusive and fraudulent takedowns not only obstruct legitimate journalism but also enable bad actors to rewrite their histories.

Conclusion

John Monarch’s story is a masterclass in how financial missteps and regulatory crackdowns can be whitewashed through aggressive reputation management. From ShipChain’s implosion to his alleged connection with bank fraud, the trail of red flags is impossible to ignore—unless, of course, you’re only relying on the sanitized digital version of the truth.

For investors, this case serves as a cautionary tale. Do your due diligence, question the glowing profiles, and always look for the buried skeletons. Because in the world of finance and tech, the most dangerous players are often the ones with the cleanest public profiles.

  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/25270387
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/28310734
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/28255748
  • September 27, 2021
  • August 01, 2022
  • July 27, 2022
  • Eli Segall
  • Eli Segall
  • Eli Segall
  • https://legalelisegall.tumblr.com/post/663459438395588608/john-monarch-ceo-of-shipchainsued-for-alleged
  • https://singaporesling2000.tumblr.com/post/691404335196815360/john20monarch20shutdown20by20the20sec20has20lin
  • https://legalelisegall.tumblr.com/post/663459438395588608/john-monarch-ceo-of-shipchainsued-for-alleged
  • https://usaherald.com/john-monarch-ceo-shipchain-sued-alleged-bitcoin-cryptocurrency-scheme/
  • https://usaherald.com/john-monarch-shutdown-by-the-sec-has-links-to-100m-alleged-bank-fraud-scheme/

Evidence Box

Evidence and relevant screenshots related to our investigation

Targeted Content and Red Flags

usaherald

John Monarch, CEO of Shipchain, Sued for Alleged Bitcoin Cryptocurrency Scheme

  • Red Flag
Visit Link

usaherald

John Monarch, Shutdown by the SEC, Has Links to $100M+ Alleged Bank Fraud Scheme

  • Red Flag
Visit Link

scribd

Lawsuit Filed Against Shipchain and Its Founder John Monarch & Attorney Aaron Kelly

  • Adverse News
Visit Link

About the Author

The author is affiliated with TU Dresden and analyzes public databases such as Lumen Database and Maltego to identify and expose online censorship. In his personal capacity, he and his team have been actively investigating and reporting on organized crime related to fraudulent copyright takedown schemes.

Additionally, his team provides advisory services to major law firms and is frequently consulted on matters pertaining to intellectual property law.

Escalate This Case
Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Checkboxes

Learn All About Fake Copyright Takedown Scam

Or go directly to the feedback section and share your thoughts

How This Was Done

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the 'back-dated article' technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a 'true original' article and back-dates it, creating a 'fake original' article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original

What Happens Next?

Based on the feedback, information, and requests received from all relevant parties, our team will formally notify the affected party of the alleged infringement. Following a thorough review, we will submit a counter-notice to reinstate any link that has been removed by Google, in accordance with applicable legal provisions. Additionally, we will communicate with Google’s Legal Team to ensure appropriate measures are taken to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.

You are Never Alone in Your Fight.

Generate public support against the ones who wronged you!

User Reviews

Website Reviews

Stop fraud before it happens with unbeatable speed, scale, depth, and breadth.

Recent Reviews

Cyber Investigation

Uncover hidden digital threats and secure your assets with our expert cyber investigation services.

Recent Investigation

Threat Alerts

Stay ahead of cyber threats with our daily list of the latest alerts and vulnerabilities.

Threat Alerts

Client Dashboard

Your trusted source for breaking news and insights on cybercrime and digital security trends.

Client Login