CyberCriminal.com

Lawrence Jenkins

We are investigating Lawrence Jenkins 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 : Lawrence Jenkins

ALLEGATIONS : Perjury, Fraud, Impersonation

INCIDENT DATE : May 29, 2024

INVESTIGATED BY : Ethan Katz

TOOLS USED : Lumen, SecurityTrails

CASE NO : 4532/A/2025

CRIME TYPE : Intellectual Property Scam

PUBLISHED ON : 27 Mar 2025

Lawrence Jenkins
Due Diligence
Get everything we know about Lawrence Jenkins 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 Lawrence Jenkins 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 Lawrence Jenkins - 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

Lawrence Jenkins, a name that has surfaced in multiple legal documents and news reports, has been associated with various allegations of financial misconduct over the years. These incidents raise significant concerns for potential investors and warrant attention from regulatory authorities.​

Securities Fraud Allegations

In April 2007, the Utah Division of Securities and the Utah Attorney General’s Office filed securities fraud charges against Lawrence Jenkins of Draper and Lamar N. Jensen of Salt Lake City. The charges stemmed from an alleged scheme in which the two men approached a Utah County real estate investment firm, promising a 100 percent return within one week on a $500,000 investment through medium-term bank notes. Additionally, they offered a $50 million line of credit with interest no greater than 6 percent, among other perks. The investment firm transferred the funds but reportedly did not receive any return on their investment.

Legal Entanglements and Financial Misconduct

Further complicating Jenkins’s financial history are legal disputes such as Bayne v. Jenkins. In this case, multiple plaintiffs contested promissory notes related to a securities sale. While the jury sided with Jenkins, ruling in his favor regarding the plaintiffs’ claims and awarding him $140,000 on his counterclaim, the case underscores the contentious nature of his financial dealings. ​

Efforts to Suppress Negative Information

Individuals with histories of financial misconduct often seek to suppress adverse media to protect their reputations and maintain access to investment opportunities. While specific instances of Jenkins attempting to censor information are not detailed in the available sources, it is common for individuals facing such allegations to pursue legal action, issue cease-and-desist letters, or engage in online reputation management strategies to remove or bury unfavorable content.​

Conclusion

The pattern of allegations and legal disputes associated with Lawrence Jenkins raises significant red flags for potential investors. While everyone is entitled to defend their reputation, the consistent emergence of financial misconduct claims suggests a need for caution. Investors are advised to conduct thorough due diligence and remain vigilant when considering opportunities linked to individuals with such histories.

  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/41891462
  • May 29, 2024
  • Utento Inc
  • https://nycnewsgroup.com/2-utahns-charged-in-securities-fraud/
  • https://www.deseret.com/2007/4/18/20013610/2-utahns-charged-in-securities-fraud

Evidence Box

Evidence and relevant screenshots related to our investigation

Targeted Content and Red Flags

deseret.com

2 Utahns charged in securities fraud

  • Removed
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