REJECTEDWALL #185
Sam Ikkurty
Posted April 14, 2026
PERMANENT LINKcftcsucks.com/185
PDF Document — 2 pages↓ Download PDF
The Receiver Who Charged More Than
the Alleged Harm
The Receiver Who Charged More Than the Alleged Harm samikkurty.com | Case No.
: -cv- (N.D. Ill.) | th Cir. -
When the CFTC obtained its ex parte asset freeze on May , , it told the court that
investors needed protection. Eleven minutes later, Judge Rowland agreed. A receiver
was appointed — KSR Group, led by Kevin Rowe — without the judge having reviewed
his qualifications. “I trust that Mr. Kopecky has done this before,” she said, confusing
the names of the principals.
Four years later, that trust has cost the estate over $ , in receiver fees and
counting.
Here is the number that makes this unconscionable: according to the CFTC’s own
forensic expert, StoneTurn Group, a Ponzi scheme was mathematically impossible in
this fund. Every one of the investors who put money into Rose City Income Fund
exited with a profit. The mean annualized return was %. Not a single investor lost a
dollar.
So what, precisely, is the receiver protecting?
The receivership was justified on the premise that investors had been harmed. The
premise was false. The CFTC’s own hired expert confirmed it was false. And yet the
receivership continues, the fees accumulate, and the assets that investors voluntarily
committed to a fund that made them money are being consumed by a court-
appointed administrator whose existence was predicated on a lie.
This is not a technicality. This is the core of the injustice. A receiver exists to protect
victims. When there are no victims — when the CFTC’s own expert says there are no
victims — the receiver is not a protector. The receiver is the harm.
The investors who filed formal objection letters with the court (Dkt. - )
understood this. They did not ask for protection. They asked the court to stop the
liquidation. They wrote, in their own words, that they had made money, that they
the Alleged Harm
The Receiver Who Charged More Than the Alleged Harm samikkurty.com | Case No.
: -cv- (N.D. Ill.) | th Cir. -
When the CFTC obtained its ex parte asset freeze on May , , it told the court that
investors needed protection. Eleven minutes later, Judge Rowland agreed. A receiver
was appointed — KSR Group, led by Kevin Rowe — without the judge having reviewed
his qualifications. “I trust that Mr. Kopecky has done this before,” she said, confusing
the names of the principals.
Four years later, that trust has cost the estate over $ , in receiver fees and
counting.
Here is the number that makes this unconscionable: according to the CFTC’s own
forensic expert, StoneTurn Group, a Ponzi scheme was mathematically impossible in
this fund. Every one of the investors who put money into Rose City Income Fund
exited with a profit. The mean annualized return was %. Not a single investor lost a
dollar.
So what, precisely, is the receiver protecting?
The receivership was justified on the premise that investors had been harmed. The
premise was false. The CFTC’s own hired expert confirmed it was false. And yet the
receivership continues, the fees accumulate, and the assets that investors voluntarily
committed to a fund that made them money are being consumed by a court-
appointed administrator whose existence was predicated on a lie.
This is not a technicality. This is the core of the injustice. A receiver exists to protect
victims. When there are no victims — when the CFTC’s own expert says there are no
victims — the receiver is not a protector. The receiver is the harm.
The investors who filed formal objection letters with the court (Dkt. - )
understood this. They did not ask for protection. They asked the court to stop the
liquidation. They wrote, in their own words, that they had made money, that they
trusted the fund manager, and that the CFTC’s intervention was destroying the very
value they had earned.
The court ignored them. The receiver kept billing.
$ , in fees. Zero investor losses. One question: who is the CFTC protecting?
Read the full receiver fee records and investor objection letters at samikkurty.com.
value they had earned.
The court ignored them. The receiver kept billing.
$ , in fees. Zero investor losses. One question: who is the CFTC protecting?
Read the full receiver fee records and investor objection letters at samikkurty.com.
Share this record
VERIFICATION RECORD
Submission trackF
StatusREJECTED
Posted2026-04-14T08:14:14.000Z
SHA-256 hashd37f3dd4edf93106077a72c4148a30b991c34d77c84e0eb6974d4fabc984c068
Permanent record. This document is permanently archived on Arweave — a decentralised storage network — where it will persist independently of this website, any server, or any court order. The SHA-256 hash above cryptographically proves the document has not been altered since archiving.