“I didn’t run a Ponzi scheme, I didn’t defraud anybody, and there was never any intent to defraud anybody,” Mr. Stanford, wearing a green prison jumpsuit, told U.S. District Court Judge David Hittner before he was sentenced [to 110 years in prison]. [WSJ]
U.S. prosecutors have urged a judge to send convicted financier Allen Stanford to prison for 230 years, calling him a “ruthless predator” whose $7 billion Ponzi scheme was among the most egregious frauds ever undertaken. Such a sentence, the maximum recommended under federal sentencing guidelines, would be 80 years longer than Bernard Madoff got in 2009 for his Ponzi scheme, and according to prosecutors reflects Stanford’s place as “among the greediest, most selfish, and utterly remorseless criminals.” Stanford’s lawyers are seeking a prison term of 31 to 44 months for their client, which could result in his immediate release because he has already been in custody for three years, according to the government. [Reuters]
Remember when alleged Ponzi-schemer Allen Stanford was beaten so severely that he lost feeling in the right side of his face and landed in the hospital looking like that? His lawyers say his brain was “injured” as a result, that he has a “major depressive disorder,” is addicted to anti-anxiety drugs and is “not competent to stand trial.” At least one doctor agrees, having testified that Stanford “is not able to work effectively, rationally, with his attorneys to develop a defense against the charges.” Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregg Costa, however, isn’t buying it. Read more »
Last May, accused Ponzi schemer Allen Stanford’s lawyers asked that their clients be let out of prison for two reasons. 1) Keeping him there ahead of his trial, scheduled to start in January 2011, was unconstitutional and 2) he was getting this shit beat out of him, including one incident in which he was “so savagely beaten that he lost all feeling in the right side of his face and lost near-field vision in his right eye. The court decided not to let him out and he has again been roughed up a bit. Read more »
Allen Stanford Wants Out Of Prison, Claims Constitutional Rights, Among Other Things, Are Being ViolatedBy Bess Levin
Hey remember Allen Stanford? It’s been a while, hasn’t it? When we last checked in with the accused Ponzier, in December, a prison psychologist was arguing that if the guy wasn’t let out of jail ASAP, it was very likely he’d “a complete nervous breakdown.” Apparently that wasn’t a convincing argument for those who make the decisions as to whether or not people are just allowed to up and leave because he’s still there, asking to be freed. Stanford, who never recovered after the SEC robbed him of being listed as the 405th wealthiest person in the world by Forbes, said in a filing that he should be cut loose because 1) keeping him behind bars is unconstitutional 2) he’s been getting some serious shit kicked out of him.
In a filing on Tuesday with the federal court in Houston, lawyers for Stanford said their client had been “subjected to substantial and undeniable punishment,” including nearly a year of incarceration and both physical and psychological damage. This and the prospect of more than a year of further custody until and during his trial, which is scheduled to start in January 2011, violates his constitutional rights to due process, effective assistance of counsel, a speedy trial, and an absence of excessive bail, the lawyers said. “When Mr. Stanford surrendered to authorities, he was a healthy 59-year-old man,” Stanford’s Houston-based lawyer, Robert Bennett, wrote in a brief on which Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz consulted.
If accused Ponzi schemer Allen Stanford is not released from the big house on bail, it’s very likely that he will go batshit insane, according to a prison psychologist. This is sad for a couple of reasons: 1) it sounds like he really might be losing it and should be let out and 2) no more prison yard brawls for us.
A psychiatrist who examined R. Allen Stanford believes he is in danger of suffering “a complete nervous breakdown” if he is not released from prison on bail and allowed to properly prepare for his scheduled criminal trial, according to court documents.
In documents asking that the jailed businessman be released on bail, attorneys argue Stanford’s deteriorating mental and physical health, combined with the difficulty of seeing his attorneys while at the downtown Houston Federal Detention Center, make it impossible for him to properly prepare for trial.
This one didn’t come at the hands of a fellow inmate but everyone on the inside would be wise to stay out of Sir Stan’s way to today, as odds are he is in a mood. One word– and I mean one!– and you’re gonna get punched in the mouth. We knew this was coming but no one could’ve prepared us for what it would feel like to see that Stanford, officially, was not named one of the Forbes 400. The incarcerated Ponzier told ABC in April that what’s been so upsetting to him through this entire ordeal of being accused of fraud is not the going to prison part (it’s actually not that bad), not the dragging of his name through the mud, and not the loss of his investors’ trust. What really chafes– and what brought him to tears at the time and probably still now– is that the actions taken by the SEC “deprived” him of being publicly recognized as one of the richest guys in the world. So what you can do right now, Mary Schapiro, is go to hell. Go to hell and die.
And yet! We are pleased to a whole bunch of our favorite money managers made the cut! Despite many of them taking it up the tailpipe last year, they were able to pull through, which brings us immesurable joy. Hopefully their investors can “big picture” it and see things the same way, particularly those in Kensington and Wellington. It’s not all about you. Just be happy for him. Lastly, we’re told PTJ has decided that this achievement will be the thing that finally gets him to make his fantasy of fucking on a bed of fried chicken* a reality. There’s no other way to properly celebrate. Sign up now.
*Or should it be a handy in the bathroom of the Norwalk KFC (his prefered location)? I couldn’t decide.
The SEC is finding new and creative ways to tarnish its image. After estimating that it would recover close to $1 billion in assets in the Stanford fraud case, the SEC now finds itself shoulder to shoulder with the guy they intend to prosecute. The receiver in the Stanford case, Ralph Janvey, has petitioned the court to approve $20 million in fees and expenses for work performed on the case since February. However, when the SEC discovered its recovery estimate was about $650 million too high, it petitioned the court to reduce the amount due to the receiver. Team SEC/Stanford have an uphill battle on their hands.
“None of the professionals was retained with the understanding that they would be subjected to deep discounts if the recoverable estate assets were less than the SEC expected,” the court filing said.
You just knew something wasn’t right with Sir Allen Stanford. Too loud. Too bold. Too self-promoting. Totally out of the mold for the quiet, offshore banking empire he was supposed to be heading. How would it be that anyone so loud would fail to attract the notice of the Regulatori for so many years? Well, if the Regulatori had reason to ignore him, as one of their own. If, say, Stanford were an informant for the DEA, and other narcodollar sniffing parties.
His status as a confidential informant could have secured Stanford a degree of protection from financial regulators such as the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and may explain why a SEC investigation into his dealings in 2006 was quietly dropped following a request by another American government agency.
A source close to the DEA told Panorama: “We were convinced that Stanford’s bank attracted millions of narco-dollars but it was very difficult to get the evidence to nail him. The word is that Stanford has been a confidential informer for the DEA since at least 1999.”
Be as loud as you want Sir Allen.
Stanford ‘was informant for US anti-drug agents’ [The Independent]