Interesting Facts:
Thief who steals thief has one hundred years of pardon.
Lying and stealing are next door neighbors.

Las víctimas olvidadas de Stanford, ahora disponible en español en:

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Allen Stanford thinks he is his best attorney

Allen Stanford thinks he is his best attorney
Text Size Published: Wednesday, 31 Jul 2013 | 7:32 PM ET By: Scott Cohn | CNBC Senior Correspondent

Craig Hartley | Bloomberg | Getty Images
R. Allen StanfordConvicted fraudster Allen Stanford—who has at one time or another been represented by 18 different attorneys—has now decided the best person for the job is himself.

Writing from the federal prison in Florida where he is serving a 110-year sentence for his role in a $7 billion international Ponzi scheme, Stanford complained to the federal court hearing his appeal that his court-appointed attorney is not responsive enough, and is unprepared to effectively represent him. So Stanford, who has no legal training, says he is invoking his right to represent himself.

The merry-go-round of Stanford attorneys began spinning soon after his arrest in 2009, when a federal court froze his assets—which once topped $2 billion. Some attorneys quit when it became clear they could not be paid. Others were fired by the famously temperamental Stanford. At his 2012 trial, Stanford was represented by court-appointed attorneys Robert Scardino and Ali Fazel, though they too tried unsuccessfully to quit the case days before trial.

After Stanford was convicted on 13 counts and ordered to forfeit $5.9 billion tied to the fraud, the court appointed Houston attorney Lourdes Rodriguez to represent Stanford in his appeal. But the two never clicked.

In his affidavit written in prison, Stanford said Rodriguez "has been elusive at times, not answering the phone, e-mails, and never responding to my letters," and he complained she has not been willing to accept his assistance in the case.

Rodriguez did not respond to a request for a comment. In a letter to the court after Stanford first began complaining earlier this year, she said Stanford's real issues were not with her, but "revolve around his expressed disdain and repudiation of the United States criminal justice system."

Now, the two may finally be parting ways. On Tuesday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that in light of Stanford's motion to represent himself, it was suspending a September deadline to file his appeal.

—By CNBC's Scott Cohn; Follow him on Twitter @ScottCohnCNBC

Read more:

For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum

Friday, July 12, 2013

Investors Sue Insurance Company That Vouched for Stanford Ponzi Scam

By John Pacenti All Articles

Daily Business Review

July 12, 2013

The letters circulated by Stanford International Bank among would-be investors claimed deposits were insured by Lloyds of London and that the bank's employees were "first class business people."

The letters proclaimed the bank had undergone "stringent risk management review by an outside audit firm."

Stanford International Bank is now known as one of the world's largest Ponzi schemes, a $7 billion scam that is second only to the con pulled off by the former New York investment adviser and financier Bernard Madoff. The Stanford bank, which was based in Antigua and maintained a sizable footprint in Miami, went under in 2009.

So while the bank's founder and one-time billionaire, R. Allen Stanford, is serving a 110-year prison sentence for fraud, investors are looking for deep pockets to make them whole.

They hope they found it in Willis Group Holdings, the U.K.-based insurance company that provided Stanford with written endorsements. The investors are also suing Willis Group's American subsidiary based in Colorado.

Getting the litigation to stick in one jurisdiction, though, hasn't been easy. Filed in Miami-Dade Circuit Court in February, the plaintiffs' suit was transferred to U.S. District Court in Miami on June 3.

U.S. District Judge Jose E. Martinez stayed the case on June 14 after the Willis Group argued the U.S. Supreme Court is looking at the liability of insurance letters to investors in a related case against Willis Group.

Other lawsuits against Willis Group by similarly situated plaintiffs have ended up in multidistrict litigation in Dallas. One has also been stayed by a Miami federal judge.

A telephone call placed to attorney Edward Soto, a partner at Weil Gotshal & Manges in Miami who represents Willis Group, was not returned by deadline.

But in his motion to Martinez for a stay, Soto said the defendant expects the case and four others filed against Willis Group to be transferred to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Texas that oversees the estate of Stanford International Bank.

The plaintiffs attorney, Ervin Gonzalez, said businesses that vouch for criminal enterprises like Stanford need to be held accountable.

"If someone is going to give an endorsement ... they'd better be careful because people rely on those endorsements," said Gonzalez, a partner at Colson Hicks Eidson in Coral Gables, Fla. "They have an obligation and a duty to be accurate."

Also representing the plaintiffs is attorney Luis Delgado, a partner at Miami's Homer & Bonner.

"From in or around August 2004 through 2008, Willis provided 'safety and soundness' letters to Stanford Financial's agents on Willis letterhead and signed by a Willis executive," the lawsuit claims.

The letters misled clients into believing their deposits were safe and insured, the lawsuit states.

The 29 plaintiffs are from Uruguay, Bolivia, Colombia and Venezuela and had a combined loss of $30 million when SIB collapsed. The lawsuit states they received identical Willis Group letters with the only difference being the date and address.

Read more:

For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum