tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38822400897516350342024-02-07T15:32:15.606-08:00Stanford's Forgotten VictimsThe official site of Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG (<a href="http://sivg.org/">http://sivg.org</a>) and
the SIVG official forum (<a href="http://sivg.org/forum/">http://sivg.org/forum/</a>)Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.comBlogger88125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-55825018925763971712015-10-31T23:08:00.000-07:002015-11-18T14:11:08.223-08:00The true aim of some liars victims who say they are here to help<span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; line-height: 107%;"><i><span style="color: red;">Good News! With
Stanford's appeal overturned the Swiss bank can finally return the money in
Stanford's account to the liquidators</span></i></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZzLYFr0NBMqLq_ZE9fnCFItY3zyyZ7JF_bEknHbdlRJ2fe8nLAUQnQCi1MoMCLx5fXhg2DwfgrEBd69PixtmGz2oMiasWylsyeadaLRKpqiGddC-EeZ5SSGMq0QoMiSBmRo6eMk_YSto/s1600/DeadForum_support_liquidators.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="131" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZzLYFr0NBMqLq_ZE9fnCFItY3zyyZ7JF_bEknHbdlRJ2fe8nLAUQnQCi1MoMCLx5fXhg2DwfgrEBd69PixtmGz2oMiasWylsyeadaLRKpqiGddC-EeZ5SSGMq0QoMiSBmRo6eMk_YSto/s400/DeadForum_support_liquidators.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 107%;">You are a damn and
selfish person who only think about you and seek to fill your pockets with the
money the liquidators are stealing. The liquidators are suing the innocent
victims who withdrew money before the collapse. We did not know about the
collapse, otherwise we would have closed the accounts. The liquidators are making
a business behind the suffering of the victims and you stopped being a victim
to become a corrupt miserable person that support the liquidators in exchange
for benefits and money.</span><br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-43424974203919443262015-07-21T14:10:00.000-07:002015-07-27T14:10:35.644-07:00Receiver files 12th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the 1st Interim Distribution Plan<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
On July 21, 2015, the Receiver filed his 12th Schedule of distribution
payments under the 1st Interim Distribution Plan with the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The
12th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be
submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to
Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the
12th. Schedule, please <a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/11th_Schedule_re_1st_Interim_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">click here.</a><br />
<br />
What happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="151" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="312" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="187" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="85" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163</a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-85682239231961243872015-03-30T22:30:00.000-07:002015-03-31T08:24:37.552-07:00Gaytri Kachroo lost the case Zelaya et al. v. U.S.<div class="yiv7811118671MsoNormal" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1427814658613_3404" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: white;"><span id="yui_3_16_0_1_1427814658613_3403" lang="ES" style="font-size: 10pt;">(Reuters) - A federal appeals court said on Monday the
United States is not liable to victims of Allen Stanford's fraud who claimed
that the Securities and Exchange Commission was incompetent for having taken
too long to uncover the swindler's $7.2 billion Ponzi scheme.</span></span></div>
<div class="yiv7811118671MsoNormal" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1427814658613_3409" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: white;"><span lang="ES" style="font-size: 10pt;">A panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in
Miami said the government is entitled to sovereign immunity.</span></span></div>
<div class="yiv7811118671MsoNormal" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1427814658613_3409" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<h1 class="article-headline">
U.S. not liable for alleged SEC negligence in Stanford fraud: court</h1>
<div class="yiv7811118671MsoNormal" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1427814658613_3409" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<span class="articleLocatio</span>n">A
federal appeals court said on Monday the United States is not liable to
victims of Allen Stanford's fraud who claimed that the Securities and
Exchange Commission was incompetent for having taken too long to uncover
the swindler's $7.2 billion Ponzi scheme.</span><br />
<span id="midArticle_1"></span>A panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Miami said the government is entitled to sovereign immunity.<br />
<span id="midArticle_2"></span>Stanford's
victims accused the SEC of negligence for having waited until 2009 to
uncover the Ponzi scheme, despite having had evidence of it as early as
1997.<br />
<span id="midArticle_3"></span>But the court said the SEC
had discretion to decide how to enforce securities laws, and could not
be liable for certain misrepresentations. It said this justified
shielding it from claims raised by the victims under the Federal Tort
Claims Act.<br />
<span id="midArticle_4"></span>"We reach no
conclusions as to the SEC's conduct, or whether the latter's actions
deserve plaintiffs' condemnation," Circuit Judge Julie Carnes wrote for a
three-judge panel. "We do, however, conclude that the United States is
shielded from liability for the SEC's alleged negligence."<br />
<span id="midArticle_5"></span>Victims
claimed that the SEC thought Stanford's business was a fraud after each
of four examinations between 1997 and 2004, but failed to advise the
Securities Investor Protection Corp, which compensates victims of failed
brokerages.<br />
<span id="midArticle_6"></span>The plaintiffs were
led by Carlos Zelaya and George Glantz, who claimed to lose a combined
$1.65 million, and sought class-action status. Monday's decision upheld
rulings in 2013 by U.S. District Judge Robert Scola in Miami.<br />
<span id="midArticle_7"></span>Gaytri Kachroo, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.<br />
<span id="midArticle_8"></span>The U.S. Department of Justice, which represented the SEC in the appeal, did not immediately respond to similar requests.<br />
<span id="midArticle_9"></span>In
2013, federal appeals courts in New York, Philadelphia and Pasadena,
California, dismissed lawsuits accusing the SEC of incompetence in
investigating Bernard Madoff.<br />
<span id="midArticle_10"></span>Stanford,
65, is appealing his March 2012 conviction and 110-year prison term for
what prosecutors called a scam centered on his sale of fraudulent
high-yielding certificates of deposit through his Antigua-based Stanford
International Bank.<br />
<span id="midArticle_11"></span>The SEC's inspector general in 2010 criticized the regulator for being too slow to uncover Stanford's fraud.<br />
<span id="midArticle_12"></span>The case is Zelaya et al. v. U.S., 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 13-14780.<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-58997330086131568052014-12-12T14:55:00.000-08:002014-12-18T04:57:23.291-08:00Receiver files 11th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the 1st Interim Distribution Plan<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
On December 12, 2014, the Receiver filed his 11th Schedule of distribution payments under the 1st Interim Distribution Plan with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 11th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 10th. Schedule, please <a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/11th_Schedule_re_1st_Interim_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">click here.</a><br />
<br />
What happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" height="151" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" height="312" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" height="187" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" height="85" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163</a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-91034720558399864372014-11-05T06:50:00.000-08:002014-11-08T06:54:32.968-08:00Receiver files 1st Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the 2nd Interim Distribution Plan<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span><strong style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;">Receiver files 1st Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the 2nd Interim Distribution Plan</strong><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 20px; text-align: justify;"> - On November 5, 2014, the Receiver filed his 1st Schedule of distribution payments pursuant to the 2nd Interim Distribution Plan with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 1st Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis. To view a copy of the 1st Schedule, </span><a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/1st_Schedule_re_2nd_Interim_Plan.pdf" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 20px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank">please click here.</a></span><br />
<br />
What happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" height="151" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" height="312" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" height="187" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" height="85" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163</a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-77468395984110737722014-09-05T09:51:00.000-07:002014-12-18T04:55:22.325-08:00Receiver files 10th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the 1st Interim Distribution Plan - On September 5, 2014<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
Receiver files 10th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the 1st Interim Distribution Plan - On September 5, 2014, the Receiver filed his 10th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 10th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 10th. Schedule, please <a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/10th_Schedule_re_1st_Interim_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">click here.</a><br />
<br />
What happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" height="151" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" height="312" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" height="187" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" height="85" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163</a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-644817472663177742014-06-04T05:32:00.000-07:002014-11-08T07:00:18.426-08:00Receiver files 9th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
Receiver
files 9th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim
Distribution Plan - On June 3, 2014, the Receiver filed his 9th
Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 9th Schedule
will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the
Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification
Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 9th. Schedule,
please <a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/9th_Schedule_re_Interim_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">click here.</a><br />
<br />
What happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" height="151" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" height="312" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" height="187" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" height="85" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163</a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-47588672427025135692014-02-26T10:14:00.000-08:002014-02-26T14:36:42.176-08:00U.S. justices say Allen Stanford victims can sue lawyers, brokers<div class="relatedPhoto landscape" id="articleImage" style="background-color: white; clear: left !important; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans; margin: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; width: 580px;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 23px; text-transform: uppercase;">BY LAWRENCE HURLEY</span><br />
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 23px; text-transform: uppercase;"><br /></span>
<img alt="Convicted financier Allen Stanford, who is serving 110 years in prison for his $7 billion Ponzi scheme, arrives at Federal Court in Houston for sentencing June 14, 2012. REUTERS/RICHARD CARSON" border="0" src="http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20140226&t=2&i=848557011&w=580&fh=&fw=&ll=&pl=&r=CBREA1P163Z00" style="display: block; width: 580px;" /><br />
<div class="rolloverCaption" id="captionContent" style="bottom: 0px; clear: both; float: left; left: 0px; margin-bottom: 20px; margin-left: -10px; padding-right: 20px; position: relative; width: 590px; z-index: 2;">
<div class="rolloverBg" style="background-image: none; clear: both; float: left; padding-bottom: 0px; width: 610px;">
<div class="captionText" style="color: #494949; font-size: 11px; height: 60px; padding: 10px; position: relative;">
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; line-height: 13px; padding: 0px;">
Convicted financier Allen Stanford, who is serving 110 years in prison for his $7 billion Ponzi scheme, arrives at Federal Court in Houston for sentencing June 14, 2012.</div>
<div class="credit" style="color: #a1a1a1; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 13px; margin-top: 5px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase;">
CREDIT: REUTERS/RICHARD CARSON</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="relatedRai" id="relatedInlineVideo" style="background-color: white; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans;">
</div>
<div class="columnLeft" style="background-color: white; clear: left; display: inline; float: left; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans; margin-right: 35px;">
<div class="relatedRail gridPanel grid2" style="display: inline; float: left; font-size: 0px; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; width: 140px;">
</div>
</div>
<div class="columnLeft" style="background-color: white; clear: left; display: inline; float: left; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans; margin-right: 35px;">
<div class="relatedRail gridPanel grid2" style="display: inline; float: left; font-size: 0px; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; width: 140px;">
</div>
</div>
<div class="columnLeft" style="background-color: white; clear: left; display: inline; float: left; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans; margin-right: 35px;">
<div class="relatedRail gridPanel grid2" style="display: inline; float: left; font-size: 0px; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; width: 140px;">
</div>
</div>
<div class="columnLeft" style="background-color: white; clear: left; display: inline; float: left; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans; margin-right: 35px;">
<div class="relatedRail gridPanel grid2" style="display: inline; float: left; font-size: 0px; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; width: 140px;">
</div>
</div>
<div class="columnLeft" style="background-color: white; clear: left; display: inline; float: left; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans; margin-right: 35px;">
<div class="relatedRail gridPanel grid2" style="display: inline; float: left; font-size: 0px; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; width: 140px;">
<div class="module" id="relatedTopics" style="float: left; margin: 0px 0px 20px; width: 140px;">
<div class="moduleHeader" style="background-attachment: scroll; background-color: transparent; background-image: none; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: repeat repeat; border: medium none; float: left; margin: 0px 0px 5px; padding: 0px; width: 140px;">
<h3 style="border-bottom-style: none; border-bottom-width: medium; color: #333333; font-size: 11px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase;">
RELATED TOPICS</h3>
</div>
<div class="moduleBody" style="float: left; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; width: 140px;">
<ul style="clear: both; float: left; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 5px; padding: 0px; width: 140px;">
<li style="background-attachment: scroll; background-color: transparent; background-image: none; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: repeat repeat; border-top-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-top-style: dotted; border-top-width: 1px; color: #999999; font-size: 14px; line-height: 14px; list-style-type: none; margin: 0px; padding: 3px 0px;"><a href="http://www.reuters.com/news/us" style="color: #006e97; cursor: pointer; font-size: 11px; line-height: 13px; outline: none; text-decoration: none;">U.S. »</a></li>
<li style="background-attachment: scroll; background-color: transparent; background-image: none; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: repeat repeat; border-top-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-top-style: dotted; border-top-width: 1px; color: #999999; font-size: 14px; line-height: 14px; list-style-type: none; margin: 0px; padding: 3px 0px;"><a href="http://www.reuters.com/politics" style="color: #006e97; cursor: pointer; font-size: 11px; line-height: 13px; outline: none; text-decoration: none;">Politics »</a></li>
<li style="background-attachment: scroll; background-color: transparent; background-image: none; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: repeat repeat; border-top-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-top-style: dotted; border-top-width: 1px; color: #999999; font-size: 14px; line-height: 14px; list-style-type: none; margin: 0px; padding: 3px 0px;"><a href="http://www.reuters.com/finance/personal-finance" style="color: #006e97; cursor: pointer; font-size: 11px; line-height: 13px; outline: none; text-decoration: none;">Money »</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="columnLeft" style="background-color: white; clear: left; display: inline; float: left; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans; margin-right: 35px;">
<div class="relatedRail gridPanel grid2" style="display: inline; float: left; font-size: 0px; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; width: 140px;">
<div id="thirdPartyLinkbackNews">
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="columnLeft" style="background-color: white; clear: left; display: inline; float: left; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans; margin-right: 35px;">
<div class="relatedRail gridPanel grid2" id="relatedInteractive" style="display: inline; float: left; font-size: 0px; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; width: 140px;">
</div>
</div>
<div class="columnLeft" style="background-color: white; clear: left; display: inline; float: left; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans; margin-right: 35px;">
<div class="relatedRail gridPanel grid2" style="display: inline; float: left; font-size: 0px; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; width: 140px;">
</div>
</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
(Reuters) - Investors in Allen Stanford's $7 billion Ponzi scheme can sue to recoup losses from lawyers, insurance brokers and others who worked with the convicted swindler, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
On a 7-2 vote, the court held that lawsuits filed in state courts can go forward. The majority said the ruling would not affect the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) ability to enforce securities law as some had feared.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
Stanford's fraud involved the sale of bogus certificates of deposit by his Antigua-based Stanford International Bank. He is serving a 110-year prison sentence.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
New York-based law firms Chadbourne & Parke LLP and Proskauer Rose LLP and insurance brokerage Willis Group Holdings Plc were sued by former Stanford investors. The investors also sued financial <a class="itxtnewhook itxthook" href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/26/us-usa-court-stanford-idUSBREA1P17220140226#" id="itxthook0" rel="nofollow" style="background-image: none; border: 0px none transparent; color: #006e97; cursor: pointer; display: inline; outline: none; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;"><span class="itxtrst itxtrstspan itxtnowrap" id="itxthook0p" style="border: 0px; bottom: auto; display: inline !important; float: none !important; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; height: auto; left: auto; line-height: normal; margin: 0px !important; padding: 0px !important; position: static; right: auto; top: auto; white-space: nowrap !important;"><span class="itxtrst itxtrstspan itxtnowrap itxtnewhookspan" id="itxthook0w" style="border-color: transparent transparent rgb(0, 204, 0); border-style: none none solid; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; bottom: auto; color: #009900; display: inline; float: none; font-family: inherit; height: auto; left: auto; margin: 0px !important; padding: 0px 0px 1px !important; position: static; right: auto; text-decoration: underline !important; top: auto; white-space: normal;">services</span><img class="itxtrst itxtrstimg itxthookicon" src="http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png" id="itxthook0icon" style="border: 0px !important; bottom: auto; display: inline !important; float: none !important; height: auto !important; left: auto; margin: 0px !important; max-height: none; max-width: none !important; outline: none; padding: 0px 0px 0px 4px !important; position: static; right: auto; top: auto; vertical-align: baseline !important; white-space: normal; width: auto !important;" /></span></a> firm SEI Investments Co and insurance company Bowen, Miclette & Britt.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
"It's clear the justices understood that ruling for the defendants would create an immunity that Congress never imagined," said Tom Goldstein, a lawyer representing the former Stanford clients.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
Representatives from the two law firms said that when the case returns to the lower court the defendants would move to dismiss the suit on other grounds.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
Writing for the majority, Justice Stephen Breyer said the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA) did not prevent the state lawsuits from proceeding. The law says that state lawsuits are barred when the alleged misrepresentations are "in connection with" the purchase or sale of a covered security, which is defined as a security listed on a national exchange at the time the alleged unlawful conduct occurred.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
As the defendants in the case were not selling securities traded on U.S. exchanges, "it is difficult to see why the federal securities laws would be - or should be - concerned with shielding such entities from lawsuits," Breyer wrote.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
IMPACT ON SEC</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
The Obama administration, representing the SEC, had sided with the defendants to try to protect the agency's authority to pursue wide-ranging investigations.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
The administration said the "in connection with" language in SLUSA that limits state court lawsuits mirrors language in federal law that gives broad authority of the SEC to pursue such misrepresentations.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in a dissenting opinion that the ruling would have a negative impact on the SEC because it "casts doubt on the applicability of federal securities law to cases of serious securities fraud." Kennedy was joined in dissent by Justice Samuel Alito.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
Securities law experts backed the majority's view that the ruling was relatively narrow.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
Donald Langevoort, a professor of law at Georgetown University, said he was "very surprised" the SEC tried to argue that a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs could diminish the government's enforcement powers.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
"The opinion is imminently correct as a matter of common sense and legal policy," Langevoort said.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
Charles Smith, of the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP who represents clients before the SEC, said the agency would be comforted by the limited scope of the ruling.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
"The decision is crafted in a way that is intended not to interfere with the SEC's enforcement authority," he said.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
The SEC, via a spokesman, declined to comment.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
The defendants had sought Supreme Court review after the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in March 2012 said the lawsuits brought under state laws by the former Stanford clients could go ahead.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
The former Stanford clients are keen to pursue state law claims because the Supreme Court previously held that similar "aiding and abetting" claims cannot be made under federal law.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
The class-action lawsuits filed by the former investors accused Thomas Sjoblom, a lawyer who worked at both law firms, of obstructing a SEC probe into Stanford, and sought to hold the other defendants responsible as well.</div>
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin-bottom: 20px; padding: 0px;">
The cases are Chadbourne & Parke LLP v. Troice et al, U.S. Supreme Court. No. 12-79; Willis of Colorado Inc et al v. Troice et al, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 12-86; and Proskauer Rose LLP v. Troice et al, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 12-88.</div>
<span id="articleText" style="background-color: white; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans;"><span id="midArticle_start"></span><span id="midArticle_0"></span><span class="focusParagraph"></span><span id="midArticle_1"></span><span id="midArticle_2"></span><span id="midArticle_3"></span><span id="midArticle_4"></span><span id="midArticle_5"></span><span id="midArticle_6"></span><span id="midArticle_7"></span><span id="midArticle_8"></span><span id="midArticle_9"></span><span id="midArticle_10"></span><span id="midArticle_11"></span><span id="midArticle_12"></span><span id="midArticle_13"></span><span id="midArticle_14"></span><span id="midArticle_15"></span><span id="midArticle_0"></span><span id="midArticle_1"></span><span id="midArticle_2"></span><span id="midArticle_3"></span><span id="midArticle_4"></span><span id="midArticle_5"></span><span id="midArticle_6"></span></span><br />
<div style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 23px; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px;">
(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley, additional reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; editing by<a data-ls-seen="1" href="http://blogs.reuters.com/search/journalist.php?edition=us&n=howard.goller&" style="color: #006e97; cursor: pointer; outline: none; text-decoration: none;">Howard Goller</a>, G Crosse and Amanda Kwan)</div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large; text-align: center;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large; text-align: center;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<br /></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-18440939412684015592014-02-26T10:08:00.000-08:002014-02-26T14:36:30.316-08:00SLUSA: Justices say Allen Stanford victim lawsuits can go forward<span style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20px;">WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that lawyers, insurance brokers and others who worked with convicted swindler Allen Stanford cannot avoid lawsuits by investors seeking to recoup losses incurred in his $7 billion Ponzi scheme.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span>
<img alt="Convicted financier Allen Stanford, who faces up to 230 years in prison for his billion Ponzi scheme, arrives at Federal Court in Houston for sentencing June 14, 2012. REUTERS/Richard Carson" border="0" src="http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/530e050a5afbd31d1a8b4567-450-300/justices-say-allen-stanford-victim-lawsuits-can-go-forward.jpg" style="border: 0px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; height: auto; line-height: 20px; max-width: 100%; vertical-align: middle;" /><br />
<div class="source" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 10px;">
Thomson Reuters</div>
<div class="caption" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 10px;">
Convicted financier Allen Stanford arrives at Federal Court in Houston for sentencing.</div>
<br />
<div style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 10px;">
</div>
<div style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 10px;">
On a 7-2 vote the court held that lawsuits filed in state court can go forward. New York-based law firms Chadbourne & Parke and Proskauer Rose and insurance brokerage Willis Group Holdings Plc were all sued by former Stanford investors. The investors also sued financial services firm SEI Investments and insurance company Bowen, Miclette & Britt.</div>
<div style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 10px;">
(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Howard Goller)</div>
<div class="tagline" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; font-style: italic; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 10px;">
This post originally appeared at <a href="http://www.reuters.com/" sl-processed="1" style="color: #00709a; text-decoration: none;">Reuters</a>. Copyright 2014. Follow Reuters on <a href="http://twitter.com/Reuters" sl-processed="1" style="color: #00709a; text-decoration: none;">Twitter</a>.</div>
<span style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 20px;"><br /><br />Read more: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/r-justices-say-allen-stanford-victim-lawsuits-can-go-forward-2014-26#ixzz2uT6YFosE" style="color: #003399; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">http://www.businessinsider.com/r-justices-say-allen-stanford-victim-lawsuits-can-go-forward-2014-26#ixzz2uT6YFosE</a></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large; text-align: center;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large; text-align: center;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span><br />
<br />Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-3286736989814578772014-02-04T13:29:00.000-08:002014-11-08T07:00:34.456-08:00Receiver files 8th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
Receiver files 8th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On February 4, 2014, the Receiver filed his 8th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 8th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 6th. Schedule, please <a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/8th_Schedule_re_Interim_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">click here.</a><br />
<br />
What happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" height="151" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" height="312" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" height="187" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" height="85" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-71768230365300613042013-12-04T09:10:00.000-08:002014-11-08T07:00:49.202-08:00Receiver files 7th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
Receiver files 7th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On December 4, 2013, the Receiver filed his 7th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 7th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 6th. Schedule, please <a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/7th_Schedule_re_Interim_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">click here.</a><br />
<br />
What happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" height="151" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" height="312" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" height="187" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" height="85" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=163</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-11463362764037646122013-11-27T09:21:00.000-08:002013-12-10T08:06:27.507-08:00CRT Offer to Buy Stanford International Bank Investor Claims<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-KZ5C0HOvUSVrLHnH9vrGQhC-COFFR4NJeHTzWzVXm4uuftCOhYPto0FrOx1SiRKfNleid6vkW9en795MNAlnHqNo4B7hkXakMFwcm5zjjBqrOVDfX9KS8btoGcY9CLt_A7lZJQ3sOeM/s1600/stanfordbank.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="243" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-KZ5C0HOvUSVrLHnH9vrGQhC-COFFR4NJeHTzWzVXm4uuftCOhYPto0FrOx1SiRKfNleid6vkW9en795MNAlnHqNo4B7hkXakMFwcm5zjjBqrOVDfX9KS8btoGcY9CLt_A7lZJQ3sOeM/s400/stanfordbank.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
(Caracas, November 26 - Noticias24) -. CRT Special Investments announced Tuesday through a press release that it would buy claims from Stanford International Bank (SIB) to investors, who can "<b>receive their money within weeks instead of having to wait years</b> and face the uncertainty of recovery, "said Joe Sarachek, General Director of the CRT.<br />
<br />
Following is the <b>full text</b> of the statement: <b><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=165" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=165</a></b><br />
<br />
Participante líder en la venta y compra de reclamos de Stanford Proporcionando a Vendedores(Inversionistas) Liquidez Garantizada<br />
<br />
Nueva York, Nueva York, noviembre de 2013 – CRT Special Investments LLC (” CRT Special Investments “) ha anunciado hoy que está enfocado en proporcionar liquidez a los ex depositantes de Stanford International Bank en América Latina con un staff dedicado de habla hispana y cuenta con sitio web.<br />
<br />
Stanford International Bank (” SIB “) era un banco con sede en Antigua, que operó desde 1986 hasta el 2009, con sede en Houston, Texas. Los depositantes de SIB recibieron certificados de depósito. Aproximadamente $ 7 mil millones fueron depositados en SIB. En febrero del 2009, la Securities and Exchange Commission de los EE.UU. obtuvo una orden para congelar todos los activos personales y corporativos de Stanford en los EE.UU. y un receptor para Stanford. Hasta la fecha, aproximadamente $ 500 millones en activos líquidos han sido identificados por el Síndico y Liquidadores Conjuntos, dejando a los ahorradores con una pérdida substancial proyectada.<br />
<br />
El Administrador Judicial ha comenzado recientemente a hacer una distribución del 1 % a los inversionistas, pero más distribuciones son inciertas.<br />
<br />
Un procedimiento paralelo al procedimiento de EE.UU. se inició en febrero de 2009 en Antigua. Los depositantes también han presentado reclamos con Grant Thornton, que ha sido designado como Liquidador Conjunto en Antigua. Hasta la fecha, ninguna distribución se ha realizado en Antigua. Debido al hecho de que no se sabe cuándo se harán nuevas distribuciones o el momento de la distribución, los depositantes que buscan liquidez se enfrentan a la elección de la venta de los compradores en el mercado secundario.<br />
<br />
El proceso de transferencia de reclamos es extremadamente lento, ya que requiere la presentación de documentos en dos jurisdicciones separadas, Dallas y Antigua. “Ninguna otra compañía tiene la experiencia y la dedicación para el mercado de América Latina en Stanford “, dijo Joe Sarachek , Director General de la CRT Special Investments. “Nuestro objetivo es proporcionar recuperación garantizada y liquidez para los clientes de Stanford lo más rápido posible. ” Sarachek añadió ” Si usted vende su reclamo a CRT, usted podrá recibir su dinero en cuestión de semanas en lugar de tener que esperar años y enfrentarse a la incertidumbre de la recuperación. ”<br />
<br />
CRT Special Investments, ha sido un participante líder en el mercado de reclamos de Stanford , cuenta con la experiencia y conocimiento del mercado , no sólo para ofrecer liquidez a los clientes que buscan vender , sino también para estructurar préstamos y negociaciones para aquellos clientes que aún no están listos para vender sus reclamos. CRT Special Investments es una filial de CRT Capital Group LLC ( “CRT “), una sociedad de valores con sede en Stamford , Connecticut, EUA que ha mantenido a los clientes institucionales desde hace más de 20 años. CRT proporciona investigación a profundidad sobre el procedimiento de quiebra de MF Global y compra venta de reclamos.<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: medium;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum <a href="http://sivg.org/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org</a></span></strong>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11097316761336981623noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-36731232277688565462013-11-24T09:37:00.001-08:002013-11-24T09:37:44.980-08:00Stanford Victims Coalition Update Regarding SIPC<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Dear SVC Members,<br />
<br />
I apologize for the gap in time between updates, but I have some very exciting news today about a project I have been working on full-time all year—a legislative remedy that should get us SIPC if the bill is passed—regardless of the outcome of the SEC vs. SIPC appeal (which could still go our way). “The Restoring Main Street Investor Protection and Confidence Act,” is being introduced in the House today with a Senate companion bill to follow. A hearing of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises is set for Thursday, November 21 (victims are encouraged to attend and I will be testifying along with another Stanford victim). A Senate Banking Committee hearing will be held as well, but a date has not been set.............<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=156" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=156</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-27054884211591610562013-11-21T09:39:00.000-08:002013-11-25T21:07:05.352-08:00U.S. lawmakers seek fix to help investors file claims against brokers<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Nov 20 (Reuters) - A bipartisan group of U.S. House and Senate members is seeking to make it easier for investment fraud victims to seek compensation, after investors in Allen Stanford's Ponzi scheme were deemed ineligible under current law to file claims.<br />
<br />
The bill, introduced by Louisiana Republican Senator David Vitter, New York Democratic Senator Charles Schumer, New Jersey Republican Rep. Scott Garrett and New York Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney, would bestow U.S. securities regulators with greater powers to oversee the process of determining whether customers of failed brokerages qualify for compensation.<br />
<br />
The legislative proposal comes as the Securities and Exchange Commission awaits a crucial decision from a U.S. appeals court over the fate of the Stanford victims.<br />
<br />
The SEC is trying to get the court to force an industry-backed fund that protects investors to start court proceedings so Stanford victims can file claims to recover a least a portion of the millions they lost.<br />
<br />
The Securities Investor Protection Corp., or SIPC, which administers the fund, has refused the SEC's request, saying Stanford investors do not meet the legal definition of "customer" under the federal law designed to protect investors if their brokerage collapses.<br />
<br />
SIPC uses funds paid by the brokerage industry to compensate investors in the event of a bankruptcy, such as the one that occurred at Lehman Brothers in 2008.<br />
<br />
Allen Stanford was sentenced in 2012 to 110 years in prison for bilking investors with fraudulent certificates of deposit issued by Stanford International Bank, his bank in Antigua.<br />
<br />
Many of the investors who purchased the products, however, did so through his Houston, Texas-based brokerage, Stanford Group Co.<br />
<br />
SIPC argues that investors in the scheme entrusted their money to the offshore, unregulated Antiguan bank and not to the U.S. broker-dealer. Moreover, it says that Stanford's investors actually did receive their certificates of deposit, as promised, even though they turned out to be virtually worthless.<br />
<br />
A federal district judge agreed with SIPC's legal position in July 2012, and tossed out the SEC's lawsuit.<br />
<br />
The SEC appealed the ruling before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in October, and is awaiting a decision.<br />
<br />
SIPC's refusal to let Stanford victims file claims has frustrated many lawmakers on Capitol Hill, including Vitter, who has been among the most vocal in fighting for the Stanford victims.<br />
<br />
"The Stanford Ponzi scheme devastated many Louisiana families who invested their hard-earned savings in good faith that it would be there for them when they retire," Vitter said in a statement issued on Wednesday.<br />
<br />
"Our bill will fix a key problem we've seen with the system, which currently allows SIPC's Wall Street members to benefit economically from the SIPC guarantee while denying the claims of legitimate victims," he added.<br />
<br />
The legislative proposal by the four lawmakers will be vetted in a hearing before a subcommittee of the House Financial Services Committee on Thursday.<br />
<br />
Among the witnesses scheduled to testify are Stephen Harbeck, the president of SIPC, a representative from Wall Street's leading brokerage trade group, and Angie Kogutt, a Stanford victim in charge of the Stanford Victims Coalition.<br />
<br />
The 19-page bill would amend the definition of "customer" to ensure that investors who deposit cash to buy securities can still be covered by SIPC protection, even if the money is initially given to a firm that is not a SIPC member.<br />
<br />
It would also give the SEC more authority to force SIPC to act without the need for court approval. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-18569045477010437322013-11-13T09:40:00.000-08:002013-11-24T09:41:33.641-08:00LEGISLATIVE ALERT 11/12<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
LEGISLATION TO BE INTRODUCED IN HOUSE, HEARINGS SET BILL ALSO BEING PREPARED IN SENATE!<br />
<br />
* Garrett & Maloney to introduce legislation in House. Senator Vitter current lead sponsor in Senate<br />
* House hearings set for 11/21<br />
* Selective grassroots to commence<br />
* 5th Anniversary media needs victims willing to be interviewed by media<br />
<br />
Dear NIAP Member & Madoff Investor,<br />
<br />
Greetings. I am excited to announce that SIPC legislation is to be introduced later this week or early next followed by Congressional hearings on Thursday, Nov 21. The legislation is to be jointly introduced by Congressman Garrett (NJ) and Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (NY). Similar legislation is expected to be introduced shortly in the Senate as well, consistent with the strategy laid out by Congressman Garrett in the last Congress.<br />
<br />
The intention is to have the legislation introduced by approximately 15 co-sponsors, and followed by an extensive outreach effort via Garrett’s and Maloney’s offices, our lobby team and our own grassroots efforts to ramp up sponsorship numbers.<br />
<br />
The specific bill language is still going through final stages, and a bill number and title will be finalized shortly. We will make the bill public as soon as we receive the final version. As you probably know, it prevents clawback of the innocent, insures SIPC payments to $500,000 based on account statements, and gives the SEC authority over SIPC.<br />
<br />
After hearings, the bill will be moved to a mark-up session in the House Subcommittee on Capital Markets, voted on and moved to the Financial Services Committee.<br />
<br />
Next Steps on Grassroots. We will want to focus our House grassroots efforts on key Financial Services Committee members, as well as other influential House members, particularly those in districts or states with sizeable Madoff and Stanford victim constituents. Our Senate strategy will focus on Senate members on the Senate Banking Committee and other key Senate members.<br />
<br />
The first wave of Grassroots letters and communications however will go out to those who are sponsoring the legislation at introduction, thanking them for their support and encouraging their reaching out to their colleagues to do the same.<br />
<br />
Stay Tuned! In the coming days we will be providing more detailed information, as well as laying out the details for the grassroots outreach. We will also undertake a rapid fundraising campaign to assist costs of Congressional hearings and grassroots support.<br />
<br />
We look forward to working with all previous and current leaders in this effort as well.<br />
<br />
Game on!<br />
Most sincerely,<br />
Ron Stein, CFP<br />
President, NIAP<br />
<br />
CONTACT INFORMATION:<br />
<br />
Victims Needed for Media interviews & Congressional testimony<br />
<br />
Volunteers and Funds Needed. Please assist us in whatever way you can! <br />
<br />
Email us at: djmionis@investoraction.org<br />
rstein@investoraction.org<br />
<br />
Call us at: 800-323-9250<br />
<br />
www.investoraction.org<br />
www.fixsipcnow.com<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-35351024742095819892013-11-07T09:42:00.000-08:002013-11-24T09:43:41.451-08:00Is the SEC Here to Help Defrauded Victims in a Ponzi Scheme, Or Not?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Posted by Kathy Bazoian Phelps<br />
<br />
The Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) plays an active role in protecting the rights of investors. Its own mission statement is:<br />
<br />
The mission of the Securities and Exchange Commission is to protect investors; maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and facilitate capital formation.<br />
<br />
Yet, in the high-profile Ponzi scheme case of R. Allen Stanford and Stanford Financial Bank, the SEC is finding itself aligned both for and against efforts to recover funds for the benefit of the defrauded victims. Positions taken by the SEC in two different pending litigation matters in the Stanford case may have polar opposite effects on the financial outcome for defrauded investors.<br />
<br />
One case, SEC v. SIPC, now pending in the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia, involves a battle between the SEC and the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) over whether the defrauded victims are “customers” under the Securities Investor Protection Act (SIPA) and therefore entitled to payment from SIPC. This is the first time that the SEC has ever commenced an action seeking SIPC coverage for investors. The lower court found that the Stanford investors are not entitled to SIPC coverage, but the SEC continues to champion the cause of the investors in the Circuit Court seeking SIPC coverage for them.<br />
<br />
The other case, Chadbourne & Park LLP v. Troice et al., involves an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court over the issue of whether Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA) bars lawsuits by a class of victims against third parties to recover their losses from alleged wrongdoers. The Fifth Circuit held that the claims against two law firms, an insurance brokerage firm and a financial services firm could proceed despite SLUSA. The U.S. Government, on behalf of the SEC and other agencies, filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court arguing that the investor claims should be barred under SLUSA. If the Government’s position prevails, defrauded victims will be denied recovery on their claims.<br />
<br />
In what would be a worst case scenario for the investors, the SEC will lose in SEC v. SIPC so that investors will be denied “customer” status and protection, and the Government’s position in the Chadbourne & Park case will prevail, denying investors the ability to use self-help to sue alleged wrongdoers.<br />
<br />
At a quick glance, it seems that the SEC is on the wrong side of the SLUSA fight in Chadbourne & Park, given the potentially adverse consequences for investors if the SEC’s position is adopted. But perhaps the issue has more do with the way that the applicable statutes are written and interpreted than with any intent on the part of the SEC.<br />
<br />
In Chadbourne & Park, the principal question to be considered by the Supreme Court is:<br />
<br />
Does the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (“SLUSA”), 15 U.S.C. 77p(b), 78bb(f)(1), prohibit private class actions based on state law only where the alleged purchase or sale of a covered security is “more than tangentially related” to the “heart, crux or gravamen” of the alleged fraud?<br />
<br />
SLUSA prohibits a state law class action alleging a purchase or sale of a covered security “in connection with” an untrue statement or omission of material fact. A “covered class action” is a lawsuit in which damages are sought on behalf of more than 50 people, and a “covered security” is a nationally traded security that is listed on a regulated national exchange. So the question remaining is: What does “in connection with” mean?<br />
<br />
The target defendants in the litigation at issue argue that “in connection with” covers the following two factual scenarios that touch “covered securities” in the Stanford case: (1) that Stanford lied to purchasers of CDs and told them that the CDs were backed by investments in stocks; and (2) that some of the CD purchasers must have liquidated stocks in order to purchase the CDs.<br />
<br />
The Fifth Circuit did not agree that either of these two scenarios were sufficient to bar claims under SLUSA, holding that the purchase or sale of a covered security must be more than tangentially related “to the ‘heart,’ ‘crux,’ or ‘gravamen’ of the defendants’ fraud.” The Fifth Circuit held that the claims against the defendants could proceed.<br />
<br />
The Government, on the other hand, has taken the position in its amicus brief to the Supreme Court that the relevant language of SLUSA was taken from the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and should be read consistently with similar language in Section 10(b) of the Act. In urging a broad reading of the words “in connection with,” the Government contends that:<br />
<br />
[A] broad reading is essential to the achievement of Congress’s purpose in enacting both Section 10(b) and SLUSA. Under Section 10(b), it enhances the SEC’s ability to protect the securities markets against a variety of different forms of fraud. Under SLUSA, it furthers Congress’s objective of preventing the use of state-law class actions to circumvent the restrictions by the PSLRA [Private Securities Litigation Reform Act] and by this Court’s decisions constraining private securities-fraud suits.<br />
<br />
In an amicus brief taking the contrary position, 16 law professors directly challenge the concept of broadening the application of SLUSA to include the certificates of deposit purchased by the Stanford investors. They note that the certificates of deposit are not themselves covered securities and argue that therefore SLUSA should be “interpreted in a way that does not preclude investors from using state courts to pursue claims seeking traditional state law remedies for acts that do not involve covered securities within the meaning of the federal securities laws.”<br />
<br />
To stress their position that SLUSA should not apply to non-covered bank-issued securities that may be potentially backed by covered securities, the 16 law professors float the following hypothetical class action claims, among others, that they contend would improperly be prohibited under SLUSA if interpreted that broadly:<br />
<br />
* "A car dealer who lies to customers about the terms of a car loan, where the car loans are securitized in a pool and interests in the pool are sold off as covered securities."<br />
* "A credit card company that securitizes credit card balances fails to pay appropriate wages to telephone operators and answering card holder questions, and the operators file a state class action alleging violations of state wage and hour laws."<br />
* "A nationally-traded securities clearing firm engages in sex discrimination in compensating clerical workers for work done in the securities office, and the workers file a sex discrimination class action law suit."<br />
<br />
In summary, where the Supreme Court draws the lines on the application of SLUSA could have a significant impact on a variety of state law claims that may or may not have much to do with securities. The SEC stands behind a broad reading of SLUSA under the pretense of protecting the securities market, but its position appears to have the consequence of harming, not helping, defrauded victims by blocking state law damage claims.<br />
<br />
The issues are undoubtedly complicated, and there are a variety of competing considerations. From the investors’ perspective, however, they can just add this to the list of roadblocks to getting their money back.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-60862102809103186942013-11-04T13:47:00.000-08:002013-11-07T13:49:31.803-08:00Receiver files 6th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
Receiver files 6th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On November 4, 2013, the Receiver filed his 6th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 6th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 6th. Schedule, please <a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/6th_Schedule_re_Interim_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">click here.</a><br />
<br />
And what happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="151" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="312" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="187" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="85" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=150" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=150</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-43581137384407721022013-10-31T07:27:00.000-07:002013-11-11T07:31:31.810-08:00Stanford 20/20 for 20: Reliving Embarrassing Moment in England's Cricket History<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB">BY FREDDIE
WILDE (FEATURED COLUMNIST) ON </span><st1:date day="31" month="10" year="2013"><span lang="EN-GB">OCTOBER 31, 2013</span></st1:date><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.05pt; margin-bottom: 10.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 12.5pt; margin-top: 18.15pt; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Five years ago today, a Kevin Pietersen-led </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">England</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> played against a team called the "Stanford
Superstars," which was made up of West Indian cricketers in a Twenty20
match in which the winners would pocket $20 million.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The extravaganza was funded by Allen
Stanford, a multi-millionaire who lived in the </span><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Caribbean</span></st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The match was intended to be the first
of five—one played annually—but when Stanford was arrested for fraud and
sentenced to 110 years in prison, the ECB terminated their contract with the
financier and the tournament was consigned to the annals of history. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Five years on from one of the most
embarrassing sagas in English cricket history, B/R takes a look back at the
whole gruesome escapade. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.05pt; margin-bottom: 10.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 12.5pt; margin-top: 6.25pt; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The ECB were keen to enter in a deal with Stanford to
help find a solution to the growing problem of the Indian Premier League. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The T20 league in </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">India</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> offered English players unparalleled riches, and the
ECB were concerned about losing control of their players during the six-week
tournament that clashed with the beginning of the English season.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The Stanford Super Series therefore posed
a handy alternative that offered </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">England</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">'s players the opportunity to earn significant sums of
money in an ECB-endorsed tournament that could be played at a time in the
calendar in which there were few schedule clashes. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 0.0001pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">In light of what happened later, with
Stanford's arrest, his gratuitous welcome onto the Nursery Ground with his
helicopter at Lord's, the Home of<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt;"><a href="http://bleacherreport.com/cricket" style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; outline: 0px;"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; color: #003366; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0cm; padding: 0cm; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Cricket</span></b></a></span><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">, was cringeworthy and embarrassing. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.05pt; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 12.5pt; margin-top: 0cm; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.05pt; margin-bottom: 10.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 12.5pt; margin-top: 0cm; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Flanked by ECB chairman Giles Clarke and West Indian
cricket legend Sir Gary Sobers, Stanford prowled around the Lord's Nursery
Ground. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">He had been involved in West Indian
cricket before the launch of the Stanford Super Series—running the domestic T20
tournament in the </span><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Caribbean</span></st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> and putting together a group of "legends"
to endorse his project. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">West Indian cricket has a rich heritage.
The fact that legends such as Sobers and Sir Viv Richards were drawn into the
whole facade is a huge shame. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.05pt; margin-bottom: 10.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 12.5pt; margin-top: 0cm; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Perhaps the most enduring image of the saga will be
Stanford flanked by cricketing head-honchos and former players, standing tall,
and beaming behind a glass box of $20 million. Whether the money was even real
is unknown, in the light of the fraud scandal, but it was a grotesque show of
wealth and power. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 0.0001pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Stephen Brenkley, writing prior to the
tournament in<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><em style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; outline: 0px;"><span style="border: none windowtext 1.0pt; color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0cm; padding: 0cm;"><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cricket/stephen-brenkley-winner-takes-all-even-the-games-soul-973759.html" style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; outline: 0px;"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #003366; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The Independent</span></b></a></span></em><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">, was prescient in his assessment of the series:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin-bottom: 6.25pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Of all the short-form matches currently being organised, the conclusion
is easily reached that Stanford Superstars v </span></i><st1:country-region><st1:place><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">England</span></i></st1:place></st1:country-region><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> is the most offensive. It has no context as a proper
sporting competition, it is neither country versus country, club versus club or
invitation XI versus invitation XI. It is a rococo hybrid. It has money but
nothing else going for it. <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.05pt; margin-bottom: 10.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 12.5pt; margin-top: 0cm; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">When the series eventually got underway, the walking,
talking disaster continued. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The pitches were poor, the cricket was
shoddy and the show was horribly stage-managed. Cricket was Stanford's toy and
he was enjoying playing with it. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">Perhaps the most embarrassing moment of
the tournament was when Emily Prior—wife of </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">England</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> wicket keeper Matt Prior—was seen bouncing on the
knee of Stanford. who looked like the cat who had got the cream. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white; line-height: 15.05pt; margin-bottom: 10.0pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 12.5pt; margin-top: 0cm; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">To top the whole thing off, England lost the $20
million match, thus taking home nothing and rendering the initial point of
getting involved unfulfilled. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">It wasn't even a close match, with the
Stanford Superstars romping home by 10 wickets. </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">England</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"> looked disenchanted, fed up and wholly unimpressed
with the occasion. And who could blame them? <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; line-height: 15.05pt; margin: 0cm 12.5pt 10pt 0cm; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="color: #373737; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;">The Stanford Saga should be remembered
as one of the most embarrassing moments in cricket history, and an accurate
reflection of an era dictated to by money and greed. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Source article: <a href="http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1832090-stanford-2020-for-20-reliving-embarrassing-moment-in-englands-cricket-history" target="_blank">http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1832090-stanford-2020-for-20-reliving-embarrassing-moment-in-englands-cricket-history</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-31499297109913054132013-10-25T15:11:00.000-07:002013-11-07T13:49:42.017-08:00Receiver files 5th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
Receiver files 5th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On October 25, 2013, the Receiver filed his 5th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 5th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 5th. Schedule, please <a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/5th_Schedule_re_Interim_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">click here.</a><br />
<br />
And what happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="151" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="312" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="187" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="85" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=148" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=148</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-79450263272049337652013-10-17T12:57:00.000-07:002013-10-20T12:58:07.907-07:00Receiver files 4th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
Receiver files 4th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On October 17, 2013, the Receiver filed his 4th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 4th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 4th. Schedule, please <a href="http://www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com/documents/4th_Schedule_re_Interim_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">click here.</a><br />
<br />
And what happened with the IRS?<br />
Let’s remember the eagerness of some victims to manipulate and deceive the rest of the victims:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s1600/IRS_1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="151" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvQ2TSpFf_tbvBuDKO8S-KRyf8cDIj2Rtks4PQDECns8LNB98OnWi0CBg-jjh_uaDL3Y7KRQEECZJmZpV2dbkx-DMX_aeREmzDmBFdqCTBugEKsfdSYVoTywFCElDTzHEdUUAfLyWu-10/s400/IRS_1.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s1600/IRS_2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="312" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcMnZfUgrckuAfuScnHE4fuiCtmPDGOdzp9uuEJd3awBvigVenIS3TAnuK4sjdZdGZ_eogfny3um9pdyUfb4tjjcibNodiSlEX5JJANXuDbJPIM3oxXUJJ_xKR-zFKrDWH8_Ubkd_chr4/s400/IRS_2.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s1600/IRS_3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="187" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkfU3TdgoJVKM0S3nF4IDM4SudGgbzTnTj1EMeeuRh_jQI2oUYpMOc2D81DPOamicngFoudieoKMvx5tkLqL2Yq7d77O1tA2lJDcRwv3sp287vl7DA8OFtpYSddKpCBn41JQk2MHGhelo/s400/IRS_3.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shame you!!!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And who have their own agenda? Oh yeah! The others... Only the others...</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s1600/IRS_4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="85" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb9BJFQ4xwVwYxnQrcaSzDmAT9wUDhVqSUrHdq8MlMTGPetcfEWzJa8CWuIgB6VQ2diB77dfDjAfk7ZxtyPymA89YtEAqgGuycx0TL4PXCMrp6KwdboIhNadNTLVITj9zF5GsPjtrJXko/s400/IRS_4.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
What is built with lies and evil intention will collapse sooner or later.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=145" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=145</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-58388078642507018942013-10-17T12:04:00.000-07:002013-10-20T13:05:26.151-07:00SEC Lawyer Argues Stanford Victims Were SIPC Customers<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
The Securities Investor Protection Corp., an industry fund that covers losses from brokerage firm failures, must compensate victims of Allen Stanford’s $7 billion Ponzi scheme because they were customers of a U.S.-based brokerage, a government lawyer told an appeals court.<br />
<br />
“We’re not claiming that anyone is covered who did not have a brokerage account” with Houston-based Stanford Group Co., U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission attorney John Avery told a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals today in Washington. “That’s how they got sucked into this scheme.”<br />
<br />
The SEC is seeking to overturn a lower court ruling that blocked the agency from ordering SIPC to cover the Stanford victims, who invested in phony certificates of deposit. U.S. District Judge Robert Wilkins in July 2012 ruled the SEC had failed to show the 7,000 investors in the scheme met the definition of “customer” under the Securities Investor Protection Act, which set up the nonprofit fund run by the brokerage industry.<br />
<br />
The Stanford case is the first time the SEC has gone to court to force SIPC to extend coverage.<br />
<br />
Michael McConnell, an attorney for SIPC, urged the judges to uphold the ruling.<br />
<br />
In Stanford’s swindle, his brokerage clients were directed to buy the CDs at his Antigua-based Stanford International Bank LLC, which was not a SIPC member, McConnell said.<br />
<br />
‘No Basis’<br />
<br />
“There was no deposit of money with SGC in this case” and thus no basis for extending coverage to its clients, McConnell told circuit judges Merrick Garland and Sri Srinivasan. A third judge, David Sentelle, was absent and will listen to a recording of arguments.<br />
<br />
Much of the hour-and-20-minute hearing was consumed by debate over the legal definition of “customer” and whether the SEC has authority to force SIPC to amend its rules to broaden the meaning to include victims when a collapse involves both member and non-member companies.<br />
<br />
Garland said that in some cases, “the courts have thought it reasonable to consolidate the covered with the non-covered.”<br />
<br />
Stanford was convicted of multiple counts of wire fraud, mail fraud and other charges in March 2012 and was sentenced to 110 years in prison.<br />
<br />
SIPC, a congressionally chartered corporation, oversees liquidation of failed brokerages and through an industry-financed fund may also pay claims of as much as $500,000 a client for missing money and securities.<br />
<br />
Madoff Victims<br />
<br />
SIPC agreed to pay victims of Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, in which $17 billion of principal disappeared according to the U.S., as well as investors who lost money in the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008 and the MF Global Holdings Inc. commodities brokerage in October 2011.<br />
<br />
The SEC argued that the denial of coverage didn’t consider the relationship between Stanford’s bank and brokerage.<br />
<br />
“It’s very difficult to draw and distinction, a meaningful distinction, between any of these Stanford entities,” Avery said in court.<br />
<br />
Money spent on the CDs from the Antiguan bank came back to Stanford-controlled entities in the U.S., he said.<br />
<br />
“This was a Ponzi scheme based in the United States,” he said.<br />
<br />
The SIPC fund contains about $1.9 billion and exposure from Stanford victims is “potentially in the billions,” Dan McGinn, a spokesman for SIPC, said in an interview last week.<br />
<br />
‘Unwarranted Expansion’<br />
<br />
Former SEC commissioners Joseph Grundfest and Paul Atkins filed a friend of the court brief urging rejection of the SEC request because it represents an “unwarranted expansion” of the term “customer” that would “substantially increase the exposure of the SIPC fund.”<br />
<br />
“The SEC’s proposed expansion of SIPC protection, absent even the most rudimentary consideration of any financial consequences, would radically transform the SIPA and threaten SIPC’s ability to function as Congress intended,” they wrote.<br />
<br />
John Coffee Jr., a professor of securities law at Columbia University, said deciding how far to extend SIPC coverage is a fundamental question that should be addressed by Congress “rather than through judicial lawmaking.”<br />
<br />
“Legislation is the better way to go rather than to try to extend SIPC coverage retroactively,” Coffee, who has no involvement with the case, said in a telephone interview.<br />
<br />
The case is Securities and Exchange Commission v. Securities Investor Protection Corp., 12-5286, U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia (Washington).<br />
<br />
To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew Zajac in Washington at azajac@bloomberg.net<br />
<br />
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=144" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=144</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-5714670224262877472013-10-16T13:09:00.000-07:002013-10-20T13:09:28.390-07:00U.S. SEC battles with industry fund over Stanford victims' claims: Oct 16, 2013<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
U.S. SEC battles with industry fund over Stanford victims' claims<br />
Text Size<br />
<br />
Published: Wednesday, 16 Oct 2013 | 5:03 PM ET<br />
By: Sarah N. Lynch<br />
<br />
<br />
WASHINGTON, Oct 16 (Reuters) - U.S. regulators sought to overturn a 2012 court ruling that prohibited victims of Allen Stanford's $7 billion Ponzi scheme from seeking compensation, in an unprecedented legal battle between the government and an industry-backed fund that protects investors.<br />
<br />
In oral arguments on Wednesday, a lawyer for the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to force the fund to start court proceedings so that victims can file claims to recover at least a portion of the millions of dollars they lost.<br />
<br />
The Securities Investor Protection Corp (SIPC), which administers the fund, has refused to do so, saying it believes Stanford investors do not meet the legal definition of "customer" under a federal law that is designed to protect investors if their U.S. brokerage collapses.<br />
<br />
SIPC uses funds paid for by the brokerage industry to compensate investors if that happens.<br />
<br />
A federal district judge agreed with SIPC's position in July 2012, and tossed out the SEC's lawsuit.<br />
<br />
But pressure from a well-organized group of investors who lost money in the scheme and some members of Congress has helped keep the fight alive.<br />
<br />
Two of the judges on the panel put lawyers representing the SEC and SIPC through a series of rigorous and difficult questions, often playing devil's advocate with each side. A third judge on the panel was not present for the arguments.<br />
<br />
The judges gave no strong hints on how they may rule.<br />
<br />
However, Chief Judge Merrick Garland asked a series of questions about whether the SEC could simply write new rules that would compel SIPC to act, as opposed to seeking a resolution in court.<br />
<br />
The SEC, as SIPC's regulatory supervisor, has argued that it has the legal authority and discretion to force the fund to take action.<br />
<br />
"Is there anything stopping the SEC from issuing a rule defining 'customer' the way that you want to define it here?" Garland asked.<br />
<br />
"I don't believe so," replied John Avery, the attorney arguing the SEC's case. But if it were challenged, he added, the SEC would land right back in court again.<br />
<br />
Allen Stanford was sentenced in 2012 to 110 years in prison for bilking investors with fraudulent certificates of deposit issued by Stanford International Bank, his bank in Antigua.<br />
<br />
Many of the investors who purchased these products, however, did so through his Houston, Texas-based brokerage, Stanford Group Co.<br />
<br />
At the heart of the case is the question of whether the victims of Allen Stanford's Ponzi scheme meet the legal definition of "customer."<br />
<br />
SIPC argues that the investors in the scheme entrusted their money to the offshore, unregulated Antiguan bank and not to the U.S. broker-dealer.<br />
<br />
Moreover, they say that Stanford's investors actually did receive their certificates of deposit as promised, even though they turned out to be virtually worthless.<br />
<br />
The law, they said, is not designed to combat fraud or guarantee an investment's value.<br />
<br />
The SEC, however, says the location of the Stanford bank is irrelevant because the entire business organization was operating one massive fraud, and that in fact no actual certificates of deposit truly existed.<br />
<br />
"It's very difficult to draw a meaningful distinction between any of these Stanford entities, which were all part of the scheme, they were all in on the scheme, they didn't follow corporate formalities and the money was commingled," SEC attorney John Avery argued. "We believe the money, at least constructively, stayed with SGC."<br />
<br />
SIPC's attorney Michael McConnell urged the court not to allow the SEC to simply lump the Stanford business entities together so the investors can file claims.<br />
<br />
He added that the investors received disclosures explicitly telling them the Antiguan bank was not SIPC-protected or U.S.-regulated.<br />
<br />
"You have people who in the face of disclosure statements clearly to the contrary, go off to an offshore bank seeking ... outlandishly high rates of return knowing that it is not covered by the securities laws," he said.<br />
<br />
"Effectively, what the SEC is telling us is that SIPC should implicitly give free insurance coverage to a fly-by-night organization."<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=143" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=143</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-52449062896412530572013-10-16T13:07:00.000-07:002013-10-20T13:07:56.631-07:00Obama campaign pocketed Ponzi schemer cash: Oct 16, 2013<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Obama campaign pocketed Ponzi schemer cash<br />
Thirty-nine political candidates, committees have not returned R. Allen Stanford contributions<br />
<br />
President Barack Obama received $4,600 in campaign contributions from R. Allen Stanford less than a year before the Texan was arrested in 2009 for running one of the biggest Ponzi schemes in U.S. history.<br />
<br />
Despite repeated requests, the Obama campaign has not returned the money to the court-appointed receiver tasked with recovering money from the fraud and returning it to Stanford’s victims. The campaign still has $5.4 million in its coffers even though the president won't be running in another election.<br />
<br />
(Update, Oct. 16, 2013, 1:39 p.m.: The Obama campaign's new 3rd quarter filing indicates it has $372,549 remaining.)<br />
<br />
Obama isn’t the only politician who has declined to return Stanford campaign contributions to help make Stanford’s defrauded investors whole. A total of 39 candidates and committees have kept their campaign funds despite the pleas by the receiver, Texas Lawyer Ralph Janvey, to return the money.<br />
<br />
A spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, which now speaks for the Obama campaign, did not immediately comment.<br />
<br />
Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, has the largest outstanding contribution that hasn’t been returned — $10,000 — according to the web site of the receiver. The New Jersey Democratic State Committee also received $10,000 from Stanford and his companies, the web site says.<br />
<br />
Other members of Congress on the receiver’s list include Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass.<br />
<br />
Stanford was sentenced in 2012 to 110 years in prison for bilking investors out of $7.2 billion. The Texan ran an investment firm that sold fraudulent certificates of deposit in an Antigua-based bank that he owned called Stanford International Bank Ltd.<br />
<br />
Five Democratic and Republican national campaign committees, which had received more than $1.6 million from Stanford and his companies, fought attempts by Janvey to recover those contributions. In October 2012, a federal appeals court ordered the committees to turn over the money and pay the receivership’s attorney fees.<br />
<br />
Janvey has not sued Obama’s campaign, or the other 38 committees who haven’t returned their contributions, because the cost of a suit would be more than the amount recovered, said Kevin Sadler, a lawyer with Baker Botts that represents the receivership.<br />
<br />
Many members of Congress and presidential candidates returned the ill-gotten contributions voluntarily. Former Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) returned a total of $27,500 and Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., reimbursed the receivership $14,000.<br />
<br />
Janvey was appointed in February 2009 to wind down Stanford’s web of companies and try to recover as much money as possible to return to the investors who were defrauded in the scheme.<br />
<br />
To date, he has recovered $234.4 million. However, the costs of winding down the companies, and of lawsuits trying to recover money, have eaten up more than half that amount.<br />
<br />
Stanford investors last month began receiving their first checks since the receivership was created in amounts that totaled about a penny for each dollar lost.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Read more: <a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=142" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=142</a></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-80212079470276632772013-10-15T12:21:00.000-07:002013-10-16T12:24:00.245-07:00Madoff Trustee Asks Supreme Court to Let Him Sue Banks<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">By PETER LATTMAN<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB" style="clear: right; float: right; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img alt="Irving H. Picard is seeking to recover money for the victims of Bernard L. Madoff’s fraud, whose paper losses total $64 billion." height="204" src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2013/10/10/business/Madoff/Madoff-tmagArticle.jpg" width="320" /></span></div>
<span class="update"><span lang="EN-GB">Updated, 7:27 p.m. | </span></span><span lang="EN-GB">The trustee seeking to recover money for the victims of Bernard L.
Madoff’s Ponzi scheme asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday to review a ruling
that prohibits him from suing several of the world’s largest banks that he
contends aided the fraud.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">In June, a federal appeals court in </span><st1:city><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB">Manhattan</span></st1:place></st1:city><span lang="EN-GB"> decided
that the trustee, Irving H. Picard, did not have standing to sue JPMorgan
Chase, UBS, HSBC and UniCredit Bank </span><st1:country-region><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB">Austria</span></st1:place></st1:country-region><span lang="EN-GB">
on claims that they abetted the multibillion-dollar fraud, which lasted
decades. That opinion upheld a lower-court ruling by Judge Jed S. Rakoff of </span><st1:street><st1:address><span lang="EN-GB">Federal District Court</span></st1:address></st1:street><span lang="EN-GB"> in </span><st1:city><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB">Manhattan</span></st1:place></st1:city><span lang="EN-GB">.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">On Wednesday, lawyers for Mr. Picard filed a petition to
the Supreme Court requesting that it hear an appeal of the case.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">“Bernard L. Madoff did not act alone,” Mr. Picard’s lawyers
said. The scheme “could not have persisted for so long, or defrauded so many of
so much, without a network of financial institutions, feeder funds and
individuals who participated in his fraud or acquiesced in it — just like any
large-scale financial fraud.”</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">In a statement, the lawyers for the trustee said the ruling
by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit contradicted the
decisions of other appeals courts across the country.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">Such conflicts often provide an impetus for the Supreme
Court to hear a case, though it accepts only a fraction of appeal requests. The
court receives about 10,000 petitions for a so-called writ of certiorari each
year, yet grants only about 75 to 80 of those cases, according to its Web site.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">The legal issue in the Madoff case centers on whether the
trustee has the right to pursue claims against a third party, like a bank, that
collaborates with a broker — in this case Mr. Madoff — to defraud customers.
The appeals court ruled that under the law, the trustee “stands in the shoes”
of Mr. Madoff’s firm and thus cannot sue the banks for losses caused by Mr.
Madoff’s fraud.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">Mr. Picard’s lawyers said the appeals court ruling
undermined the intent of the Securities Investor Protection Act.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">“If this decision is allowed to stand, the law governing
S.I.P.A. liquidations will be in turmoil, making collaboration with future
Madoffs risk-free for big financial institutions,” wrote David B. Rivkin Jr., a
lawyer for Mr. Picard at Baker Hostetler. “In other words, the bad guys win.”</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">Mr. Picard is trying to recover billions of dollars from
the banks that he said turned blind eyes to clear warning signs of the Madoff
fraud. He contends, for instance, that JPMorgan was “thoroughly complicit” in
the fraud, having obtained many indications of misconduct and failed to report
the suspicious activity.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">The lawsuit filed against JPMorgan highlights several
examples in which JPMorgan officials expressed concerns about Mr. Madoff’s
business. On </span><st1:date day="15" month="6" year="2007"><span lang="EN-GB">June
15, 2007</span></st1:date><span lang="EN-GB">, a senior risk-management officer
at the bank e-mailed colleagues to report that another bank executive “just
told me that there is a well-known cloud over the head of Madoff and that his
returns are speculated to be part of a Ponzi scheme.”</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">In another e-mail, a top private wealth management
executive at the bank was routinely urging clients to avoid investments with
exposure to Mr. Madoff because his “Oz-like signals” were “too difficult to
ignore.”</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">Federal prosecutors continue to investigate whether
JPMorgan failed to properly alert regulators about Mr. Madoff’s business, said
people briefed on the investigation. A JPMorgan spokesman declined to comment.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">Cash losses from the fraud are estimated at about $17
billion, but the paper wealth that was wiped out totaled more than $64 billion.
Mr. Picard has thus far recovered about $9.4 billion and continues to pursue
lost money.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">Mr. Madoff is serving a 150-year sentence in a federal
prison in </span><st1:state><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB">North Carolina</span></st1:place></st1:state><span lang="EN-GB"> after pleading guilty in March 2009.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-GB">While the trustee’s lawyers at Baker Hostetler try to
pursue a case against JPMorgan, they have another legal connection to the
banking giant. Mr. Rivkin and Oren J. Warshavsky are representing Bruno Iksil,
the JPMorgan trader nicknamed the London Whale, who is cooperating with the
government in its investigation into the bank’s record trading loss.</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">In
addition, jury selection for the first criminal trial related to the Madoff
case is under way in federal court in </span><st1:city><st1:place><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">Manhattan</span></st1:place></st1:city><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">.
Five former employees of Mr. Madoff, including his longtime personal secretary
and two computer programmers, are fighting charges that they helped their boss
carry out his fraud. The trial is expected to take as long as five months.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 17px;">Link: </span></span><a href="http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/madoff-trustee-appeals-to-supreme-court-in-suit-against-banks/?_r=0" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%; text-align: left;" target="_blank">http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/madoff-trustee-appeals-to-supreme-court-in-suit-against-banks/?_r=0</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3882240089751635034.post-85139021051729636732013-10-12T12:52:00.000-07:002013-10-16T12:52:50.283-07:00Madoff Trustee Asks Supreme Court to Let Him Sue Banks<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
By PETER LATTMAN<br />
Updated, 7:27 p.m. | The trustee seeking to recover money for the victims of Bernard L. Madoff’s Ponzi scheme asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday to review a ruling that prohibits him from suing several of the world’s largest banks that he contends aided the fraud.<br />
<br />
In June, a federal appeals court in Manhattan decided that the trustee, Irving H. Picard, did not have standing to sue JPMorgan Chase, UBS, HSBC and UniCredit Bank Austria on claims that they abetted the multibillion-dollar fraud, which lasted decades. That opinion upheld a lower-court ruling by Judge Jed S. Rakoff of Federal District Court in Manhattan.<br />
On Wednesday, lawyers for Mr. Picard filed a petition to the Supreme Court requesting that it hear an appeal of the case.<br />
<br />
“Bernard L. Madoff did not act alone,” Mr. Picard’s lawyers said. The scheme “could not have persisted for so long, or defrauded so many of so much, without a network of financial institutions, feeder funds and individuals who participated in his fraud or acquiesced in it — just like any large-scale financial fraud.”<br />
<br />
In a statement, the lawyers for the trustee said the ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit contradicted the decisions of other appeals courts across the country.<br />
<br />
Such conflicts often provide an impetus for the Supreme Court to hear a case, though it accepts only a fraction of appeal requests. The court receives about 10,000 petitions for a so-called writ of certiorari each year, yet grants only about 75 to 80 of those cases, according to its Web site.<br />
<br />
The legal issue in the Madoff case centers on whether the trustee has the right to pursue claims against a third party, like a bank, that collaborates with a broker — in this case Mr. Madoff — to defraud customers. The appeals court ruled that under the law, the trustee “stands in the shoes” of Mr. Madoff’s firm and thus cannot sue the banks for losses caused by Mr. Madoff’s fraud.<br />
<br />
Mr. Picard’s lawyers said the appeals court ruling undermined the intent of the Securities Investor Protection Act.<br />
“If this decision is allowed to stand, the law governing S.I.P.A. liquidations will be in turmoil, making collaboration with future Madoffs risk-free for big financial institutions,” wrote David B. Rivkin Jr., a lawyer for Mr. Picard at Baker Hostetler. “In other words, the bad guys win.”<br />
<br />
Mr. Picard is trying to recover billions of dollars from the banks that he said turned blind eyes to clear warning signs of the Madoff fraud. He contends, for instance, that JPMorgan was “thoroughly complicit” in the fraud, having obtained many indications of misconduct and failed to report the suspicious activity.<br />
<br />
The lawsuit filed against JPMorgan highlights several examples in which JPMorgan officials expressed concerns about Mr. Madoff’s business. On June 15, 2007, a senior risk-management officer at the bank e-mailed colleagues to report that another bank executive “just told me that there is a well-known cloud over the head of Madoff and that his returns are speculated to be part of a Ponzi scheme.”<br />
<br />
In another e-mail, a top private wealth management executive at the bank was routinely urging clients to avoid investments with exposure to Mr. Madoff because his “Oz-like signals” were “too difficult to ignore.”<br />
<br />
Federal prosecutors continue to investigate whether JPMorgan failed to properly alert regulators about Mr. Madoff’s business, said people briefed on the investigation. A JPMorgan spokesman declined to comment.<br />
<br />
Cash losses from the fraud are estimated at about $17 billion, but the paper wealth that was wiped out totaled more than $64 billion. Mr. Picard has thus far recovered about $9.4 billion and continues to pursue lost money.<br />
<br />
Mr. Madoff is serving a 150-year sentence in a federal prison in North Carolina after pleading guilty in March 2009.<br />
<br />
While the trustee’s lawyers at Baker Hostetler try to pursue a case against JPMorgan, they have another legal connection to the banking giant. Mr. Rivkin and Oren J. Warshavsky are representing Bruno Iksil, the JPMorgan trader nicknamed the London Whale, who is cooperating with the government in its investigation into the bank’s record trading loss.<br />
<br />
In addition, jury selection for the first criminal trial related to the Madoff case is under way in federal court in Manhattan. Five former employees of Mr. Madoff, including his longtime personal secretary and two computer programmers, are fighting charges that they helped their boss carry out his fraud. The trial is expected to take as long as five months.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 17px;">Read more: </span></span><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=138" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/view_topic.php?t=eng&id=138</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #cccccc; font-size: x-large;">For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum </span><span style="color: orange; font-size: x-large;"><a href="http://sivg.org/forum/" target="_blank">http://sivg.org/forum/</a></span></div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0