Stanford asks judge to delay trial after experts resign

By PURVA PATEL, HOUSTON CHRONICLE

Expert witnesses working for R. Allen Stanford's defense have resigned because they haven't been paid, according to a request made by the former billionaire's lawyers to postpone his trial.

Last week, U.S. District Judge David Hittner rejected a previous request for a 90-day continuance in the trial of Stanford, who is accused of swindling investors out of $7 billion. The latest request asks the judge to reconsider and notes Stanford - who was only recently deemed competent to assist his attorneys - needs time to go through the evidence in the case in order to assist in his defense.

So far, all expenses submitted to the district court have been within the budget previously submitted to the court, but experts haven't been paid for four months, according to a recent motion filed by Stanford's government- appointed lawyers.

Limitations on budget

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has also informed the attorneys that it intends to limit the expert budget moving forward and mandate that all payments be made after the trial ends, according to the motion.

"Counsel was informed by all experts that they cannot continue to assist the defense under the new parameters. ... All experts have therefore tendered their resignations to counsel and have ceased all work relating to this matter," the motion states.

The attorneys, therefore, can't prepare for trial or meet the court's deadlines, they argue.

Robert Scardino, an attorney for Stanford, declined to comment Monday.

While the district court usually handles approval of payments for indigent defendants like Stanford, the circuit court may step in when a case's budget looks like it will exceed the allocated funds, said Philip Hilder, a Houston attorney and former federal prosecutor.

There is usually an arbitrary lag time of weeks or months before payments are made after being submitted, but in such a time-consuming case, experts aren't necessarily going to "take it on good faith that they're going to get paid," Hilder said.

Ineffective counsel?

"The defense is in a difficult position because this particular case is expensive and yet they have a duty and obligation to zealously defend Mr. Stanford," Hilder said. "Unless the defense can properly and adequately utilize expert testimony, Mr. Stanford may have a claim for ineffective counsel."

Previously, Stanford's lawyers have claimed he suffered brain damage in a jailhouse attack that rendered him unable to assist in his own defense. His original trial date in January 2011 was postponed so he could undergo a series of evaluations at a federal prison hospital.

Hittner ruled last month that Stanford was competent, denied the lawyers' first request for more time to prepare for trial and ordered jury selection to begin Jan. 23.

Stanford, 61, who headed Houston-based Stanford Financial Group, maintains he is innocent of the 14 charges he faces.

He has been held without bail since his June 2009 arrest.

A federal indictment alleges Stanford and others defrauded investors who bought certificates of deposit issued by Stanford's bank in the Caribbean island nation of Antigua.

Three co-defendants are free on bail and will be tried later, and a fourth is fighting extradition from Antigua.

Stanford Group's chief financial officer was charged separately, pleaded guilty and is expected to testify if the case comes to trial.