By Laurel Brubaker Calkins - Feb 7, 2012
James M. Davis, Stanford Financial Group Co.'s former finance chief, told jurors that R. Allen Stanford's businesses collapsed in part because the stock market imploded and a court-appointed receiver destroyed much of the companies' value after they were seized by the government.
Davis, testifying for the government under a plea deal at Stanford's federal court trial in Houston, was shown a letter he wrote shortly after regulators seized Stanford's companies in February 2009.
"There was from the start never a thought to put the clients in harm's way in this process, never a hint of criminal intent," Robert Scardino, a lawyer for Stanford, read from the letter, which Davis said he wrote to an attorney he was trying to hire to defend him at the time.
"The underlying global business growth model remained strong," Davis wrote in the letter, adding that some of Stanford's businesses were moving toward profitability.
"Isn't that 180 degrees opposite from what you've been telling this jury?"
Scardino asked Davis. "You said these companies had no value."
Davis responded, "A number of the companies Stanford owned were growing; they were worth something." The 2009 letter "could be true under certain circumstances," he said.
The former finance chief told jurors he changed his mind a month after writing that letter, when he met with his current attorney, who persuaded him to seek a plea deal. "But at the time I was still lying," he said of the letter. "I was still in the middle of it."
Stanford's Defense
Davis's testimony may bolster Stanford's defense that he never intended to defraud investors of $7 billion through what the government says was a Ponzi scheme built on bogus certificates of deposit at Antigua-based Stanford International Bank.
Stanford's lawyers claim accountants were in the process of consolidating companies the financier funded with $2 billion in secret bank loans onto the Antiguan bank's portfolio when regulators stepped in and stopped the process.
Stanford's attorneys told jurors several times that the financier was a hands-off visionary who left the details of running his companies to others, primarily Davis.
"So you were running the company?" Scardino asked Davis.
Attention Needed
"No sir," Davis replied. "His attention was desperately needed," Davis said of Stanford.
Davis testified he hopes his cooperation will lead to leniency when he is sentenced. Under the terms of his plea deal, Davis, 63, faces as long as 30 years in prison.
Davis said while he doesn't wish to spend the rest of his life in prison, he'd rather be there than free and "bound as I was for the last 20 years with Allen Stanford."
Showing posts with label Houston. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Houston. Show all posts
Wednesday, 8 February 2012
Thursday, 5 May 2011
New Allen Stanford Indictment Unlikely to End Delays
A federal grand jury in Houston has returned a new, 14-count indictment against alleged fraudster Allen Stanford, who was already accused in 2009 of running a $7 billion Ponzi scheme. But the new charges are unlikely to move the case closer to a trial.
Stanford was initially charged along with three former executives and the former top banking regulator in Antigua, the home of Stanford's offshore bank. But the co-defendants' cases were separated from Stanford's last year. The new indictment charges Stanford alone.
As in the earlier case, he is accused of conspiracy, wire fraud, mail fraud, obstruction of an SEC investigation and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
The new indictment removes two counts of wire fraud and five counts of mail fraud, and Stanford is no longer accused of conspiracy to commit securities fraud. Still, Stanford faces up to 250 years in prison.
A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment, citing a court-imposed gag order in the case.
While the new indictment sharpens the focus on Stanford as a lone defendant, it is unclear whether it will do much to advance a case that has been hopelessly stalled for months.
Stanford's original trial, scheduled for January, was postponed indefinitely after he became addicted to prescription drugs while in federal custody and a judge ruled him incompetent. Because of that, he is also unable to answer the new charges against him and will not attend an arraignment scheduled for May 19. Stanford's court-appointed defense attorney, Ali Fazel, says that as a matter of law, Stanford cannot enter a plea.
"He has been found incompetent," Fazel said. "We are on standby."
The fate of Stanford's initial co-defendants—former chief investment officer Laura Pendergest-Holt, former accounting executives Mark Kuhrt and Gilbert Lopez, and former Antiguan banking regulator Leroy King—also remains unclear. Pendergest-Holt, Kuhrt and Lopez have all pleaded not guilty. King, who holds dual citizenship in the U.S. and Antigua, has been fighting extradition to the U.S.
Fazel notes that as a matter of law, the judge in the case could put the co-defendants on trial at any time, but instead has chosen to delay their cases until after Stanford's trial, which has been postponed indefinitely.
"The other defendants are free on bond and have had months to study the charges," Fazel said. Citing the judge's gag order, however, Fazel to speculate on why the co-defendants are being allowed to wait for trial.
"Make of that what you will," he said.
The new indictment comes at a time when investors and others touched by the Stanford scandal have been turning up the heat on the authorities in hopes of moving the case along. The delays have confounded efforts by a court-appointed receiver to recover assets for Stanford's alleged victims, because most of the missing funds are believed to be in overseas accounts. Without a guilty verdict and a forfeiture order, the funds are off limits to U.S. authorities, meaning investors are likely to see just pennies on the dollar.
The receiver, Dallas attorney Ralph Janvey, has instead been focusing his efforts in the U.S. Janvey has filed dozens of so-called "clawback" claims, including against dozens of former Stanford employees and investment advisors. One such claim targets two advisors widely credited with helping authorities make their case against Stanford: Charles Rawl and Mark Tidwell of Houston.
The two sued Stanford in 2007, saying they left the company due to rampant fraud, which the company denied. Rawl and Tidwell say they brought their evidence to the SEC, which sued Stanford in 2009. (Read about other whistleblower cases and how the SEC rewards tipsters here.)
Rawl, who has not spoken publicly about the case in two years, told CNBC exclusively this week that he and Tidwell contacted the SEC seeking help with the suit by the receiver, but were told they are on their own.
"The SEC attorneys informed us that, you know, 'We've got your back guys, you're good with us,'" Rawl said. But apparently that goodwill only went so far. Rawl said they were told, "We like you, you're our guys, but we don't control the receiver. There's nothing we can do to help you.'"
An SEC spokesman did not respond to CNBC's request for a comment.
Rawl believes the government is intentionally dragging its feet because authorities took so long to move in on Stanford. A 2010 SEC Inspector General's report found the agency was aware of issues at Stanford as far back as 1997. Rawl alleges the delays in Stanford's criminal case are part of what he calls a cover-up.
"The further that people dig, the more embarrassment on the government's part," Rawl said. "I think certain people hope it just fades away."
Stanford was initially charged along with three former executives and the former top banking regulator in Antigua, the home of Stanford's offshore bank. But the co-defendants' cases were separated from Stanford's last year. The new indictment charges Stanford alone.
As in the earlier case, he is accused of conspiracy, wire fraud, mail fraud, obstruction of an SEC investigation and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
The new indictment removes two counts of wire fraud and five counts of mail fraud, and Stanford is no longer accused of conspiracy to commit securities fraud. Still, Stanford faces up to 250 years in prison.
A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment, citing a court-imposed gag order in the case.
While the new indictment sharpens the focus on Stanford as a lone defendant, it is unclear whether it will do much to advance a case that has been hopelessly stalled for months.
Stanford's original trial, scheduled for January, was postponed indefinitely after he became addicted to prescription drugs while in federal custody and a judge ruled him incompetent. Because of that, he is also unable to answer the new charges against him and will not attend an arraignment scheduled for May 19. Stanford's court-appointed defense attorney, Ali Fazel, says that as a matter of law, Stanford cannot enter a plea.
"He has been found incompetent," Fazel said. "We are on standby."
The fate of Stanford's initial co-defendants—former chief investment officer Laura Pendergest-Holt, former accounting executives Mark Kuhrt and Gilbert Lopez, and former Antiguan banking regulator Leroy King—also remains unclear. Pendergest-Holt, Kuhrt and Lopez have all pleaded not guilty. King, who holds dual citizenship in the U.S. and Antigua, has been fighting extradition to the U.S.
Fazel notes that as a matter of law, the judge in the case could put the co-defendants on trial at any time, but instead has chosen to delay their cases until after Stanford's trial, which has been postponed indefinitely.
"The other defendants are free on bond and have had months to study the charges," Fazel said. Citing the judge's gag order, however, Fazel to speculate on why the co-defendants are being allowed to wait for trial.
"Make of that what you will," he said.
The new indictment comes at a time when investors and others touched by the Stanford scandal have been turning up the heat on the authorities in hopes of moving the case along. The delays have confounded efforts by a court-appointed receiver to recover assets for Stanford's alleged victims, because most of the missing funds are believed to be in overseas accounts. Without a guilty verdict and a forfeiture order, the funds are off limits to U.S. authorities, meaning investors are likely to see just pennies on the dollar.
The receiver, Dallas attorney Ralph Janvey, has instead been focusing his efforts in the U.S. Janvey has filed dozens of so-called "clawback" claims, including against dozens of former Stanford employees and investment advisors. One such claim targets two advisors widely credited with helping authorities make their case against Stanford: Charles Rawl and Mark Tidwell of Houston.
The two sued Stanford in 2007, saying they left the company due to rampant fraud, which the company denied. Rawl and Tidwell say they brought their evidence to the SEC, which sued Stanford in 2009. (Read about other whistleblower cases and how the SEC rewards tipsters here.)
Rawl, who has not spoken publicly about the case in two years, told CNBC exclusively this week that he and Tidwell contacted the SEC seeking help with the suit by the receiver, but were told they are on their own.
"The SEC attorneys informed us that, you know, 'We've got your back guys, you're good with us,'" Rawl said. But apparently that goodwill only went so far. Rawl said they were told, "We like you, you're our guys, but we don't control the receiver. There's nothing we can do to help you.'"
An SEC spokesman did not respond to CNBC's request for a comment.
Rawl believes the government is intentionally dragging its feet because authorities took so long to move in on Stanford. A 2010 SEC Inspector General's report found the agency was aware of issues at Stanford as far back as 1997. Rawl alleges the delays in Stanford's criminal case are part of what he calls a cover-up.
"The further that people dig, the more embarrassment on the government's part," Rawl said. "I think certain people hope it just fades away."
Saturday, 20 February 2010
Stanford stays in jail
Jailed Texas swindler suspect R. Allen Stanford unveiled his latest legal tactic to get free: Prosecutors failed to tell me what I've done wrong. So there!
A year after charging the billionaire in a $7 billion Ponzi scheme, the Securities and Exchange Commission has failed to disclose any basic case, said Stanford's lawyers in a new bid to an appeals court for his release.
"We've looked really hard at the latest complaint, and it's 32 pages long but it doesn't really have any specifics about what Allen Stanford said, to whom he said it or how the SEC even has jurisdiction over the CDs, because they're not securities," Stanford lawyer Christina Sarchio told Bloomberg.
But it didn't fly, and a US appeals court in Houston turned down his freedom bid for a second time.
Stanford's trial is set to begin in January 2011.
Stanford, 59, was jailed nearly eight months ago without bail, due to his possible flight risk. Courts said he's likely to flee the US, since he holds a passport for the tiny Caribbean island of Antigua, which also has knighted him as Sir Allen for planting a global bank there and holding immense personal wealth on the island.
In one earlier attempt to get free for the Christmas holidays, Stanford unsuccessfully argued that he's cracking up behind bars and simply must get out for a family visit.
Stanford did manage last year to get moved from a Texas hellhole cell into a cushy federal lockup in Houston after a cellmate broke his nose and blackened his eye.
RSS Jailed Texas swindler suspect R. Allen Stanford unveiled his latest legal tactic to get free: Prosecutors failed to tell me what I've done wrong. So there.
A year after charging the billionaire in a $7 billion Ponzi scheme, the Securities and Exchange Commission has failed to disclose any basic case, said Stanford's lawyers in a new bid to an appeals court for his release.
"We've looked really hard at the latest complaint, and it's 32 pages long but it doesn't really have any specifics about what Allen Stanford said, to whom he said it or how the SEC even has jurisdiction over the CDs, because they're not securities," Stanford lawyer Christina Sarchio told Bloomberg.
But it didn't fly, and a US appeals court in Houston turned down his freedom bid for a second time.
Stanford's trial is set to begin in January 2011.
Stanford, 59, was jailed nearly eight months ago without bail, due to his possible flight risk. Courts said he's likely to flee the US, since he holds a passport for the tiny Caribbean island of Antigua, which also has knighted him as Sir Allen for planting a global bank there and holding immense personal wealth on the island.
In one earlier attempt to get free for the Christmas holidays, Stanford unsuccessfully argued that he's cracking up behind bars and simply must get out for a family visit.
Stanford did manage last year to get moved from a Texas hellhole cell into a cushy federal lockup in Houston after a cellmate broke his nose and blackened his eye.
A year after charging the billionaire in a $7 billion Ponzi scheme, the Securities and Exchange Commission has failed to disclose any basic case, said Stanford's lawyers in a new bid to an appeals court for his release.
"We've looked really hard at the latest complaint, and it's 32 pages long but it doesn't really have any specifics about what Allen Stanford said, to whom he said it or how the SEC even has jurisdiction over the CDs, because they're not securities," Stanford lawyer Christina Sarchio told Bloomberg.
But it didn't fly, and a US appeals court in Houston turned down his freedom bid for a second time.
Stanford's trial is set to begin in January 2011.
Stanford, 59, was jailed nearly eight months ago without bail, due to his possible flight risk. Courts said he's likely to flee the US, since he holds a passport for the tiny Caribbean island of Antigua, which also has knighted him as Sir Allen for planting a global bank there and holding immense personal wealth on the island.
In one earlier attempt to get free for the Christmas holidays, Stanford unsuccessfully argued that he's cracking up behind bars and simply must get out for a family visit.
Stanford did manage last year to get moved from a Texas hellhole cell into a cushy federal lockup in Houston after a cellmate broke his nose and blackened his eye.
RSS Jailed Texas swindler suspect R. Allen Stanford unveiled his latest legal tactic to get free: Prosecutors failed to tell me what I've done wrong. So there.
A year after charging the billionaire in a $7 billion Ponzi scheme, the Securities and Exchange Commission has failed to disclose any basic case, said Stanford's lawyers in a new bid to an appeals court for his release.
"We've looked really hard at the latest complaint, and it's 32 pages long but it doesn't really have any specifics about what Allen Stanford said, to whom he said it or how the SEC even has jurisdiction over the CDs, because they're not securities," Stanford lawyer Christina Sarchio told Bloomberg.
But it didn't fly, and a US appeals court in Houston turned down his freedom bid for a second time.
Stanford's trial is set to begin in January 2011.
Stanford, 59, was jailed nearly eight months ago without bail, due to his possible flight risk. Courts said he's likely to flee the US, since he holds a passport for the tiny Caribbean island of Antigua, which also has knighted him as Sir Allen for planting a global bank there and holding immense personal wealth on the island.
In one earlier attempt to get free for the Christmas holidays, Stanford unsuccessfully argued that he's cracking up behind bars and simply must get out for a family visit.
Stanford did manage last year to get moved from a Texas hellhole cell into a cushy federal lockup in Houston after a cellmate broke his nose and blackened his eye.
Saturday, 30 January 2010
Stanford's daughter agrees to vacate $1.3M condo
The daughter of jailed Texas businessman R. Allen Stanford has dropped her fight to stay in a $1.3 million Houston condominium, her attorney said Thursday.
Randi Stanford's decision came hours before she was to appear in federal district court to show why she should not be held in contempt for refusing to cooperate with government efforts to sell the 2,800-square-foot home. She will move out by March 31.
The condo was a gift from her father, who is accused of leading a $7 billion Ponzi scheme — allegations that he denies. Court-appointed receiver Ralph Janvey plans to sell the condo and direct the proceeds to allegedly defrauded investors.
On Wednesday, Janvey filed a declaration from a forensic accountant detailing that most of the $1.3 million purchase price came from the elder Stanford's personal bank account in Antigua, which is tied to his alleged wrongdoing.
Joe Kendall, Randi Stanford's attorney, said his client put up $20,000 for the condo and that her mother, Susan, put up $50,000. But the deed to the home is held by a limited liability company; its only member is R. Allen Stanford.
"That would make selling the property by Randi Stanford very problematic under the current circumstances," Kendall said.
He added that Randi Stanford is working three jobs to support herself.
Janvey notified Randi Stanford in March 2009 that he intended to sell her condo. He offered to allow her to continue living there rent-free so long as she maintained it in good order. He also offered to provide three hours notice before showing the unit to prospective buyers and 30 days notice for her to remove her possessions when it was sold.
Instead, she declined to cooperate and argued that Janvey's authority did not extend to the condo.
Randi Stanford said she spent more than $113,000 for upkeep since she moved in three years ago. She has not waived her claim to a share of the proceeds from the sale proportionate to her investment in the property, Kendall said.
Her father is the subject of a Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit accusing him of promising inflated returns to about 28,000 investors on certificates of deposit at his Antiguan bank. The SEC also accuses him of skimming more than $1 billion to fund his lavish lifestyle.
Stanford is jailed in the Houston area on similar criminal charges.
Randi Stanford's decision came hours before she was to appear in federal district court to show why she should not be held in contempt for refusing to cooperate with government efforts to sell the 2,800-square-foot home. She will move out by March 31.
The condo was a gift from her father, who is accused of leading a $7 billion Ponzi scheme — allegations that he denies. Court-appointed receiver Ralph Janvey plans to sell the condo and direct the proceeds to allegedly defrauded investors.
On Wednesday, Janvey filed a declaration from a forensic accountant detailing that most of the $1.3 million purchase price came from the elder Stanford's personal bank account in Antigua, which is tied to his alleged wrongdoing.
Joe Kendall, Randi Stanford's attorney, said his client put up $20,000 for the condo and that her mother, Susan, put up $50,000. But the deed to the home is held by a limited liability company; its only member is R. Allen Stanford.
"That would make selling the property by Randi Stanford very problematic under the current circumstances," Kendall said.
He added that Randi Stanford is working three jobs to support herself.
Janvey notified Randi Stanford in March 2009 that he intended to sell her condo. He offered to allow her to continue living there rent-free so long as she maintained it in good order. He also offered to provide three hours notice before showing the unit to prospective buyers and 30 days notice for her to remove her possessions when it was sold.
Instead, she declined to cooperate and argued that Janvey's authority did not extend to the condo.
Randi Stanford said she spent more than $113,000 for upkeep since she moved in three years ago. She has not waived her claim to a share of the proceeds from the sale proportionate to her investment in the property, Kendall said.
Her father is the subject of a Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit accusing him of promising inflated returns to about 28,000 investors on certificates of deposit at his Antiguan bank. The SEC also accuses him of skimming more than $1 billion to fund his lavish lifestyle.
Stanford is jailed in the Houston area on similar criminal charges.
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Baseball stars and others, to get back Stanford funds
Some of alleged swindler Allen Stanford's investors, including baseball star Johnny Damon, will see their funds returned after a U.S. appeals court ruled the receiver in the fraud case may not sue them.
Ralph Janvey, the receiver in the Stanford civil fraud case, had filed a lawsuit to recover "clawback" proceeds from several hundred investors in the firm's offshore bank, which prosecutors say is at the heart of a $7 billion Ponzi scheme.
Stanford, 59, faces civil and criminal charges for leading the alleged scheme related to certificates of deposit (CDs) issued by Stanford International Bank Ltd in Antigua.
Janvey has argued that Stanford clients who redeemed their CDs in the weeks before civil fraud charges were filed, unfairly cashed out and were paid with money stolen from other investors.
But the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans said in a ruling late on Friday that Janvey had no right to sue the investors and the funds, which have been frozen by a lower court's order since February, should be released.
"We were pleasantly surprised that the receiver has indicated his intent to release the money and not pursue further appeals in this matter," Gene Besen, an attorney who helped recoup $9.5 million for seven current and former Major League Baseball players.
Other baseball players snared by the alleged Stanford fraud who will have their funds released include famed former major league pitcher Greg Maddux and J.D. Drew, an outfielder with the Boston Red Sox.
Stanford Financial Group sponsored numerous leagues and teams in such sports as cricket, golf, tennis, basketball, polo and sailing.
About $275 million in proceeds from certificates of deposit have been frozen in accounts at Bank of New York Mellon Corp's (BK.N) Person LLC, JP Morgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) and SEI Investments Co (SEIC.O), according to court documents.
"The Receiver will continue to carry out his duty to recover assets traceable to the Stanford fraud for the benefit of all investors by pursuing recovery of, where cost justified, improper and/or preferential payments of estate funds," a lawyer for Janvey said in an email.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which filed the civil fraud charges, had also opposed Janvey's lawsuit, saying it penalized innocent investors.
"He (Janvey) viewed these funds, which were already frozen, as low-hanging fruit and the Fifth Circuit slapped him back on this money grab," Jacob Frenkel, a former SEC enforcement lawyer and now a partner at Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy & Ecker.
Ralph Janvey, the receiver in the Stanford civil fraud case, had filed a lawsuit to recover "clawback" proceeds from several hundred investors in the firm's offshore bank, which prosecutors say is at the heart of a $7 billion Ponzi scheme.
Stanford, 59, faces civil and criminal charges for leading the alleged scheme related to certificates of deposit (CDs) issued by Stanford International Bank Ltd in Antigua.
Janvey has argued that Stanford clients who redeemed their CDs in the weeks before civil fraud charges were filed, unfairly cashed out and were paid with money stolen from other investors.
But the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans said in a ruling late on Friday that Janvey had no right to sue the investors and the funds, which have been frozen by a lower court's order since February, should be released.
"We were pleasantly surprised that the receiver has indicated his intent to release the money and not pursue further appeals in this matter," Gene Besen, an attorney who helped recoup $9.5 million for seven current and former Major League Baseball players.
Other baseball players snared by the alleged Stanford fraud who will have their funds released include famed former major league pitcher Greg Maddux and J.D. Drew, an outfielder with the Boston Red Sox.
Stanford Financial Group sponsored numerous leagues and teams in such sports as cricket, golf, tennis, basketball, polo and sailing.
About $275 million in proceeds from certificates of deposit have been frozen in accounts at Bank of New York Mellon Corp's (BK.N) Person LLC, JP Morgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) and SEI Investments Co (SEIC.O), according to court documents.
"The Receiver will continue to carry out his duty to recover assets traceable to the Stanford fraud for the benefit of all investors by pursuing recovery of, where cost justified, improper and/or preferential payments of estate funds," a lawyer for Janvey said in an email.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which filed the civil fraud charges, had also opposed Janvey's lawsuit, saying it penalized innocent investors.
"He (Janvey) viewed these funds, which were already frozen, as low-hanging fruit and the Fifth Circuit slapped him back on this money grab," Jacob Frenkel, a former SEC enforcement lawyer and now a partner at Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy & Ecker.
Tuesday, 29 September 2009
Sir Allen Stanford moved to another prison after a brawl
The renegade financier Sir Allen Stanford, awaiting trial in Texas on $7bn (£4.4bn) fraud charges, is being moved to a different jail by US authorities after he suffered two black eyes, a broken nose and concussion in a fracas with a fellow inmate. Stanford, who bankrolled Twenty20 cricket tournaments, had complained repeatedly about conditions at the Joe Corley Detention Centre, a private facility in the town of Conroe where he shared a cell with ten others. After representations by lawyers, a judge ordered authorities to move him to a federal detention centre in central Houston, saying this will make it easier for the former billionaire to meet with counsel in preparation for his trial Stanford's lawyer, Kent Schaffer, said the only way to communicate with Stanford had been to hold up documents to a window and shout through two-inch thick glass. Schaffer gave few details of the fight in which Stanford was injured, other than to say: "The reality is violence happens in any jail."
Saturday, 22 August 2009
Lawyers' dispute turns physical
Jailed former billionaire R. Allen Stanford has had trouble paying, and thus keeping, his attorneys, and now it appears two of them got into a physical altercation last month.
A Houston Police Department report shows that on the evening of July 10 several officers responded to a call to the office of Dick DeGuerin, a criminal defense lawyer who has since asked to be released from representing Stanford.
DeGuerin said he called police because Houston attorney Michael Sydow punched him and was trespassing and refused to leave.
But Sydow, a civil lawyer who has attempted to serve in limited capacity in Stanford's criminal case, told police that DeGuerin pushed him into a chair and bumped him with his chest.
Houston Police spokesman John Cannon confirmed that the report includes a photo of DeGuerin's chest with a red mark where DeGuerin said Sydow punched him with his fist.
Neither lawyer pressed charges.
DeGuerin said the two argued over a written statement in which Stanford allowed DeGuerin to collect his fees from an insurance policy Stanford's company carried. Exactly how Stanford will pay whoever ends up representing him is unclear, because his assets were frozen when federal regulators filed a civil fraud complaint against him, his companies, and other company executives.
DeGuerin said Sydow called him a liar. He said he then ordered Sydow out of the office and grabbed the document, at which point Sydow punched him. DeGuerin, who had a knee replacement a month before the incident, said he neither pushed nor chest bumped Sydow. He said two other men from the office intervened and corralled Sydow into an outer office while DeGuerin called police.
Sydow, who said he is serving as local counsel in the criminal case, said Friday that they were discussing DeGuerin charging a $30 million flat fee to Stanford.
Sydow said he told DeGuerin he thought it unethical to change fees mid-representation, and that riled DeGuerin.
Sydow said he stood up and DeGuerin shoved him back into a chair, grabbed the document and then claimed Sydow assaulted DeGuerin. Sydow said he never punched DeGuerin.
DeGuerin said details of this altercation are among many papers he's supplied Senior U.S. Judge David Hittner in his effort to get off the case. He said the documents show that Stanford wishes to have other attorneys, including Sydow. DeGuerin said he can't work with Sydow.
Stanford faces 21 criminal charges in an alleged $7 billion scam focusing on CDs at his offshore bank.
On July 31, a news release announced Stanford's new criminal lawyer would be Robert Luskin of Washington, D.C.
Luskin said he would enter the case only if he could be assured he would be paid.
Hittner refused to release DeGuerin from the case until another lawyer entered unconditionally.
Hittner denied Sydow's request to enter the case just to receive notices regarding whether Luskin could be paid. Luskin and Sydow went to an appeals court to remove Judge Hittner from the case but were denied.
“It's an impossible situation,” DeGuerin said.
A Houston Police Department report shows that on the evening of July 10 several officers responded to a call to the office of Dick DeGuerin, a criminal defense lawyer who has since asked to be released from representing Stanford.
DeGuerin said he called police because Houston attorney Michael Sydow punched him and was trespassing and refused to leave.
But Sydow, a civil lawyer who has attempted to serve in limited capacity in Stanford's criminal case, told police that DeGuerin pushed him into a chair and bumped him with his chest.
Houston Police spokesman John Cannon confirmed that the report includes a photo of DeGuerin's chest with a red mark where DeGuerin said Sydow punched him with his fist.
Neither lawyer pressed charges.
DeGuerin said the two argued over a written statement in which Stanford allowed DeGuerin to collect his fees from an insurance policy Stanford's company carried. Exactly how Stanford will pay whoever ends up representing him is unclear, because his assets were frozen when federal regulators filed a civil fraud complaint against him, his companies, and other company executives.
DeGuerin said Sydow called him a liar. He said he then ordered Sydow out of the office and grabbed the document, at which point Sydow punched him. DeGuerin, who had a knee replacement a month before the incident, said he neither pushed nor chest bumped Sydow. He said two other men from the office intervened and corralled Sydow into an outer office while DeGuerin called police.
Sydow, who said he is serving as local counsel in the criminal case, said Friday that they were discussing DeGuerin charging a $30 million flat fee to Stanford.
Sydow said he told DeGuerin he thought it unethical to change fees mid-representation, and that riled DeGuerin.
Sydow said he stood up and DeGuerin shoved him back into a chair, grabbed the document and then claimed Sydow assaulted DeGuerin. Sydow said he never punched DeGuerin.
DeGuerin said details of this altercation are among many papers he's supplied Senior U.S. Judge David Hittner in his effort to get off the case. He said the documents show that Stanford wishes to have other attorneys, including Sydow. DeGuerin said he can't work with Sydow.
Stanford faces 21 criminal charges in an alleged $7 billion scam focusing on CDs at his offshore bank.
On July 31, a news release announced Stanford's new criminal lawyer would be Robert Luskin of Washington, D.C.
Luskin said he would enter the case only if he could be assured he would be paid.
Hittner refused to release DeGuerin from the case until another lawyer entered unconditionally.
Hittner denied Sydow's request to enter the case just to receive notices regarding whether Luskin could be paid. Luskin and Sydow went to an appeals court to remove Judge Hittner from the case but were denied.
“It's an impossible situation,” DeGuerin said.