R. Allen Stanford sentenced to 110 years in prison
Somewhere Charles Ponzi may have a smile on his face. Nearly 100 years after the Italian con man became infamous for his scheme to bilk investors by repaying them with the funds from later victims, U.S. District Judge David Hittner came down hard on Ponzi disciple R. Allen Stanford.
June 15, 2012 at 07:37 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Somewhere Charles Ponzi may have a smile on his face. Nearly 100 years after the Italian con man became infamous for his scheme to bilk investors by repaying them with the funds from later victims, U.S. District Judge David Hittner came down hard on Ponzi disciple R. Allen Stanford.
Stanford, the former billionaire who once reigned over a vast financial empire, was sentenced to 110 years in prison yesterday for running a Ponzi scheme that swindled investors out of more than $7 billion over 20 years.
In March, a federal jury convicted Stanford of running an international scheme in which he offered fraudulent high-interest certificates of deposit at the Stanford International Bank, which was based on the Caribbean island of Antigua. According to prosecutors, Stanford lied to investors, assuring them safe investments for their money, which he funneled into his jet-setting lifestyle, a Swiss bank account and a slew of failed business deals.
The sentence was a happy medium between the prosecutors' request for 230 years in prison—the maximum sentence possible after Stanford was convicted on 13 of 14 counts of conspiracy, wire and mail fraud after a seven-week trial. The defense had requested a maximum sentence of 44 months, which Stanford would have completed in about eight months. He has been behind bars since his arrest in June 2009.
For his part, Stanford still asserts that he has done nothing wrong.
In a 40-minute monologue to the court during which he reportedly held back tears, Stanford said that he was a victim of government “Gestapo tactics” that targeted his Caribbean bank and forced him to sell off his assets at greatly reduced prices. Additionally, he said that anyone who lost money was a result of the government's unnecessary actions.
“I'm not up here to ask for sympathy or forgiveness,” Stanford said, the New York Times reported. “I'm up here to tell you from my heart I didn't run a Ponzi scheme.”
Conversely, federal prosecutor William Stellmach had an understandably different take on the events.
“This is a man utterly without remorse,” Stellmach said, according to the Times. “From beginning to end, he treated all of his victims as roadkill.”
For more on Stanford and the sentencing, read the New York Times and New York Post.
And for other InsideCounsel coverage on Stanford, read:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRepublican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
4 minute readSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
FTC Lauds Withdrawal of Proposed Indiana Hospitals Merger After Leaning on State Regulators
4 minute readHow Qualcomm’s General Counsel Is Championing Diversity in Innovation
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250