HOUSTON, (Reuters) – Allen Stanford says he is innocent and intends to fight any fraud charges against him. So a court decision on whether he can tap his vast wealth for his legal defense will be pivotal as his case moves forward.
The billionaire’s court battle over the release of $10 million to pay legal fees will be a tough one, with the outcome likely hinging on any criminal evidence the government may have against the Texas financier, who faces only civil charges now, lawyers said.
Stanford, two aides and three of his companies are accused by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission of a Ponzi scheme involving high-yield certificates of deposit issued by Stanford International Bank in Antigua.
Stanford, whose assets were frozen on Feb. 17 by a court-appointed attorney, said his bank accounts, luxury homes and credit cards have been seized and he has no money to pay his growing legal defence team.
Defense attorneys have questioned the fairness of asset freezes in high-profile white-collar cases. Some say a freeze gives the government too much power, putting pressure on clients to plead guilty instead of defending themselves in a costly court battle.
The executive does not face criminal charges but has said he expects to be arrested and indicted soon. And in a filing with the federal court in Dallas on Sunday, his lawyers said the case and the grand jury’s criminal investigation are proceeding at a “blistering pace.”
In a criminal matter, he would have the right to an attorney — but not the right to hire the high-powered, high-dollar team he would likely need.
Stanford has asked U.S. District Judge David Godbey for release of the funds and a hearing on the matter. His attorneys also said he is also seeking defence costs from insurance policies.
The judge has not yet ruled on the request and the government has not yet said whether it opposes the motion.
“The question is going to be what kind of evidence they have on Stanford himself, personally linking him to the wrongdoing,” said Mark Srere, vice chairman of the government enforcement and corporate compliance committee at DRI, an advocacy group for defence lawyers. “Who ultimately has shown more rights to the money?”
Should criminal charges be filed, “it will be particularly difficult for Mr. Stanford and the other defendants to argue that they had access to untainted funds,” said Ross Albert, a former U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission attorney and now partner at Morris, Manning & Martin LLP in Atlanta.
