SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: anniebonny who wrote (106479)2/27/2009 8:53:35 AM
From: scion  Respond to of 122087
 
Elie Wiesel Levels Scorn at Madoff

By STEPHANIE STROM
Published: February 26, 2009
nytimes.com

What does Elie Wiesel, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Holocaust survivor who has dedicated his life to fighting hatred and intolerance, think about Bernard L. Madoff?

" ' Psychopath' -- it's too nice a word for him," Mr. Wiesel said in his first public comments on Mr. Madoff and the Ponzi scheme he is accused of perpetrating on thousands of individuals and charities, including the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity.

" ' Sociopath,' ' psychopath,' it means there is a sickness, a pathology. This man knew what he was doing. I would simply call him thief, scoundrel, criminal."

Mr. Wiesel's charity lost $15.2 million, and he and his wife, Marion, lost their life savings. "This was a personal tragedy where we discovered all of a sudden what we had done in 40 years -- my books, my lectures, everything -- was gone," said Mr. Wiesel, who shared his story as part of a panel discussion on the Madoff scandal on Thursday.

He said he began investing with Mr. Madoff at the suggestion of an old friend whom he declined to name, "just a wealthy man, not in the financial business." Mr. Wiesel said, "He too lost $50 million."

The Wiesels met Mr. Madoff on only two occasions, he said, adding that during one encounter Mr. Madoff had tried to persuade Mr. Wiesel to abandon his post at Boston University, where he teaches the humanities, philosophy and religion, for a chair at Queens College, alma mater of Mr. Madoff's wife, Ruth.

"We must have spoken about ethics," Mr. Wiesel said. "Some learn, and some don't."

After seeing how consistently Mr. Madoff generated handsome returns buying fairly plain-vanilla securities -- "He bought 100 shares of Coca-Cola and sold 500 shares of Pfizer," Mr. Wiesel said, describing his understanding of the Madoff strategy -- the Wiesels decided to invest their charity's assets with him as well.

"We checked the people who have business with him, and they were among the best minds on Wall Street, the geniuses of finance," Mr. Wiesel said. "I am not a genius of finance. I teach philosophy and literature -- and so it happened."

Mr. Wiesel spoke on a panel at the "21" Club moderated by Joanne Lipman, the editor in chief of Portfolio, the Condé Nast magazine devoted to business and finance.

Another panelist, James Chanos, who specializes in short-selling, or betting that certain stock prices will fall, said Mr. Madoff's investors bore some responsibility for not heeding the warning signs.

"Every checklist of responsible behavior on behalf of fiduciaries broke down here: ‘we're not going to tell you what we're in,' ‘you can't see where we're investing,' the statements weren't clear, the strip-mall accounting firm," Mr. Chanos said.

Harvey L. Pitt, former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, said that Madoff investors were not the only ones hoodwinked in the last several years, that investors in Wall Street firms also tolerated less-than-ideal transparency. "I really do believe that there was criminality at a lot of these firms," Mr. Pitt said, citing the different valuations that financial institutions placed on the same financial instruments.

"It's not per se fraudulent to have different values for different purposes, but someone has to look at that and figure out what was going on," he said. "These kinds of things reflect more than happenstance or carelessness; they reflect criminality."

Mr. Wiesel said, however, that spotting problems was not easy. "Remember, there was a myth he created around him, that everything was so special, so unique that it had to be secret," he said, adding that his charity's accountants had not identified potential concerns about Mr. Madoff.

He said he was amazed at the outpouring of support for his charity in the wake of the scandal. "Unsolicited, hundreds of people, literally, hundreds of people we have never known sent us money through the Internet, $5, $18, $100, one even $1,000," he said.

The Elie Wiesel Foundation will hold a benefit concert on May 26 to raise more money, and Mr. Wiesel has a book, "A Mad Desire to Dance," coming out soon.

Asked what punishment he would like to see for Mr. Madoff, Mr. Wiesel said: "I would like him to be in a solitary cell with only a screen, and on that screen for at least five years of his life, every day and every night, there should be pictures of his victims, one after the other after the other, all the time a voice saying, ' Look what you have done to this old lady, look what you have done to that child, look what you have done,' nothing else."

nytimes.com



To: anniebonny who wrote (106479)2/27/2009 10:09:08 AM
From: scion  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 122087
 
SEC Testimony in Stanford Case Leads to Fireworks

February 27, 2009
complianceweek.com

SEC testimony can sometimes be tedious and uneventful, but that certainly does not appear to have been the case with respect to the February 10, 2009, SEC testimony of Stanford Financial Group chief investment officer Laura Pendergest-Holt. First, almost immediately following her testimony, Stanford Financial Group’s lawyer, Thomas Sjoblom of the law firm Proskauer Rose, decided to withdraw from the case altogether and to “disaffirm” his prior statements to authorities.

According to a Memphis Daily News article, on February 11, Sjoblom reportedly gave notice to the SEC that his firm was no longer Stanford’s counsel. Sjoblom followed that up with a Feb. 12 fax to Kevin Edmundson, the assistant regional director in the SEC’s Forth Worth office, and left a voice mail message for him the next evening.

Finally, Sjoblom typed a note on his BlackBerry to Edmundson a little after 4 p.m. Saturday, Feb. 14. It read: “Kevin, this will advise the SEC, and confirm my voice message last evening, that I disaffirm all prior oral and written representations made by me and my associates … to the SEC staff regarding Stanford Financial Group and its affiliates.”

Three days later, on February 17, the SEC filed its case against SFG and the executives.

That was hardly the end of the “post-testimony” fall-out in this case, however. Yesterday, the FBI made Pendergest-Holt the first arrest in its $8 billion Stanford Financial Group fraud investigation. The DOJ alleges that in her SEC testimony, Pendergest-Holt “concealed her role in and familiarity with the Antigua bank’s investments.” Specifically, Reuters reports that the allegations of the complaint include the following:

Pendergest-Holt did not tell the SEC that she had served on the Antigua bank’s investment committee and that the investment portfolio holding more than 80 percent of its assets included a $1.6 billion loan to Stanford himself.

Pendergest-Holt wrongly denied she had prepared with company officials before her SEC interview on February 10. In fact, the complaint alleges, there were stormy preparation sessions for Pendergest-Holt in January and February “during which the bank’s shaky asset base became apparent. to a wider circle of officials and to the lawyer — ‘Attorney A’ — who later quit.” These intense sessions allegedly included “Executive A” — Stanford –”pounding the table” and insisting “the assets are there.” The next day one of the participants broke down in tears and threatened to go to the authorities, and the attorney declared “the party is over.”

According to Bloomberg, the DOJ stated that its criminal complaint against is based on a finding of probable cause by a magistrate judge, and Pendergest-Holt has not been indicted by a grand jury. Pendergest-Holt’s lawyer, Dan Cogdell, stated that “[s]he is extremely disappointed in the path the SEC and law enforcement are taking. She has been cooperating for weeks, and now she is falsely charged for a crime she didn’t commit.”

complianceweek.com