|[Allen Stanford Mug Shot from wikipedia]|
Did you hear the news about the sentencing yesterday of Defendant R. Allen Stanford in a Houston federal court? He was sentenced to serve a whopping 110 years in federal prison!
In March, a jury reportedly convicted Stanford on thirteen counts of mail and wire fraud for his role in a massive $7 billion ponzi scheme. According to government prosecutors, Stanford treated investors "like road kill" in an international investment fraud scheme, whose scope was apparently exceeded only by the ponzi scam of investment fraud "king," Bernie Madoff. According to news reports, Stanford's criminal defense lawyers plan an appeal.
Stanford's 110 year sentence was surpassed by Madoff's 150 year sentence. But is there really a difference?
As a former federal prosecutor, (and currently as an Augusta, Georgia criminal defense attorney), I am reminded of a story once told by a judge about another sentencing. The judge had sentenced a bank robber to serve 77 years in prison. The defendant told the judge, "But I can't make 77 years!" The judge replied, "Well, just make it the best you can!"
Well, I guess Mr. Stanford, like Mr. Madoff, will just have to make it the best he can, too. What do you think?