Exclusive: Stanford Whistle Blower

" Well I'm -- Stanford. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Stanford financial group of companies. As you can well imagine much of my time has been on the road tending to the minute details associated with running a multinational organization."

" Almost nine years ago we did the opulent marble in mahogany hallways of Stanford financial group headquarters in Houston Texas. A successful broker named -- a -- yeah suspected something. Was wrong. Today her name is -- widener and she remembers what worried her so much so long ago about Stanford financial."

" In 2002000. I was recruited to work for Stanford yes as a broker for. Add the air broker dealer act and not to sell beer offshore products which was at the out banking and keep."

" Widener says Stanford managers pressured her to sell Stanford international bank certificates of deposit to a client's. She says she refused and demanded to -- documents to verify the security and authenticity of those CD's. Weather says she never got them. And in 2002. She was fired. Her case welled up in front of -- NASD arbitration panel the National Association of Securities Dealers today the NASD. Is camera the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Why they're warned them and the SEC. About Stanford but she says no buddy list."

" You actually her counterclaim. Used the phrase Ponzi scheme they -- in that and it's NASD now -- document that says sponsors that's what you were alleged. How they've had there was a three panel arbitration court. How'd they react. But I -- in different."

" In different. You know days. Dating you've been. Do their -- within the villages and saying okay I would like to. See their portfolio appraisal and be very fine by her party. In that to prove her wrong."

" You made a phone call after that arbitration ruling against him in 2004 alternative which we infantry. The Securities and Exchange Commission this is the regulatory agency that if you suspect a a Ponzi scheme if you suspect some line about insurance coverage for certificate of deposit where there is no coverage that's he's supposed to call right. That's right. He called. You're you're what we call the whistle blower in this kind of situation."

" What happens when men who might do. Wanted to get some answer -- wanted to talk to Benjamin and tell them about my experience and that was shocked that I am. The -- arbitrator tires had rule against me I thought that I was. Very serious concern to space should be because. Can now is worried about the current investors into insuring investors. Bringing. Their life savings into their into the inside these TV game bank."

" But let me just we kept -- You go to work for his staff in 2000. You're terminated in 2002 and you have -- you've made it clear to Stanford in that period of two that it doesn't come -- on those CD's. I want to see some of the due diligence we would call it the appraisals -- see the insurance they won't give you these documents is terminated. You go to -- the regulatory authority for. Brokerages. You lose. With camera and then you go to the SEC in 2004. And yet the FCC they have --"

" So that think they did and they they'd follow up with me and and and they leave even discuss the fact that -- I thought that this CDs were securities and they agree with me."

" They said -- he -- that this CDs are indeed securities which would mean they would have authority. Did you ever heard you would ask or did you ever wonder okay it's 2004 if if he hasn't gone. With that. -- mean it would have been a simple phone call to find out who that account and was an anti India. -- You know who think. I don't think so that followed a personal relationship. Is a cornerstone. To establish a lifelong report."

" Former Stanford see -- James Davis is -- operating week prosecutors explaining how Stanford financial group and Stanford international bank. Layla says Stanford relied on the broker client relationship. To push those CD."

" It's and you had very serious concerns about those CD's NEC it is the sent you had warned her clients will. When you left Stanford stopped by those CDs and we've discussed at some of them actually did that."

" This -- And in February when. Everything happened. And I happen to be in Mexico when when they've raided the offices here you from. Some of those people call me and it passed from my house. And so I mean helping them out."

" What's it like and it you know yeah see that this information you know you have a suspicion. That it's wrong I I imagine you hope. God it's not. True that it's a fraud and -- discovered five years later it is it's talking."

" Absolutely I mean did it terrible part is seeing. So many people losing their life savings I mean I've talked to sell many victims and you know they're they're just press quiet and yet. It didn't have to be is that -- say that David yeah -- listen to you know afraid because what I let up I mean I didn't even go with like about a billion dollar in the bank and."

" What it ended at seven point two billion -- the government in their filings on all of us have said that stand for deposits grew exponentially. But. Then you're asking simple questions again whose big town and why are you saying there's insurance when they really isn't and and where's this money being invested. And have date -- has generally did listen to you in 2000 threat but the SEC taken action in 2004."

" What I think what happens. When none of these have happened or -- of people you know it would've been. People would have lost so much you know and he would not have continue."

" Mike phallic was the lawyer who represented -- during VNA EST arbitration. He says he tried to get the NASD. To force Stanford financial to release documents that might claims. Would have exposed the fraud."

" But some business was a very current trading case because. -- from the beginning. The arbitration panel. Wouldn't let us get into the discovery that we needed to approve the case and of course we now know why -- for profit discovery so hard. Obviously had been required to provide us with the information. We would have none of 2003 what went on the wall. What."

" Live you know okay it's it's now 2009. We don't know what's happened in the Stanford case what could Finneran. With the SEC you differently as we go forward to stop the next. --"

" Well I would say that they should take. Concerns like these more seriously. They should open up. Channels of communications with. You know financial advisers and people in general."

" When they have a plane like that and in an -- when you had your could yet claim with the SEC to get to meet face to face an investigator from this is known. He spoke with -- on the phone on the -- That they never bothered to come and hear the story and listen to -- Yeah that would have made a big difference I think and I think you have documentation about those emails that takes Elvis CD's of the cities -- yes I. They were asked to see that stuff music to dissent and to think they have. The documentation. About the certificates of deposit the SEC possesses this in 2004. And I'm here in 2009 trying to figure out what happened."

" What can I say that that's how it is -- what this means that he had they have got documentation."

" And they had five years ago then they had to now. I hope all of you would share my enthusiasm about our companies -- about our future."

" Allen Stanford's lawyer addicting -- insists that his client never ran a Ponzi scheme or defrauded anybody out of their money answer the FCC. They have long claimed that they began an examination of Stanford in 2005. But the SEC has never explained. Why the investigation failed to prevent the tragedy that -- was counting on the SEC and other regulators to stop and five years later we still don't know one."