How the SEC really treats "Whistleblowers" - Second Part

June 6, 2011
By WikiLeaks-Stanford

I (Charles W. Rawl) feel that I am left with no ethical or practical alternative but to resign given the serious nature of these issues and their cumulative adverse effect on our clients.

The reasons, which are not intended to be exhaustive, include the following:

1) The firm's decision that the Trust Company, as custodian of a SIBL CD, is not required to file the TDF form, and its further failure to advise clients of its decision or the client’s obligation to file the TDF form.

2) The firm’s purging of files and destruction of documents with knowledge of an ongoing SEC inquiry into the SIBL CD and the CD sales practices.

3) The firm’s continued use of historical performance data in its SAS (and therefore SIM) presentations that are known to be incorrect, or at least not verifiable, in representations to clients.

4) The firm’s strategy to rapidly expand the number of financial advisors has placed the focus away from the clients to one predicated on creating the appearance of liquidity for the firm.


More interested information:

Declaration of Charles W. Rawl.

Mark Tidwell & Charles W. Rawl - Plaintiffs' First Amended.

Related article: How the SEC really treats "Whistleblowers" - First Part.

Exclusive: Stanford Whistle Blower

News separator


SIVG reserves the right to delete comments that are off-topic or offensive. Excessively long comments may be moderated as well. SIVG cannot facilitate requests to remove comments or explain individual moderation decisions. The comments posted here, express only the views of their authors and not the administrators/moderators from SIVG; for that reason SIVG won't be held responsible for those contents

Join the Discussion

Showing 0 comments...