Font Size: 
Ex-Stanford Security Chief Seeks Speedy Trial
Daily Business Review
September 14, 2009
The former Miami chief of the Drug Enforcement Administration, who is accused of destroying evidence in the alleged $8 billion Stanford Financial Group fraud, wants to force the prosecution's hand by insisting on a trial later this month.
Thomas Raffanello, who served as the special agent in charge of the DEA's Miami office from 2002 to 2004, made an initial court appearance Friday on charges of obstructing a federal investigation and destroying records protected by a court order when he allegedly ordered the shredding of documents to thwart an investigation into the Houston-based financial enterprise.
Prosecutors allege the investment empire founded by R. Allen Stanford was a massive Ponzi scheme that capitalized on the sale of certificates of deposit from his Caribbean-based bank.
Stanford is in jail in Texas awaiting trial on fraud charges. Raffanello was charged separately Thursday in Fort Lauderdale along with former Stanford Financial global security officer Bruce Perraud.
Raffanello's attorneys -- former U.S. Attorney Kendall Coffey and Jeffrey Crockett of Miami's Coffey Burlington -- insist the government has made a big mistake in indicting an upstanding former member of the law enforcement community for basically "taking out the garbage."
"Every action that was done has a credible and legitimate explanation," according to a motion filed Thursday to invoke Raffanello's right to speedy trial. "There is no conceivable motive or motivation for defendants to obstruct an investigation of the crimes of others in which they indisputably did not participate and from which they did not gain."
Perraud, who was indicted earlier, is scheduled for trial Sept. 21. Raffanello's attorney asked U.S. District Judge William Zloch to keep the same schedule. A pretrial hearing is set Sept. 18.
Raffanello of Coral Gables became Stanford's security chief in Fort Lauderdale almost immediately after retiring from the DEA in 2004, performing employee background checks.
A Dallas judge handling the Securities and Exchange Commission civil case against Stanford issued an order in February instructing all employees to preserve company documents and protect them from destruction.
Raffanello was called the same day to discuss the court order, the indictment charged. Six days later, he allegedly directed the shredding of documents at the Fort Lauderdale office.
Under Raffanello's direction, Perraud contacted a commercial shredding company about destroying a large quantity of Stanford documents, the indictment charged. Perraud is accused of supervising as a 95-gallon bin was packed with documents and hauled to the shredder's vehicle Feb. 25.
"This is a routine practice of the security office, in which the trash was periodically shredded by an outside vendor and pertinent items scanned," according to Raffanello's motion for speedy trial.
Raffanello surrendered to authorities Friday and appeared in front of U.S. Magistrate Judge Robin Rosenbaum, who set a $100,000 personal surety bond.
One of Perraud's attorneys said after the hearing that the men are ready to go to trial.
Ira N. Loewy, a partner with Miami's Bierman Shohat & Loewy, said all data from Stanford's Fort Lauderdale office was stored on a computer server, which is in the hands of the court-appointed receiver in the SEC case.
"Our position is that nothing was destroyed," Loewy said. "That applies to anything that was of relevance to this receiver."
Pushing for a trial days after indictment carries risks and benefits. The primary advantage for the defense is forcing the prosecution to go to trial with only the evidence at hand, not after months of scouring computer and paper records and interviewing players in Stanford's far-flung world.
Miami criminal defense attorney David Markus said he has used the strategy in rare instances.
"It's going to put a lot of pressure on the government," he said. "It's a high-stakes trial strategy with big risks and big rewards. And that's what good trial lawyers do. They take risks."
Other attorneys familiar with Raffanello said they have trouble believing the Vietnam veteran would flout a federal court order.
"I've known Tom a long time. He is one of the most honest and straightforward people I have ever met," said Greenberg Traurig attorney Mark Schnapp, who represented Stanford Financial Group along with the firm.
Former Miami U.S. Attorney Guy Lewis, now a partner with Lewis Tein in Miami, said he worked with Raffanello during the drug prosecution of deposed Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega.
"Tom is an honest man. I'm extremely skeptical of the allegations that he broke the law," Lewis said.
Stanford Financial Group included Antigua-based Stanford International Bank, which attracted billions of dollars for investment in high-yield CDs. Investigators charge the bank was nothing more than a Ponzi scheme paying old investors with money from new ones.
Raffanello isn't the only former DEA agent to surface in connection with Stanford.
Tom Cash, who specialized in money laundering investigations in a 25-year career with the DEA including seven years in charge of the Florida and Caribbean division, became an executive at Kroll, a top-drawer private investigative agency.
Two civil lawsuits filed in federal court allege Kroll had a conflict of interest when it vetted Stanford for NECA, a construction trade group looking to protect its investments, because the investigative firm had done work for the Texas billionaire's companies. Cash is not named as a defendant in the litigation, but his stamped signature appears on a $15,000 contract with NECA calling on Kroll to perform due diligence on Stanford in 2007.
Charles Intriago, a former federal prosecutor and founder of the International Association for Asset Recovery in Miami, said Raffanello certainly deserves his day in court, but the charges are extremely serious, especially for a former DEA chief.
Obstruction of justice "goes right to the heart of the criminal justice system," Intriago said. "It's not even a glance blow. You obstruct justice, you destroy evidence, you are basically thwarting justice."
