Guyana’s Ambassador to Kuwait denies guilt in US fraud case

Sep 11, 2016 News

Guyana’s Ambassador to Kuwait, Dr. Shamir Ally has vehemently denied culpability in the charges brought by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission against the company he was employed with.

Guyana’s Ambassador to Kuwait, Dr. Shamir Ally

In a previous article Kaieteur News had noted that Ally, a convicted felon, was appointed as Guyana’s ambassador to Kuwait.
According to information garnered by Kaieteur News, Ally was convicted on March 4, 2003 by United States District Court Judge, Michael M. Baylson, for dissemination of false financial information by Acrodyne Communications, Inc.
The conviction was specifically for violations of the antifraud and recordkeeping provisions in keeping with the United States Securities regulations.
Ally, who was charged jointly with A. Robert Mancuso and Ronald R. Lanchoney, was fined US$10,000. His co-conspirators were fined US$50,000 and US$10,000 respectively.
In addition, the final judgments prohibited Ally’s co-conspirators, Mancuso and Lanchoney, from acting as an officer or director of a public company.
After the news broke, Foreign Affairs Minister, Carl Greenidge said that an investigation would be launched into the allegations. He said too that Ally will be questioned about the matter.
However the Alliance For Change, (AFC) in a statement yesterday noted Ally had vehemently denied the charges. According to the statement Dr Ally was employed by Acrodyne, a Public manufacturing Company, for a short period, from February 2, 1999 to May 9, 1999 as the Cost Accounting Manager.
“On May 10, 1999 he was promoted to Controller and he served in this position for fifteen (15) months up to July 10, 2000.”
According to the information disseminated by the AFC, the company’s President, A. Robert Mancuso had asked Ally to help turn around the company as they were preparing to manufacture Digital Television Transmitters for Television Stations, converting from analogue to digital systems.
“But Dr. Ally was terminated in July 2000 when the Technical Director Ostroff became the new President. The company was at the time in the midst of a power struggle, falling revenue/income &a depleting labour force.”
Two (2) years later in May 2002, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the United States agency for maintaining fair, orderly and efficient markets in-country, served notice on Acrodyne Pty. Ltd and its former principals of its intention to take civil action.
According to the document the charge read that the SEC was accusing former President A. Robert Mancuso and former Chief Financial Officer Ronald R. Lanchoney, along with Controller Shamir Ally, of disseminating false financial information in press releases and Commission filings in 1998, 1999 and 2000.
Dr. Ally was then charged jointly with Mancuso and Lanchoney. Instead of proceeding with a long and costly trial, the Party outlined that the three professionals were strongly advised by that company’s Attorney-at-Law, Mr. Steven Thomas, to make a deal with the SEC to pay fines without admission to guilt.
As such, the document outlined that Dr. Ally’s vehement denials of any culpability were first contained in correspondences to the Staff Attorney of the SEC’s Central Regional Office, Ms. Dawn Leporatileget, on May 29, 2002.
In all of his correspondences to the SEC and Acrodyne since 2002, Dr. Ally has said that he “most vehemently disagrees with the SEC’s charges”, and that he had agreed to pay the US $10,000 penalty under protest. The CFO also paid a US$10,000 penalty and the company’s President US$50,000.
Dr. Ally also accused the SEC of making him a scapegoat, since the Accounting procedures he had worked with he had inherited from his predecessors, and he has consistently iterated that he worked under the close supervision of Mr. Lanchoney, the CFO.
He said that his July 2000 termination ruled out his ability to access the accounting records which would have enabled him to substantially rebut the SEC’s 2002 charge.
Contrary to information carried recently in several sections of the local media, the Ambassador is also claiming that the SEC’s 2002 charges never took away his voting rights in the USA.

2 thoughts on “Guyana’s Ambassador to Kuwait denies guilt in US fraud case”

Cat oman September 11, 2016 at 7:48 am

Why would someone pay a hefty fine for something they did not do? As far as I’m concerned “payment of fine without admission of guilt” is a bogus way to deny a charge. I’m even more surprised that the Guyanese government does not do a better job of vetting persons they appoint to such important positions. This should be a lesson to them.
1. carl veecock September 12, 2016 at 11:43 pm
  
  Cat oman
  
  You do not know how we do things in NA
  Our legal advisors do advise as they see fit while in negotiations.
  
  As a former official, I had many disagreements with our legal advisors when I felt that they were being too soft or are not prepared to work harder.
  
  The option to ” to make a deal with the SEC to pay fines without admission to guilt” is not unusual. It was done under advisement.
  What I find unusual is the misinterpretation that the person is deemed to be guilty in total ignorance of the facts.