4 thoughts on “Felon Advises Merkin on Fund Management—While in Federal Prison! – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. i’m not scratching my head. i’m mad as hell at the ganovim who have been stealing our money. i want to throw every last one of them in jail and then throw away the keys. looks to me like you want to say that…..

  2. Here is an extract from a similar article on the Wall Street Journal website:

    “Charles A. Stillman, a lawyer for Teicher, said Sunday that Teicher wasn’t actively managing the fund’s assets, but acting more in an advisory role. After he was convicted, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission sought to bar Teicher from associating with any registered or unregistered investment advisers.

    Teicher was permitted to continue advising unregistered investment advisers, such as Merkin, until a final, unappealable court ruling on the SEC’s bar request under an agreement with the SEC, Stillman said.

    When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the SEC in 2000, Teicher immediately stopped advising Merkin, Stillman said.”

  3. In response to the New York Times article of February 14, 2009, my attorneys have sent the following to the New York Times:

    “We are counsel to Victor Teicher, who is referenced in a misleading and false way in a February 14, 2009 article about Ezra Merkin’s lawsuit with NYU. We write to demand an immediate retraction of statements in that article which suggest directly or indirectly that Mr. Teicher acted in violation of a bar by the Securities and Exchange Commission when he provided services to certain of Mr. Merkin’s funds in certain periods in the 1990’s into the beginning of 2000.

    Those statements are false because Mr. Teicher was permitted, pursuant to an express agreement with the SEC, to be associated with unregistered investment advisors such as Mr. Merkin, until a final, unappealable order was issued by the Courts that the SEC had jurisdiction over unregistered investment advisors. After that final ruling was issued in the beginning of 2000, Mr. Teicher observed his agreement with the SEC to the letter and promptly stopped working for Mr. Merkin’s funds. Your statement that he continued to be associated with those funds until 2001 is also false.

    Having falsely suggested that Mr. Teicher’s association with Mr. Merkin’s funds was illegal, your article goes on to suggest that Mr. Teicher’s 2007 and 2008 applications to modify his industry bar falsely claimed that he had complied with the securities laws and did not disclose his supposed illegal association with Mr. Merkin’s funds. All of those false statements are libelous per se, and must be immediately and prominently retracted.

    We note that had your reporters followed proper journalistic practices and attempted to contact Mr. Teicher or his representative prior to publication of this article, they would have learned the true facts. The failure to seek comment or clarification from Mr. Teicher is inexcusable and Mr. Teicher will pursue all available remedies.”

    Victor Teicher

  4. I comment on this blog entry here.

    I did not put the text in this blog’s comment section because Richard probably would not agree with my analysis, and I see no reason for him to be attacked simply because I wrote something in response to one of his articles.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link