Some of the stocks Grayson picked increased 300, 500 and 600 percent during the three-year loan periods.

Unclean Hands

The Derivium defendants Grayson sued in South Carolina tried to delve into all 92 ?stock loans? Grayson participated in dating back to November 2000 ? not just the 33 profitable ones that Grayson relied on to set his damages at $34 million.

And, to determine how Grayson treated them in his taxes, they asked the judge to order Grayson to produce his income tax returns.

In a June 2008 hearing, an attorney for one of Derivium?s owners said Grayson had taken some cash profits ?and got that money sent to the Cook Islands ? and I want to see how this shows up on his tax returns. Are all the gains shifted to (the AMG Trust) and the Cook Islands where they do not have to file tax returns??

The attorney also suggested Grayson could have claimed losses on some trades to reduce his taxes, while concealing profits in the Cook Islands to evade capital gains. ?If he is playing fast and short with the IRS, I think that?s relevant in this case,? the attorney argued.

Grayson?s attorney, Alisa Roberts, told the judge there is ?absolutely no evidence or any basis upon which (the defendants) might possibly conclude that Alan Grayson or the AMG Trust committed tax fraud.? Even if there were, she said, any tax evasion by Grayson would be irrelevant to the fraud and racketeering counts facing Derivium.

The attorney for another Derivium owner disagreed, saying the IRS had taken action against ?lots of borrowers, tagging them with multimillion-dollar tax deficiencies for not declaring it as a sale ? (Grayson) may have had some ulterior motives. And he may have had unclean hands. And I think that?s relevant.?

But U.S. District Chief Judge David C. Norton denied access to the tax returns, ruling they were not relevant in the South Carolina case.

Also kept from the jury: the opinions of a defense expert who implied in his deposition that Grayson used the funds in ?an illegal or improper manner,? according to court transcripts. Grayson?s attorney argued successfully that such speculation did not belong in evidence.

?In a trial,? Grayson told Local 6, ?the other side will always try to change the subject, to cast aspersions on you?try to slime you, but good people can see through that. The jury was good and they saw through that.?

Grayson did have to submit in 2008 to four days of depositions, answering questions under oath about his investments and taxes. But a court order consented to by all parties has allowed transcripts of those depositions and other documents in the case to remain confidential.

Outspoken Voice

Grayson, still smarting from his Derivium dealings, vows to remain an outspoken voice in Congress against those who took advantage of taxpayers and others before and during the current recession.

?You know, people are angry. They want to know what happened to their money and if I can help to accomplish that then I think people will feel I?ve done something important,? Grayson said.

Reminded he didn?t know what happened to his own money after he turned his stock over to Derivium, Grayson responded, ?Well, we found out eventually.?

Asked if -- as a congressman who ran, in part, on his success as a businessman -- he was embarrassed or hurt to be victimized, he said, ?No. people lied to me? When someone lies to you, it?s not your fault.?