Articles were all over the place. Here's just one.

http://www.financialweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081218/REG/812189991

Not only was he not doing any "audit procedures" for the money, he told the NY State CPA regulators and the AICPA that he didn't perform audits and thus was not subject to a higher level of professional "peer review".

http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Web/20091553

Back around the time Sarbanes Oxley became law, I used to audit a small private broker dealer. It was an SEC audit of course, but way less in detail than those required of public entities. Then along came SOX ( Sarbanes Oxley) and the requirement for audit firms of private broker dealers to register with the SEC. They postponed implementing that requirement for a few years and the client eventually sold his business to someone else and works under that eneity. My partners and I would not have gone thru the SEC hoops for only 1 BD client.

Here's the takeaway for public companies:
Go to the SEC website and review their filings. Look at their audited financial statements filed there or on their own website.

Go to the AICPA website and look up the most recent peer review of the CPA firm. It's public record. Issuing audited financial statements and not having a peer review by another CPA firm can't happen. Truthfully, that is.