Where's the perp walk?

[What_Goes_Up]

Looks like we’ll be working our way down the organisational chart, not up, to get those crooks!

Mail clerks, postroom boys and doormen - your days are numbered!

[What_Goes_Up]

What about those Bear Stearns naughty hedgies?

Are they guilty?

June 19, 2008
bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= … ZnRy9Si0OI
Ex-Bear Stearns Fund Managers Indicted for Fraud (Update4)

Nope!

November 11, 2009
money.cnn.com/2009/11/10/news/co … /index.htm
Former Bear Stearns execs not guilty

[mr_anderson]

Don’t you know, the butler did it !

[What_Goes_Up]

AIG - gotta be guilty right?

Nope!

Mar 5, 2010
reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6244SW20100305
AIG’s Greenberg says cannot be charged

May 22, 2010
bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= … ksbwRhTw7w
Prosecutors Said to Drop Probe of Ex-AIG Executive (Update1)

[What_Goes_Up]

Dick “What’s a Repo 105” Fuld - well he’ll never work on Wall Street again, right?

Nope!

05/14/10
thestreet.com/story/10757156 … ities.html
Dick Fuld Re-Emerges at Legend Securities

[johnnyskeleton]

The important thing is not whether they are found guilty or not - thats for a jury to decide. The important thing is that they have a functioning criminal justice system that puts them on trial. Which isn’t happening in this country wrt banking fraud, political corruption and other breaches of the companies acts.

[What_Goes_Up]

The important thing is not whether they are found guilty or not - thats for a jury to decide. The important thing is that they have a functioning criminal justice system that puts them on trial. Which isn’t happening in this country wrt banking fraud, political corruption and other breaches of the companies acts.

Ahhhhhh… but do they?

Many are starting to disagree.

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 … t-go-free/

Will Wall Street Go Free?
May 27, 2010
By WILLIAM D. COHAN

Let me try to get this straight. The Justice Department announced last weekend that it has dropped its criminal investigation into wrongdoing by the former executives of American International Group Financial Products, or A.I.G.-F.P. — the group inside A.I.G. that foolishly decided to insure billions of dollars of risk in the mortgage market, and got paid millions of dollars for doing so. So the Obama administration, which has repeatedly pilloried banking executives in an effort to build support for its financial reform package, has in one step reduced exponentially the chances of actually holding people on Wall Street accountable for the financial crisis, which was an utterly preventable self-inflicted wound. This is simply incomprehensible.

Especially since the facts with which to hold people accountable are so compelling. Forthwith, then, a financial crisis reminder primer:

…(cont’d)

[What_Goes_Up]

industry.bnet.com/financial-serv … al-crisis/

One Word Explains What Caused the Financial Crisis: Fraud
May 5, 2010
By **Alain Sherter **

“The best way to rob a bank is to own one.” — William Black

Economist James Galbraith submits what I think is the best theory to explain what caused the financial crisis. It’s a doozy, though, so just try to keep up. Here goes: fraud.

Oddly, as the U. of Texas-Austin prof noted this week on Capitol Hill, that simple premise doesn’t draw much attention in the corridors of power. Lawmakers furrow their brows. Financial industry folks, summoned to Washington for their opinion, study the middle distance. Adepts of the dismal science whip out incomprehensible charts. It’s very complicated.

Except fundamentally it’s not. Fraud was, is and will continue to be a central feature of financial crashes, as recent history attests. During the savings & loan crisis in the 1980s, for instance, bankers stripped thrifts down to their skivvies. Twenty years later, boiler-room operators like Jeff Skilling and Bernie Ebbers took the money and ran.

…(cont’d)

[What_Goes_Up]

William K. Black has argued vociferously for maniacs in manacles:

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=29917&p=392172
To rob a country, own a bank

[johnnyskeleton]

The important thing is not whether they are found guilty or not - thats for a jury to decide. The important thing is that they have a functioning criminal justice system that puts them on trial. Which isn’t happening in this country wrt banking fraud, political corruption and other breaches of the companies acts.

Ahhhhhh… but do they?

Many are starting to disagree.

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 … t-go-free/

Will Wall Street Go Free?

May 27, 2010
By WILLIAM D. COHAN

Let me try to get this straight. The Justice Department announced last weekend that it has dropped its criminal investigation into wrongdoing by the former executives of American International Group Financial Products, or A.I.G.-F.P. — the group inside A.I.G. that foolishly decided to insure billions of dollars of risk in the mortgage market, and got paid millions of dollars for doing so. So the Obama administration, which has repeatedly pilloried banking executives in an effort to build support for its financial reform package, has in one step reduced exponentially the chances of actually holding people on Wall Street accountable for the financial crisis, which was an utterly preventable self-inflicted wound. This is simply incomprehensible.

Especially since the facts with which to hold people accountable are so compelling. Forthwith, then, a financial crisis reminder primer:

…(cont’d)

Ok, a slightly more functional but still imperfect justice system.

[yoganmahew]

William K. Black has argued vociferously for maniacs in manacles:

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=29917&p=392172
To rob a country, own a bank

Here, I think he’s wrong. The evidence appears to show that it is not the owners (shareholders) who benefit, it is the management. So the best way to rob a country appears to be to ‘manage’ a bank. I believe there is a serious disconnect between owners and managers, as a result of a criminal connect. The bank owned life and insurance companies have large cross-holdings in other banks. This should never have been allowed to happen.

The banks need to be split up so that banking functions are in one company totally separated from insurance and life functions. Banks should not be permitted to hold the debt of other banks, even at supposedly arms length. The owners of banks must be separated from the managers.

[The_Unwelcome_Guest]

Where’s the perp walk?

Stop.

Hammertime.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2c4L4CPfQY8

[What_Goes_Up]

Countrywide - Tangelo’s a shoo-in, no?

04 Jun 2009
cnbc.com/id/31108460/SEC_Cha … er_Trading
SEC Charges Ex-Countrywide CEO with Insider Trading

Hmmmm… maybe not:

Jun 16th 2008
bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/1 … eal-story/
Angelo Mozilo’s loans to friends: the real story

[What_Goes_Up]

theloop21.com/money/who-caused-t … -they-jail

Who caused the financial collapse, and why aren’t they in jail?
Wed, 05/26/2010
By: **Devona Walker **

We’re livid about the Wall Street bailout and skeptical about financial reform

If you write bad checks, if you steal a car, you are going to jail. That’s how the system works for regular folks. On Wall Street, if you rip someone off, defraud them, take their (our tax) money, you may get a bonus or you may lose your job. But not one of the players that contributed to the financial meltdown has seen the inside of a jail cell. That’s what has so many Americans livid about the Wall Street bailout and skeptical about financial reform.

Here are some of the biggest players, who have not been held accountable and won’t really be touched by Financial Reform.

Credit rating agencies. Let’s start with the credit rating agencies, the folks who were suppose to be watchdogs for the mortgage market. Their role, even though the financial reform debate seems to center around derivatives and “too big to fail,” in the financial collapse should not be overlooked. Moody’s and Standard & Poor, etc. gave A ratings on risky packages, sub prime mortgage-backed securities. The entire ratings system was a scam in which they were helping the banks screw investors. They had no real incentive to do their job. They were paid by the banks and therefore had every incentive not to really evaluate the products – but do what the banks wanted.

Even back in Dec. 2006, an internal employee memo illustrates they knew exactly what they were doing.

…(cont’d)

[What_Goes_Up]

newsweek.com/2009/07/08/too-big-to-jail.html

Too Big To Jail
July 09, 2009
by Michael Hirsh

Why prosecutors won’t hit Wall Street hard in the subprime scandal.

Ever heard of Sky Capital? Probably not. The CEO of that rinky-dink Wall Street firm and five of his employees were indicted this week over what the Securities and Exchange Commission described as a “trans-Atlantic boiler room scheme” to defraud investors. Maybe you have heard of Angelo Mozilo, the perpetually tanned former head of Countrywide Financial who faces civil fraud charges that he and two others knew many of their subprime loans were “toxic,” as Mozilo allegedly described them in e-mails. Mozilo says he’s innocent. Prosecutors believe he was one of many middlemen who fed one of the greatest confidence games of all time—the subprime-mortgage-backed securities scam—perpetuated by Wall Street.

But if you think this is ultimately going to be like the 1980s, when Wall Street’s not-so-finest were cuffed and marched off to jail in front of the TV cameras, think again. Despite much fanfare a year or so ago from the FBI and the Justice Department, which said they were investigating major financial firms, most of the cases you are likely to hear about will be small fry like Sky Capital (whose executives have pleaded not guilty). The truth is, even the outcome of the Mozilo case is in doubt, according to legal experts.

Two years into the catastrophe, there have been almost no indictments beyond low-level mortgage-fraud cases. Yes, ample evidence exists that senior executives on Wall Street knew, or should have known, that fraudulently inflated home values, wholly invented incomes, and other illegal schemes figured in a huge percentage of the subprime loans that were turned into securities and sold around the world, according to prosecutors, county and state officials, and real-estate experts I have interviewed. And there are e-mails indicating some of these executives were privately worried that the boom might end, even as they evinced confidence publicly. But they all share a common defense: ignorance of just how bad things would get, says Carl (Chip) Loewenson, a former assistant U.S. attorney who helped prosecute some of the big insider-trading cases in the '80s. “So many of the big banks and investment banks had a very similar experience,” says Loewenson, who now helps run Morrison & Foerster’s white-collar defense unit in New York. “Look at Lehman, Merrill, Citi, Wachovia … They just got killed. Unless you’re going to say they were all in one big conspiracy, or they all coincidentally happened to have identical conspiracies, the only reasonable explanation is they all got blindsided by a thousand-year storm.”

…(cont’d)

[What_Goes_Up]

Got one of the bastards!

I’m sure a few CEOs will be losing sleep tonight!

journallive.co.uk/north-east … -26538773/

**Financier Martin Watson jailed over mortgage scam **
May 28 2010
by Rob Kennedy, The Journal

A CROOKED financier has been jailed after he contributed to the sub-prime mortgage crisis with a £2.2m mortgage scam.

Martin Watson seemed every inch the upright money expert, living in style on Northumberland’s smart Darras Hall estate and shining as a self-employed broker.

But the 54-year-old former high-flying consultant was also the brains behind an audacious fraud in which he inflated the salaries and employment details of clients in the North East to win mortgage advances of up to £219,000.

Watson used fake job records, pay slips and P60s supplied by sidekick Paul Robertson from his South Tyneside accountancy firm to seal the home loans from high street banks and building societies.

And by the time the racket was finally smashed, more than 20 bogus applications together worth £2.24m had been secured, Newcastle Crown Court heard.

…(cont’d)

[What_Goes_Up]

20 of the most “doable” from Time’s list:
time.com/time/specials/packa … 39,00.html

[What_Goes_Up]

globalresearch.ca/index.php? … &aid=20672

Accountability and Transparency in the World of Big Money: Banks too Big to Fail and too Big to Jail
Global Research, August 18, 2010
by Danny Schechter

AS BANKS SETTLE FRAUD COMPLAINTS, WHAT HAS REALLY BEEN SETTLED IN THE CONFLICT WITH THE BANKSTERS?

Another day, another bank in the news – with the settlement blues.

Now, Barclays is coughing up $298 million for violating a US Trade law. A Judge is still deliberating on a settlement that may cost Citi $70-$100 million for misleading investors about $40 billion in sleazy subprime holdings.

Last week, It was Wells Fargo settling for $200 million after being caught gouging their own customers. This follows in the wake of a $550 million dollar settlement on the part of Goldman Sachs and then a $600 million deal involving Countrywide and Bank Of America.

If this keeps going, we will soon be talking about real money—but for what? What have these settlements settled other than payoffs substituting for criminal prosecutions?

Bear in mind that very little, if any, of this money wrested from the banksters by the SEC and other agencies goes back to the people who were ripped off in the first place.

Some of the bankers consider this extortion, but it certainly isn’t justice.

The avaricious banks remain too big to fail and, unfortunately, too big to jail. While I don’t think filling our prisons with white-collar criminals will fix the economy, it might lead to overdue improvements in shameful prison practices. It also might send an overdue signal.

…(cont’d)

[What_Goes_Up]

seekingalpha.com/article/222567- … nst-mozilo

The SEC Needs a Win Against Mozilo
August 27, 2010
Jake Zamansky

As a New York Times story suggested earlier this week, Federal Judges are no longer rubber stamping the SEC’s settlements with Wall Street. This has put the SEC in an almost impossible situation: drive harder bargains and risk facing off in court against Wall Street’s limitless legal resources or bow to their wishes and risk more rejected settlements.

It all started with Judge Jed S. Rakoff’s denouncement of the SEC’s settlement with Bank of America (BAC) for allegedly misleading shareholders about losses pending at Merrill Lynch, which at the time was in the process of being acquired. Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle then refused to accept a settlement with Citigroup ©, which also was accused of misleading shareholders about tens of billions of dollars in potential losses.

Judges are frustrated that the SEC’s settlement patterns harm shareholders who actually bear the brunt of the fines. They also want the SEC to negotiate stiffer penalties holding executives personally liable for fraudulent acts.

There are many reasons why large Wall Street firms are able to negotiate such generous terms with the SEC. One reason is the so-called “revolving door,” where former SEC officials representing Wall Street sit across from their past colleagues who themselves might be eying lucrative Wall Street jobs. But another is that Wall Street knows that the SEC is at a disadvantage if push comes to shove and a trial is scheduled.

…(cont’d)

[What_Goes_Up]

bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-1 … ate1-.html

Countrywide’s Mozilo Loses Bid for Dismissal of SEC’s Subprime Risks Suit
Sep 17, 2010
By Edvard Pettersson

Countrywide Financial Corp. former Chief Executive Officer Angelo Mozilo must face trial on regulators’ claims he misled investors about risks tied to subprime lending, a judge ruled.

U.S. District Judge John F. Walter in Los Angeles yesterday denied requests by Mozilo and two other former senior Countrywide executives, David Sambol and Eric Sieracki, for a ruling that there were no genuine issues to be tried. The case is now set for a jury trial in October.

“It remains to be seen whether the Securities and Exchange Commission will be able to convince a jury that defendants’ statements were indeed misleading and material,” Walter said in his decision. “At the summary judgment stage, the judge’s function is not himself to weigh the evidence and determine the truth of the matter.”

…(cont’d)