Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:10 pm Post subject: Arrests, charges, trials, prison sentences of the banksters
First Iceland bank crash prison sentence handed down
Posted on07 April 2011. Tags: banking, Iceland, Landsbanki, olafur thor hauksson, prosecution, shares
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2011/04/07/first-iceland-bank-crash-pr ison-sentence-handed-down/
Reykjavik District Court has today passed sentence on the first case by the special prosecutor into the banking crash. Baldur Gudlaugsson has been sentenced to two years in prison for insider trading.
Baldue Gudlaugsson, former permanent secretary at the Ministry of Finance, committed serious crimes, the judge said;adding that his sentence is particularly harsh because he abused his position as a civil servant.
Gudlaugsson was found guilty on six charges, Visir.is reports. He was found not guilty on one charge and partially absolved of the remaining two.
He sold his shares in Landsbanki on the 17th and 18th September 2008, immediately before the bank’s fall — apparently based on inside knowledge.
The court has seized the ISK 192 million (EUR 1.2 million) profit from the share sale, which Gudlaugsson has been keeping in an account at Arion Bank. He will also have to pay his lawyer a further ISK 4.5 million in charges.
This is the first case brought by special prosecutor Olafur Thor Hauksson to get to the sentencing stage. Hauksson is currently in Luxembourg investigating the fall of Kaupthing Bank.
Another former Icelandic banker sent to jail
Posted on08 March 2012. Tags: bankers, crime, fraud, Iceland, jail, sparisjóðurinn
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2012/03/08/another-former-icelandic-ba nker-sent-to-jail/
Viggó Þórir Þórisson, the former director of the Icelandic savings banks’ joint securities fund (Verðbréfasjóður Sparisjóðanna) has been sentenced to two years in prison for attempted fraud. He was, however, cleared of a charge of large scale fraud.
He created false statements and records concerning guarantees on a bond issue by a company called Napir on the stock exchange in Guernsey, RÚV reports.
He deliberately made it appear that Napir had USD 680 million (ISK 85 billion) to its name and on that basis the company was able to issue bonds. Viggó Þórir owned a 25 percent stake in Napir.
In court Viggó variously gave either no explanation for evidence shown by the prosecution, or his explanations were deemed incongruous with his previous testimony.
The judge said in conclusion that the sentence had to reflect the obvious deliberate nature of the defendant’s crime and the relatively high sums of money involved. It is also considered likely that his actions were one of the major causes for the savings banks’ securities fund having to close down.
His attempt at fraud was considered weak and unconvincing, however; because it targeted institutional investors and banks.
It is now five years since the case against Viggó first came to light and he has been banned from leaving Iceland for longer than most other people involved in cases. _________________ www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org www.rethink911.org www.patriotsquestion911.com www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org www.mediafor911truth.org www.pilotsfor911truth.org www.mp911truth.org www.ae911truth.org www.rl911truth.org www.stj911.org www.v911t.org www.thisweek.org.uk www.abolishwar.org.uk www.elementary.org.uk www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149 http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:15 pm Post subject:
Ex-Anglo Irish Chairman Charged After Arrest
By EAMON QUINN – Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443570904577546420019553 652.html
DUBLIN—Authorities in Ireland arrested and indicted the former chairman of Anglo Irish Bank Corp., making him the most senior executive to face charges in an investigation into financial irregularities at the lender that eventually led to Ireland accepting an international financial baillout.
Collapse Had Roots in Real-Estate Bubble
A Dublin court heard that Sean FitzPatrick was arrested early Tuesday at Dublin airport after returning from overseas. He is charged with unlawfully helping the bank provide funds to individuals to help purchase shares in the bank. He was released on bail ahead of the next court hearing in early October without an entering a plea, as is permissable at this stage under the Irish legal system. A spokesman for the law firm representing Mr. FitzPatrick said he had no comment.
The court appearance comes a day after two other former bank officials were indicted on similar charges and about three years after the launch of a joint investigation between the country's Director of Corporate Enforcement, or ODCE, and Irish fraud police into the bank's problems that has cost Irish taxpayers at least €32 billion ($38.8 billion).
Along with other lenders, the now-nationalized Anglo Irish lent huge amounts to small groups of property lenders during the country's boom years. The Irish property bubble began to burst in 2008, and the cost to taxpayers of rescuing a banking system burdened by soured loans has reached about €64 billion, equivalent to 40% of the country's annual economic output.
Ireland eventually lost access to the debt markets to finance the costs and was eventually forced to strike a €67.5 billion bailout deal with the European Union and International Monetary Fund in late 2010.
A Dublin court on Monday heard indictments against William McAteer, a former finance director at Anglo Irish, and Pat Whelan, a former managing director, that they unlawfully permitted funds to be given to 16 individuals to allegedly help prop up the bank's stock in 2008.
The solicitor for Messrs. McAteer and Whelan declined to comment on the case. Under the Irish legal system, the two men aren't required to enter pleas at this stage.
Mr. FitzPatrick, 64 years old, helped shape Anglo Irish, first as chief executive for almost 20 yearsto 2005, and then as its chairman until his resignation in December 2008.
The bank tapped cheap wholesale funds during the boom years and became the country's largest real-estate specialist lender. But amid mounting losses from the property-market crash, the Irish government nationalized Anglo Irish in January 2009. Last year, it was merged with Irish Nationwide Building Society and renamed the Irish Bank Resolution Corp.
Mr. FitzPatrick was declared bankrupt in 2010.
Irish fraud police examined the provision of funds by Anglo Irish to customers and other business people to buy its shares. They had also investigated so-called back-to-back deposits of about €7.4 billion made between Anglo Irish and another lender in September 2008.
The ODCE has previously said it is investigating loans made to former Anglo Irish directors that it says may not have been adequately reported by Anglo Irish for many years, as well as the content of Anglo Irish's 2008 financial reports and statements and a loan granted to one of the bank's directors.
Irish law suggests that if he were convicted, Mr. FitzPatrick could face a prison sentence of up to five years. But Shelley Horan, a barrister and law lecturer at Trinity College Dublin, said that in criminal cases involving a number of charges, a judge can in rare circumstances impose a longer sentence. _________________ www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org www.rethink911.org www.patriotsquestion911.com www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org www.mediafor911truth.org www.pilotsfor911truth.org www.mp911truth.org www.ae911truth.org www.rl911truth.org www.stj911.org www.v911t.org www.thisweek.org.uk www.abolishwar.org.uk www.elementary.org.uk www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149 http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Iceland’s Hörður Torfason – How to Beat the Banksters
Alex Peitrowski, Contributor
Activist Post
The tiny Nordic European island country of Iceland is presently experiencing one of the greatest economic comebacks of all time. After the privatization of the banking sector completed in 2000, the economy was thrown into a tailspin when over a five-year period, private bankers borrowed 120 billion dollars (10 times the size of Iceland’s economy). A huge economic bubble was created, causing house prices to double, and making a small percentage of Iceland’s population rich enough to buy up overseas investments, mansions, yachts, and private jets, while leaving an absolutely unpayable debt for all Icelanders. Iceland was facing national bankruptcy.
In response to the failed banking system, in October 2008, Iceland’s revolution against this financial tyranny began, rather casually in the street, in front of the Icelandic general assembly.
In the duration of five months, the main bank of Iceland was nationalized, government officials were forced to resign, the old government was liquidated, and a new government was put in its place. By March 2010, Iceland’s people voted to deny payment of the 3,500 million Euro debt created by the bankers, and about 200 high-level executives and bankers responsible for the economic crisis in the country were either arrested or were facing criminal charges.
In February 2011, a new constitutional assembly settled in to rewrite the tiny nation’s constitution, which aimed to avoid entrapment by debt-based currency foreign loans. In 2012, Iceland’s economy is expected to outgrow the Euro and the average for the developed world, as estimated by the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
So how does a revolution like this take root and activate a citizenry to effectively respond to grand scale economic theft by bankers and politicians?
Hörður Torfason, a lifelong activist from Iceland, is credited with organizing the Icelandic ‘Kitchenware Revolution’, beginning with a simple vigil in front of parliament aimed at educating passersby and ridiculing the blatant crimes of the elite who worked there. When the foreign financial community (the IMF and the European Union) pressured Iceland’s Parliament to pass laws dictating repayment of debts privately incurred by bankers, the revolution was formally ignited and nearly turned violent when some Icelanders began throwing rocks at the capitol, attempting to pressure the government for redress.
Torfason and his supporters knew that a non-violent approach would be more effective, and formed a “human wall” of clearly marked orange-vested citizens between angry rock-throwers and the police line. Torfason believed that in order for a movement to be effective, one must use reason and information, as well as peaceful demonstrations, to send a strong message to politicians that the people refuse to pay the bankers’ debts.
The end result of the peaceful resistance to economic tyranny is a model for all Western nations who are currently being gutted by a totally corrupt banking system.
This story is much different than what has happened in the US since the banking crisis began in 2008. Large “bailouts” were granted to the bankers, and none of the responsible parties have faced criminal prosecution. And it appears that we are still at the mercy of the currency cartel and the dollar faces total destruction.
In Iceland, the prime minister was indicted, over 200 criminal charges were filed against the bankers, and all of the former CEOs of the 3 biggest banks were arrested. The new government supported citizens by passing a banking remittance that forgave debt exceeding 110% of home values. As a result, “banks have forgiven loans equivalent to 13 percent of gross domestic product, easing the debt burdens of more than a quarter of the population.” (source: Bloomberg.com)
Yes, the country continued to struggle economically after the 2008 revolution. But already today Iceland is thriving, with 2.9% growth in the economy in 2011, and 2.4% estimated by the OECD for 2012 and 2013.
The lesson to be learned from Iceland’s crisis is that if other countries think it’s necessary to write down debts, they should look at how successful the 110 percent agreement was here. It’s the broadest agreement that’s been undertaken. – Thorolfur Matthiasson, an economics professor at the University of Iceland in Reykjavik (source: Bloomberg.com)
This is about our life and the future of the children, of the generations, of the young people. – Hörður Torfason (source: http://vimeo.com/25824717) _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Amazing Mail article on Barclays crooks yesterday, and this is just part of it, click through for more!
Exposed: The regime of fear inside Barclays - and how the boss lied and shredded the evidence
British executive at £184bn broking arm hid damning report on bullying Intimidated staff forced to flout rulesinpursuit of 'revenue at all costs' Huge blow to Barclays reputation as new CEO struggles to relaunch bank
By SIMON WATKINS
PUBLISHED: 01:20, 20 January 2013 | UPDATED: 16:46, 20 January 2013
A senior Barclays executive has quit after it was revealed that he secretly shredded a bombshell report that described a key part of the bank as ‘out of control’. Andrew Tinney, who was chief operating officer of the bank’s high-end private investment division, Barclays Wealth, destroyed the explosive dossier at his £5 million Surrey mansion after reading its shocking contents. He then misled banking regulators and Barclays chief executive Antony Jenkins – the man brought in to clean up the bank after the Libor rate-fixing scandal and the resignation of Bob Diamond – by pretending that the report had never existed. But he finally owned up to suppressing it, and last week Barclays made an internal announcement that he had resigned from his job. The dossier, seen by The Mail on Sunday, exposes a culture of fear, intimidation, bullying and mismanagement at the bank’s stockbroking and investment arm, which handles client assets worth £184billion. The Mail on Sunday’s revelations come at an acutely embarrassing time for Barclays, as bosses try to regain public trust after a series of deeply damaging scandals. The report which Mr Tinney suppressed paints a devastating picture of incompetence and arrogance at the bank, showing that executives:
Pursued a ‘revenue at all costs’ strategy. Fostered a culture of fear and intimidation. Were ‘actively hostile’ to the idea of compliance with banking rules. Presided over a ‘broken culture’ where problems were ignored or buried. Allowed the business to spin ‘out of control’.
But Mr Tinney, 46, shredded the only hard copy and ensured that its contents were not entered into the Barclays computer system. Last Monday, his colleagues learned that he had quit as chief operating officer of Barclays Wealth, where he received a package worth around £5 million a year in salary, bonus, share options and incentive payments.
The bank said last night that Barclays Wealth customers had not suffered because of the cultural problems
Mr Tinney received no payoff from the bank, so avoiding embarrassing questions that would have inflicted further damage on Barclays’ already sullied reputation. However, Barclays could face fines running into millions if it is shown to have ignored banking rules.
More... 'At least you don't work for HMV': Police chief tells officers facing wage cuts they are lucky to still have jobs
Speaking at his six-bedroom home in Weybridge last night, Mr Tinney said: ‘I’m sorry but I shouldn’t be having this conversation with you. Can you speak to the company?’ The investigation which he tried to cover up in March last year was triggered after regulators found ‘deficiencies’ in the New York division, Barclays Wealth America (BWA). However the problems pervaded the entire Wealth division, which is based at Canary Wharf in London, according to one member of the inquiry team. Compiled by consultancy firm Genesis Ventures, the report said: ‘The current leadership team have pursued a course of “revenue at all costs”, taken a conscious decision to ignore support functions, reinforced a culture that is high risk and actively hostile to compliance, and ruled with an iron fist to remove any intervention from those who speak up in opposition. ‘Management consciously failed to invest in necessary technology, people and safeguards that it knew it needed, leaving these areas understaffed, under-skilled, under-supported and in disarray.
‘A conscious choice was made to ignore compliance until an issue was raised by the regulators – actively inviting intervention. There has been a total lack of accountability by the senior team. ‘Management have created a culture of dominance and fear that has removed escalation of issues [the reporting of concerns up the management chain] and created a siloed organisation with serious flaws. Issues do not flow up but are buried, stopping any solution ever coming to light. ‘This culture immediately removes anyone who opposes Mitch [BWA managing director Mitch Cox] and his team or who expresses dissent in any way… and prevents any counterbalance to the “revenue at all costs” strategy.’ One banker questioned by the investigators said: ‘When I reported a compliance issue to a member of ManCo [management committee], I was told, “I don’t have time for this bull****.’ Another said: ‘When we presented the risk report, [an executive] said “This is a piece of s***” –and threw it across the room.”’ One senior manager is accused in the report of being ‘incredibly defensive’ and of failing to take regulatory issues seriously. Another executive is said to have been determined to stop the inquiry team from gathering information. This individual, the report says, was regarded by colleagues as a ‘key contributor to the current culture of fear’.
Blue in the face: Protesters dressed as suited eagles on Barclays cycle hire bikes demonstrated outside the Royal Festival Hall last year
In one of the most devastating sections of the dossier, the consultants say: ‘The senior team portray themselves as all-powerful and all-knowing… and people chose to disagree with them at their own peril. It is a mentality of superiority which, when combined with other deficiencies, stops the team from tackling their blind spots. When those deficiencies are in compliance, this results in serious issues that no one else has the power to address.’ The report adds: ‘Stories circulate of individuals who have been fired because they brought issues to the management’s attention. It is culturally acceptable at BWA, from the top of the organisation down, to ignore, put off, and even deride risk and compliance issues.’ Mr Tinney had commissioned the report after regulators at the US Securities and Exchange Commission found ‘deficiencies and weaknesses’ in BWA’s compliance with federal banking laws in 2011. Two investigators from Genesis Ventures interviewed more than 50 BWA employees as part of the inquiry. When the process was complete, Mr Tinney arranged to have the report biked to the exclusive Surrey estate where he lives. Apparently horrified by its contents, Mr Tinney fed the document into a shredder, then denied all knowledge of it ever having existed. However, the astonishing saga did not end there. In September, an anonymous whistleblower, thought to be a Barclays insider, contacted chief executive Antony Jenkins and then chairman Marcus Agius, describing the culture within the Wealth division as ‘deeply flawed’ and asking them to look into the mystery of the disappearing report.
Iran to Execute 4 Bankers on Fraud Charges February 22, 2013
Source: Weath Wire
Iran's judiciary system recently worked through the biggest banking fraud case in the nation's history.
According to The New York Times, the outcome of the case was made official on Monday. Results were dramatic to say the least.
Judiciary spokesman Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei told reporters that four people had been officially sentenced to death on charges of corruption and “disrupting the country's economic system.”
The guilty party was responsible for mishandling $2.6 billion of funds – using forged documents in order to receive credit from banks, permitting them to purchase state-owned companies.
From PressTV:
According to the indictment, the owners of Aria Investment Development Company, which is at the center of the controversy, had bribed bank managers to get loans and letters of credit. The company has more than 35 offshoots which are active in diverse business activities.
...
“The four are Mahafarid Amir-Khosravi…[the prime suspect], Behdad Behzadi, his legal advisor, Iraj Shoja, his financial solicitor and Saeed Kiani Rezazadeh, head of the Ahvaz branch of Saderat Bank,” he [Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei] said.
Additionally, the president of the Bank Melli branch in Kish was condemned to life in prison. The former deputy minister Khodamorad Ahmadi has been ordered to spend a decade in prison as well, according to Iran's attorney general, Mohseni-Ejei.
Several others involved in this infamous scandal have also been slapped with heavy fines and many have also been prohibited from holding public office.
Economist Nouriel Roubini added his two cents on the subject, reporting to Bloomberg:
“Bankers are greedy; they’ve been greedy for the last hundreds of years...t’s not a question if they are more immoral today then they were a thousand years ago, you have to make sure they behave in ways in which you minimize those risks.”
This message surely hits a little too close to home for central bankers across the globe who have been engaged with fraud and corruption in the past or present.
Constituents and political leaders spend a big chunk of time debating over how to deal with our crumbling economy. Ending system abuse from insiders and the Fed alike would undoubtedly have a positive ripple effect, but how is that goal going to be achieved? Thus far, not a single chief central banker has been arrested in light of the financial crisis.
This is completely asinine.
They keep making more money, while we struggle to thrive in the middle class. The brutal truth is that banks prosper when people are on welfare. They're invested in keeping you down and could care less about your American Dream.
Perhaps Iran is on to something by enforcing real consequences when insiders mess with the country's entire economic system. The death sentence decision is obviously harsh (Iran's justice system is pretty harsh in general). Alas, what's decided cannot be undone. They said they are trying to set an example.
Elite criminals shouldn't be treated differently than any other criminal; they should be prosecuted, not protected. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
The obvious questions, where were these Iran fraudsters trained & who were they working for?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/four-face-death-in -iran-over-26bn-banking-fraud-7987982.html _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:36 am Post subject:
Covering up the truth - Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? How the Banking Commission is denied access to important evidence on banking crime!
The Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards issued a call for evidence in July 2012 .
The terms of reference of the Commission were to consider and report on:
a) professional standards and culture of the UK banking sector, taking account of regulatory and competition investigations into the LIBOR rate-setting process;
b) lessons to be learned about corporate governance, transparency and conflicts of interest, and their implications for regulation and for Government policy;
In the wake of the LiBOR scandal, the Commission was set up to be led by Andrew Tyrie, who also chaired the Treasury Select Committee (TSC). He said: "Recent scandals have shown how much we need higher standards in banking … perpetrators of wrongdoing should be held fully accountable..."
Since that day, the Commission has sat virtually every week, and has received a vast amount of evidence from a wide variety of informed sources. I have watched many of the hearings on the Internet, and the Chairman has repeatedly asked witnesses the same questions.
"...'Why has no-one been prosecuted for financial crimes committed by the banks and financial entities which have been so prominently in the news, and what proposals are being made to rectify this situation so we can get to the truth in the future..."?
It is the tradition of such Commissions to call for evidence from the public and interested bodies, and to invite selected persons with special knowledge to come and give live evidence to the Commission.
As you would expect, a wide cross section of interested parties were invited to present evidence, and just about anyone in the banking, regulatory and academic establishments submitted evidence and many of them were invited to give evidence. Their names and the details of their evidence are attached in various addendums on the Commission's web pages.
I too submitted evidence to the Banking Commission on 22 August 2012 in a document entitled;
"...Response to the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards - Professional Standards of the UK Banking Sector..."
The document was submitted in a formal academic style and its Summary laid out the terms of the evidence which was being submitted. It stated;
"...This paper makes the assertion that the British Banking Industry has become identical with an Organised Criminal Enterprise...
It examines the nature of the criminogenic personality and determines the kind of person who is more likely to break the criminal law and why.
It asserts that this state of affairs has been allowed to develop because of the failure of the regulatory process to develop the necessary skills and knowledge of the conduct of criminals to enable them to deal professionally with the misdeeds of the banking sector and the reluctance of the regulators to use their statutory powers effectively.
It defines why there needs to be a far greater degree of criminal prosecution brought against financial practitioners and explains why such processes are among the only penalties that such practitioners truly fear..."
I had deliberately focused on these topics because I was only too well aware that they would be highly unlikely to be covered by anyone else providing evidence to the Commission.
What follows is an exact reproduction of the facts as they happened to me over this issue.
My evidence was submitted in time together with the relevant covering letter requesting that I be permitted to attend and give evidence in person.
And I waited.
Then, in or about late 2012, when the Commission was in full swing, and having heard nothing from the Commission, I rang Ian Fraser, who will be known to many of you and asked him if his evidence had been accepted. He told me that he had been forced to ring the Office of the Commission and complain because his evidence did not appear in the list of submitted written evidence. He agreed that his evidence had subsequently been included in a second list of written evidence and published on the website, but only after had had been forced to complain!
I searched the website but could uncover no evidence of my evidence appearing in any list, so I rang the office of the Commission.
I spoke to a young woman and explained my position and asked her why my evidence had not been acknowledged on the website.
She said she would look, and when she returned she stated that they did not appear to have received any evidence from me. I expressed great surprise and made it clear to her that I had submitted evidence in time and in due manner and that nothing had been returned. I asked her to look again or enquire of someone else who perhaps might have had more knowledge of the workings of the system. She agreed to do so and said she would ring me back within 48 hours.
Needless to say she did not ring back.
Beginning now to smell a rat, (or at least a Crown Servant), I rang again, and this time I spoke to a young man. I outlined my concerns and explained that I had already spoken to the young woman, and he almost immediately said he would go and look again for my submissions.
Now, I imagine that all such submissions are entered on to a database and it should not take long to check. When the young man returned quite a few minutes later, he re-confirmed that no evidence had been received from me and that in any case, not all evidence received was selected for use by the Commission. However he said he would ask his manager and get back to me later with an answer.
He did not call back.
Having given evidence to a previous Parliamentary Sub-Committee for Trade and Industry, I was aware that all evidence received is logged and recorded, even though, truthfully not all of it may be relevant, and if so, then it is not used, but it is recorded.
By now, the rat had grown in proportion and I was beginning to smell that most typical of British civil (government) servant aromas, the odour of 'cover up', of 'official obfuscation', of 'sweep under carpet time' and having smelt that pong before many times, I knew it was pointless continuing to ring the Commission Office.
So I wrote to Andrew Tyrie, the Chairman of the Committee! His office told me that I could email him but in his capacity of Chair of the Commission. I sent the following email on 22nd January 2013;
"... Dear Mr Tyrie,
I am writing to you in the hope that I can alert you to evidence which I had hoped would be allowed to be given to the Commission on Banking Standards.
I recently watched the hearings on 17th January 2013 when questions were asked by yourself about the reasons why no-one has been prosecuted or convicted for criminal offence arising out of the recent banking scandals.
I submitted evidence to the putative Commission back in August 2012 in a paper which dealt with issues of banking culture, workplace standards, conduct of business and treatment of clients, and I sought to draw comparisons between their similarities to organised criminality.
I raised issues of ways in which truly effective sanctions can be imposed on bankers who break the criminal law (as indeed so many of them have done), and I sought to set out an explanation for their criminogenic culture.
This arises out of academic work I have completed in recent years, as well as on the basis of my many years in the enforcement of financial legal issues, as a lawyer, a former Metropolitan Police Detective, a financial regulator, and a financial legal consultant.
I spoke to the Commission office today because I had received no response to my submissions, and I was told that they did not believe my submissions had been selected for consideration. They are subsequently checking this fact.
I am aware that my submissions were very hard-hitting and indeed, possibly unpalatable to many, but my many years of experience in dealing with financial crime had made me realise that what bankers and their apologist bodies will say in public, and what they will really do in private and away from public gaze, are two entirely different things.
I have very strong views on banking criminals and the way in which they should be treated, as well as the ways in which this country has been so badly served by the actions and responses of its financial regulators in recent years. I can give direct evidence of an investigation I was commissioned to undertake for H.M.Treasury into money laundering in the City of London, and the attitudes of the FSA towards dealing with its effects, as far back as 2001, and I can assure you that very little has changed in the interim.
I am very concerned that your Commission might not have the chance to at least be appraised of the content of my findings prior to your final deliberations. I should like to give evidence to you because I believe it would be very valuable, but in the absence of any information as to whether or not your Committee will even see the evidence I submitted, I am at a loss to know how to proceed, apart from taking the responsibility to write to you directly..."
I received no acknowledgement of this email, but I did not expect any, as it would be difficult for Andrew Tyrie, as Commission Chairman to make any comment on the record.
I left the matter for a week and then I rang the Commission office again and spoke again to the same young man.
'...Oh Mr Bosworth-Davies, I was just about to call you. Your evidence has just been discovered, it was here all the time. My Principal is deciding how to deal with it, but she's in a meeting right now, but I will call you back, when I know what she intends to do with your evidence, but don't hold your breath...'
Quite what he meant by that I cannot say, but yet again, he did not call back. So I rang again the following day.
'...Yes, your evidence is still being appraised upstairs by one of our senior people, and promise I will call you back...'
This time, he did, at about 6.15pm on a Friday evening.
'...Your evidence will be circulated to the Commission and they will all have a chance to read it. However, my principals want to redact certain parts of the report before it is published...'
'...Which parts...' I asked.
'...Well, the parts where you call the banks criminals, we think that the use of such words might upset them, might send the wrong impression, particularly as no-one has been convicted of any crime...'
'...But those are the facts, you can't escape them...' I said. '...That is the whole point of the Chairman's repeated question, they want to know why no-one has been convicted of criminal offences...Using the phrase criminal doesn't have to mean they have been convicted...If a bank launders money like HSBC has done, then they are money launderers. .If they were to be convicted in court then they would be convicted money launderers...so why do you need to redact anything from the report...'
He had no answer.
I am now informed that my evidence has been circulated around the Commission and it will be ultimately published on the website. I have no means of knowing whether this is true or not, we shall have to wait and see!
What truly infuriates me about this whole episode is the way in which civil (or government) servants are the ones to decide what evidence is submitted to such a Parliamentary Commission. These non-elected apparatchiks decide what will and what will not be seen by the Commissioners.
By what right do they give themselves these powers, by what possible provision do they have the right to determine what the Commissioners will and will not see or read. What right do they have to redact evidence if it is given in a lawful fashion, just because it might be irritating to one or more of those being reviewed.
Perhaps most importantly, how much other evidence has been quietly marginalised and pushed to the side and quietly forgotten, evidence which might have contained important information which the Commission might have usefully received, but which they have been denied by these bureaucrats, either because it is inconveniently positioned for the banks, or is just too awful to contemplate.
The Commission staff have knuckled their foreheads, and bowed down to the interests of the banks and their apologist agencies, the Big 4 Consultancies and all the other members of the institutional Great and Good, but, as in my case, they have censored the right of others to bring their honestly-held and properly acquired evidence to the Commission.
I am aware that my evidence was hard-edged, it was irritating, it was not happy reading and it made some very unpleasant allegations, all of which I stand by. My evidence was based on long experience of the financial markets and based on years of involvement with the financial sector and it deserved to be considered with greater consideration. How else will we ever alert our political representatives to what is really going on if all they ever see is what their apparatchiks want them to see, because it suits their perverse version of events. I have no doubt if I had not written to the Chairman, my evidence would have continued to languish in some black hole behind the arrass.
All the time we have government servants busily knuckling their foreheads to the interests of the financial sector and standing in the way of those of us who want to let in a bit of light to illuminate some grubby dark corners, we shall continue to suffer from these miscarriages of public administrative justice.
We must await the final report with great anticipation, but I fear that little will really change very much! If no-one tells the Commissioners what they really need to know, how will they ever find out?
This is the second tranche of the evidence I sent in to the Parliamentary Commission on Banking which they sought to suppress.
Identifying the reluctant regulator.
17. It has started to become clear that those persons who are employed in the compliance function in the industry itself do not wish to be perceived to be effective in 'policing' terms or are not encouraged by their employers to become so.
18. The problems which have always caused financial regulators the greatest degree of difficulty are those which stemmed from behaviour which was manifestly 'criminal', whether obvious or submerged. The first kind of criminal activity can be determined by those acts involving insider dealing, money laundering, the theft of client's funds or the obtaining of money from investors by deception. The second group includes behavior which becomes criminal as a result of its commission (the trader who executes false trades or makes up positions in order to cover up his own ineptitude, or to give the impression he has achieved certain targets.) In so doing he commits offences of Fraud, and stands to be prosecuted in exactly the same way as a person who makes a false claim for State Benefit.
19.Unhappily, those given the greatest degree of responsibility for ensuring compliance with the rules and regulations , and who have the role of investigating and identifying any criminogenic behaviour, have, in the vast majority of cases, no previous experience of investigating criminal offences and appear to possess no obvious skills or ability to perform an effective policing function, and more importantly, no desire so to do, nor are they apparently willing to adopt 'policing' techniques or methods.
20.This unwillingness to be observed to be performing a policing function has begun to impact very heavily on the effectiveness of the regulatory role, to the extent that it has begun to become counter-productive. A detailed re-evaluation of attitudes and responses has defined an alternative interpretation which could be placed upon the reasons which apparently lie behind the bland, constantly-rehearsed assertions that other, non-policing techniques could be adopted more usefully to regulate the financial sector. A hidden agenda begins to be glimpsed, one which positively discriminates against the adoption of any methods or skills which, while they might have proved to be effective against the activities of working-class criminals in the past, are positively discouraged when it came to dealing with the crimes of the powerful.
21.As a result, business conduct which, by any definition, and in any other social sector, would be deemed to be manifestly criminal, has been allowed to proliferate. Perhaps the most egregious example of such conduct occurred in the observance of the criminal activities of private pension salesmen, during a time when Government permitted the practice of allowing private pension companies to solicit pension transfers and contributions from the holders of occupational company pension schemes. The activities of the salesmen were nothing short of downright fraud but their egregious conduct was allowed to be dealt with within the financial sector in other, non-criminal ways, because it had become defined in other terms; i.e. the offences of 'obtaining property by deception' or 'false accounting' had been re-determined as 'mis-selling'.
22.What distinguishes this conduct from other forms of high-pressure selling, the criminality inherent in the activity being undertaken, was the deliberately false and deceptive way in which the contracts were solicited, and the methods which turned the 'Great Pensions Swindle' into one of the biggest frauds in British history. Vital information about the performance of their existing pension arrangements, which clients were entitled to be given, was deliberately witheld from them. Important information about the way in which the costs of the new private pension would be calculated and the amount of contribution needed, was carefully avoided. Client financial fact-finds, the information on which the salesman was supposed to determine the most suitable financial needs of the client, and which were required by financial services regulation, were either completed in the scantest detail, or were never completed at all.
23.Looked at on the simplest basis, the existing clients had to be deceived in order to have agreed to sign their capital transfer forms over to the insurance companies. They could not have been truthfully told the facts of the contract they were entering into, when they signed the agreements to transfer their accumulated savings to the relevant product providers; nor could they have clearly understood the facts they were told. Any contract based upon any of these misunderstandings or misconceptions would be void, and the product providers, or their agents, would have been guilty of acts of criminal deception, false accounting or procuring the execution of a valuable security by deception under the 1968 Theft Act, and therefore, in law, the property in the money transfer could not pass lawfully to the insurance company or product provider.
24.Despite this institutionalised level of fraudulent practice, not one salesman or product provider was ever interviewed as a suspect for a criminal offence. Approximately 65,000 former mineworkers alone transferred in the region of £736 million out of the Mineworkers Pension Scheme (one of the best and most generous in the country), on the advice of salesmen who told them they could get a better deal outside their own scheme, advice which was wholly untrue, and criminally deceptive. Nearly 27,000 teachers left the Teacher's Superannuation Scheme into which local education authorities paid a contribution of 8.05% of salary and which possessed index-linked benefits.
Effective regulation of financial markets
25.Ever since my early study visits to the USA in the early 1980s to study financial regulation with the SEC, the NASD, the CFTC and the major Exchanges, I have long reiterated my belief in the importance of the financial regulatory function in reining back the dishonest excesses of the financial sector.
26.Now, with the news about Standard Chartered Bank and their wholesale disregard of US laws on sanctions, my belief is reinforced even more strongly. This episode is just yet another example of what has become an endemic culture of legal anomie (norm evasion) within the banking system, where the Executives of the major banks have decided that they are 'too big to jail', and international laws do not apply to them when they become inconvenient.
27.Without any doubt, the scandal that has become the ‘banking collapse’ in the UK, (not my words, they are Vince Cable’s on the ‘Today Programme’ on 26th July 2012), was caused by an excess of greed on the part of the banks, influenced both by a new environment of derivative abuse in the field of debt securitisation, but coupled with a culture of criminality which has been allowed to become endemic in the financial sector; an admixture of regulatory failure, influenced by political incompetence and the policy of a ‘light touch approach’ towards regulation of banks; and the total failure of the regulators to understand and respond to the criminogenic culture inherent within the new product models adopted by the practitioners whom they were supposed to oversee.
28.Lest anyone be tempted to observe that the financial problem started in the US, let me say that it was only allowed to become as bad as it did because the Americans, first under Reagan and later the younger George Bush had demolished a superb regulatory edifice that had been in place since 1934, and had made a significant contribution to America’s post war financial hegemony!
29.Those US pioneers had taught us that without effective and professional regulators, armed with personal courage, good legal knowledge and sincere moral integrity, the financial sector it purports to regulate will run wild. The very reason that the SEC was created in the first place was to restore the integrity of the markets destroyed in the aftermath of the Wall Street Crash, a financial scandal caused by an epidemic of criminal operators who had undermined the credibility of the exchanges.
30.The financial sector existed then, as it does today, to make money, lots of it, and it doesn’t really care how it does it. Those who populate the financial markets are fairly crude creatures, motivated by greed and selfishness. You don’t need to be very bright or intellectual to make money in the financial sector, but you do have to be willing to sacrifice any principles of honesty or integrity you may once have been born with. As Balzac once said, ‘behind every great fortune there is a great crime’!
31.So, why and how has this state of affairs been allowed to develop?
32.The British have always adopted a schizophrenic attitude towards the way they view criminal activity. There is the crime of the streets, burglary, theft, mugging, joy-riding, rioting, committed by identifiable criminal types, and dealt with by the police. Then there is the kind of wrong-doing that takes place within the financial sector, but when it happens, it gets called something else (mis-selling), and is dealt with by regulatory agencies.
33.For some reason there is a complete distinction between the two courses of conduct. They are, and have always been dealt with differently; penalised differently; administered differently, and for some strange reason which I only finally understood after I had studied the work of Edwin Sutherland, considered differently by politicians, regulators and in many cases, even by the general public.
34.I once conducted an academic research project where I asked a group of financial services compliance officers to place in order of seriousness a series of criminal offences. In the general list I included six typical identifiable criminal offences such as theft, fraud, joy riding, robbery, while for the other six I used recognisable terms such as ‘insider trading’, ‘churning’, ‘misselling a financial product for the purposes of generating more commission, ‘misselling a financial product which meant that the client was no better off, but which generated more profit for the company’, ‘front running’, etc.
35.Without exception, in excess of 60 respondents put the identifiable ordinary crimes first in the list, while putting the financial issues last. It was as if activities which could be described in conventional criminal terms assumed a far greater degree of social opprobrium than did financial crimes, even though in pure legal definitions, all the offences alleged were equally criminal and all should be investigated and punished equally seriously.
36.It was a classic illustration of what Professor Michael Levi of Cardiff University once referred to as the huge social gulf that existed between the crimes of the streets as opposed to the crimes in the suites!
37.There is absolutely no reason why someone who steals a car or robs a post office should be considered to be any different from a person who trades in securities using inside information, who allows his institution to be used for the purposes of laundering of criminal money, or who helps himself to funds deposited with him for the purposes of investment.
38.One of the greatest tragedies of the British regime of financial regulation, and one of its biggest failings, is that none of those who hold down senior roles within the upper reaches of the regulatory agencies, have ever once undertaken even the simplest form of criminal investigation. They have never even arrested so much as a shoplifter, and they do not know how criminals will behave when they are being investigated; they do not know what evidence is needed to bring these persons before a court and to obtain a safe and proper conviction; they do not know how to go about acquiring even the most basic evidence which can be used to convict a criminal; and perhaps most importantly of all, they do not understand how to conduct themselves when they are being required to investigate a pattern of behaviour which might prove to possess important criminal consequences. Put more simply, they simply do not understand the signs of crime, and they are therefore ill-equipped to deal with them even when they are staring them in the face!
39.Yet these are the very people we put in charge of our regulatory agencies, and we give them very complex investigatory powers. Members of the ‘Great and Good’, people who have held down no doubt important roles in academe or the law, (even the Serious Fraud Office has been seriously criticised for its administrative failings), banking or other areas of financial business, former civil servants or senior partners in leading firms of accountants (if ever there was a serious conflict of interests it is in appointments such as these), or people who are seconded from other regulatory environments, but who have no experience at all in dealing with criminals.
40.While they all possess undoubted skills and experience, the one thing they all have in common is a complete lack of any understanding of the function of the criminal temperament.
41.And the people they recruit are cast in the same mould. They use the age-old civil service tests of suitability, are they the ‘safe pair of hands’, or ‘is he one of us’, requirements which succeed only in maintaining a regime of ineptitude. I simply cannot recall how many former senior, experienced police detectives, men and women who have real skill and experience in dealing with major criminals, have ever been recruited to become senior figures in the regulatory agencies.
42.There may be some who have found a niche in the business sector, albeit not too many, and at not too elevated a rank, but I cannot think of a single former detective currently holding down an important role in any financial regulatory agency.
43.It is as if the skills required to catch common working class thieves are considered to be unsuitable to catch criminals from a more elevated social sector of society.
44.I have observed this phenomenon for so many years, and I have come to the single and unpalatable conclusion that it has that it has to be driven by the class element. Putting it more simply, it is as if society is happy to leave detectives to deal with the criminal classes, but they don’t want ‘Mr Plod’ stumbling around among the more delicate sensibilities to be found in the financial sector.
45.How else can you explain the fact that when I was a detective, I could charge a man with an offence which could result in his being incarcerated for life, without the need for any approval from anyone in Government, whereas if I wanted to charge a businessman with an offence subject to the Companies Act with a maximum period of imprisonment of 2 years, I was required to seek the authority of the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry first?
46.The civil service and the civil administrative function simply refuse to acknowledge the skills and the knowledge of police. It has been ever thus. During my career, even when I could demonstrate that my squad was dealing with named US mafia organised criminals who were setting up share dealing operations in London, DTI officials refused to do anything about it, and just laughed at us, accusing us of ‘seeing the mafia behind every bush’!
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 11:44 pm Post subject:
Country's most senior judge calls for radical reform of laws on fraud so City bankers can be tried and punished
Lord Chief Justice said there are too few fraud prosecutions
Those who commit fraud or bribery 'should be punished'
Follows no charges against those responsible for financial crisis
Lord Chief Justice Sir John Thomas called for radical reform of laws on fraud today
The country’s most senior judge called for radical reform of the laws on fraud so that corrupt City bankers can be tried and punished.
Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas said: ‘It is vital for the health of our economy and the pre-eminence of London that those who commit financial fraud or engage in bribery and corruption are tried in a criminal court and severely punished.’
He said there were too few prosecutions for fraud and shaking up the law would ensure ‘rigorous pursuit of more prosecutions for fraud, particularly fraud in the financial markets, and for bribery and corruption.’
The intervention from Lord Thomas, who is the head of the judiciary and the leading criminal judge in England and Wales, follows the failure of prosecuting authorities to bring criminal charges against a single banstker or financier over the wrecking of the economy in 2007 and 2008.
The collapse of banks including Northern Rock, the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS cost the taxpayer scores of billions in bailout money. Yet no City executive has answered in court for the lapses and greed that led to more than five years of recession.
Since the banking catastrophe the banks have been involved in a series of scandals that have led to the payment of further billions in compensation, and large-scale fines against financial institutions.
These include the fixing of interest rates, which led to a £290 million fine on Barclays; the mis-selling of payment protection insurance; and the selling of interest rate swaps which were supposed to protect small businesses, but ended up driving many to the wall.
Not one banker has yet been successfully prosecuted over any of the post-crash scandals.
Lord Thomas said in a speech to the Justice legal reform group: 'Fraud investigations and trials are still too slow and immensely expensive; not enough prosecutions are brought despite the re-energised Serious Fraud Office under David Green QC.'
He said that fraudsters have been getting away with it since the early 1980s.
He said that as a commercial barrister at the time 'I saw as much if not more fraud than would a person practising at the criminal bar; I had also been heavily engaged in the legal issues arising out of a series of scandals then involving the insurance market. Many of those scandals involved conduct where the allegations were of serious criminality.
‘Prosecutions were few and those that were brought failed.’
Lord Thomas referred to the views of former Director of Public Prosecutions Lord MacDonald QC, who said in 2009: ‘Our system for regulating markets and for prosecuting market crime is completely broken.’ The Lord Chief Justice singled out two key issues in fraud cases - disclosure and the mode of trial.
Disclosure procedures require prosecutors to reveal to defendants all the information they have - including information that fraud defendants can use to help their case.
Reformers say prosecutors should be able to use only the information they need to win a conviction, and that a defendant should have to get an order from a judge before they can get any other material the prosecution side may have.
Concerns over mode of trial centre on the ability of juries made up of ordinary people to understand complicated fraud cases.
Alternative proposals include trial by judge alone, or trial by a judge sitting with a mixed panel of expert assessors and laymen.
No City executive has answered in court for the lapses - including the collapse of RBS - that led to more than five years of recession
Lord Thomas said: ‘There are still major problems in disclosure that seem to indicate things are getting worse rather than improving.
‘Should we not look radically again at disclosure and the mode of trial’? Last month an analysis of the behaviour of bankers in the 2008 crash by US judge Jed S Rakoff questioned why there had been no criminal convictions of bankers.
Judge Rakoff said an American inquiry referred to fraud on 157 occasions; that the use of top-grade AAA ratings on bad debt may have shown intent to commit fraud; and that the involvement of governments in weakening financial regulation and urging on disastrous takeovers might have discouraged prosecutors.
For the most part, American bankers whose rash pursuit of profit brought on the 2008 global financial collapse didn’t get indicted. They got bonuses.
Odds are that scandal would have played out differently in Vietnam, another nation struggling with misbehaving bankers.
The authoritarian Southeast Asian state doesn’t just send unscrupulous financiers to jail. Sometimes, it sends them to death row.
Amid a sweeping cleanup of its financial sector, Vietnam has sentenced three bankers to death in the past six months.
One duo now on death row embezzled roughly $25 million from the state-owned Vietnam Agribank. Their co-conspirators caught decade-plus prison sentences.
In March, a 57-year-old former regional boss from Vietnam Development Bank, another government-run bank, was sentenced to death over a $93-million swindling job.
According to Vietnam’s Tuoi Tre news outlet, several of his colluders were sentenced to life imprisonment after they confessed to securing bogus loans with a diamond ring and a BMW coupe. And last week, in an unrelated case, charges against senior employees from the same bank allege $47 million in losses from dubious loans.
None of this would impress Bernie Madoff, mastermind of America’s largest ever financial fraud scheme. The combined amount from all three Vietnamese cases adds up to less than 1 percent of his purported $18-billion haul.
But these death sentences nevertheless are high profile scandals in Vietnam.
That’s the point. Human rights watchdogs contend that splashy trials in Vietnam are acts of political theater with predetermined conclusions. The audience: a Vietnamese public weary of state corruption. But these sentences also sound loud alarm bells to dodgy bankers who are currently running scams.
“It’s a message to those in this game to be less greedy and that business as usual is getting out of hand,” said Adam McCarty, chief economist with the Hanoi-based consulting firm Mekong Economics.
“The message to people in the system is this: Your chances of getting caught are increasing,” McCarty said. “Don’t just rely on big people above you. Because some of these [perpetrators] would’ve had big people above them. And it didn’t help them.”
Like most nations that crush dissent and operate with little transparency, Vietnam is highly corrupt.
According to a World Bank study, half of all businesses operating within the communist state expect that gift giving toward officials is required “to get things done.” Transparency International, which publishes the world’s leading corruption gauge, contends Vietnam is more corrupt than Mexico but not quite as bad as Russia.
Unlike in America, where judges can’t sentence white-collar criminals to death, Vietnam can execute its citizens for a range of corporate crimes.
Amnesty International reports that death sentences in Vietnam have been handed down to criminals for running shady investment schemes, counterfeiting cash and even defaulting on loans. This is unusual: United Nations officials have condemned death for “economic crimes” yet Vietnam persists with these sentences — as does neighboring China.
Though statistics on Vietnam’s opaque justice system are scarce, a state official conceded that more than 675 people sit on death row for a range of crimes, according to the Associated Press.
It’s still unclear how the bankers will be killed. Vietnam’s traditional means of execution involves binding perpetrators to a wooden post, stuffing their mouths with lemons and calling in a firing squad. The nation wants to transition to lethal injections. But European nations refuse to export chemicals used in executions (namely sodium thiopental) to governments practicing capital punishment.
Fraudulent bankers are receiving heavy sentences at a moment when Vietnam is enacting major financial reforms.
For decades, Vietnam has been slowly transforming its communist-style, state-run market into a more open and competitive arena. In the post-reunification era, the government owned every bank in Vietnam. Today, state-run banks control only 40 percent of all assets.
This push to bank in a more Western style has ushered in improvements as well as temptations to swindle. According to the UN economist Vu Quang Viet, Vietnamese credit laws passed in 2010 “simply copied the lax US law now widely believed to be at least partially responsible for the financial debacle in 2008.”
Campaigns to root out corruption are promoted as a way to entice foreign investment, which could help prop up Vietnamese banks whose growth has slowed from a sprint to a jog.
But the recent death sentences aren’t really intended to prove the reformers’ sincerity to the outside world, according to McCarty.
“They don’t care about foreigners. It’s all internal politics,” McCarty said. Foreign banking honchos wouldn’t be impressed by a few executions anyway. “If you really want to want to resolve the problem, you can’t just arrest people,” he said. “You’ve got to improve accountability and transparency in the entire system.”
A leading Vietnamese newspaper, Thanh Nien, is also pushing for system-wide cleanup in lieu of showcase trials against a few corporate criminals.
An op-ed in the paper recently compared death sentences for corruption to fighting fire with fire. The preferred approach would be dousing corruption before it burns through public funds. “It is better to prevent corruption,” the paper opined, “than deal with it after the fact.”
£300m annual turnover Bristol based financial services firm Hargreaves Lansdown have issued BCfm with a legal threat over our show last week which accused proprietor Peter Hargreaves of having historically been interviewed several times under caution for fraud
We stand by our story and are refusing to be intimidated
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8kNC2WJdzY _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
'Bloomberg News reported, on April 8th, that a Securities and Exchange Commission prosecuting attorney, James Kidney, said at his recent retirement party on March 27th, that his prosecutions of Goldman Sachs and other mega-banks had been squelched by top people at the agency, because they “were more focused on getting high-paying jobs after their government service than on bringing difficult cases.” He suggested that SEC officials knew that Wall Street would likely hire them after the SEC at much bigger pay than their government remuneration was, so long as the SEC wouldn’t prosecute those megabank executives on any criminal charges for helping to cause the mortgage-backed securities scams and resulting 2008 economic crash...'
'..President Obama personally led in this lying.
On May 20, 2009, at the signing into law of both the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act and the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act, Obama said: “This bill nearly doubles the FBI’s mortgage and financial fraud program, allowing it to better target fraud in hard-hit areas. That’s why it provides the resources necessary for other law enforcement and federal agencies, from the Department of Justice to the SEC to the Secret Service, to pursue these criminals, bring them to justice, and protect hardworking Americans affected most by these crimes. It’s also why it expands DOJ’s authority to prosecute fraud that takes place in many of the private institutions not covered under current federal bank fraud criminal statutes — institutions where more than half of all subprime mortgages came from as recently as four years ago...”
'..Privately, Obama had told Wall Street executives that he would protect them. On 27 March 2009, Obama assembled the top executives of the bailed-out financial firms in a secret meeting at the White House and he assured them that he would cover their backs; he promised “My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks”. It’s not on the White House website; it was leaked out, which is one of the reasons Obama hates leakers. What the DOJ’s IG indicated was, in effect, that Obama had kept his secret promise to them...'
'..Another recent report documents lying by the Administration regarding its promised program to force banks to compensate cheated homeowners for fraud in their mortgages, and sometimes even for evictions that were based on those frauds. The investigative journalist David Dayen headlined on 19 March 2014, “Just 83,000 Homeowners Get First-Lien Principal Reductions from National Mortgage Settlement, 90 Percent Less Than Promised.” He documented that, “the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development sold the settlement on a promise of helping 1 million homeowners, and the final number missed the cut by over 916,000. That … shows the essential dishonesty [Obama’s HUD Secretary Shaun] Donovan displayed in his PR push back in 2012. … We’re used to the Obama Administration falling far short of their goals for homeowner relief, whether because of a lack of interest or a desire to foam the runway for the banks or whatever. Even still, the level of duplicity is breathtaking....”
So, no Banksters for the High Jump, unfortunately (except those 'suicided' by the perps). _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
In August 2012, I wrote a response to a British Parliamentary Commission public request for evidence concerning the state of the British Banking Industry. In that document I made the following assertions;
“…The British banking sector has become an organised criminal enterprise which has been allowed to develop because of the criminogenic environment in which it functions, which has resulted from the absence of any meaningful regulation which those who control and manage the banks would fear.
In this organised criminal category I include the various mis-selling cases, including pensions, PPI Insurance and interest rate swap derivatives; the criminal manipulation by Barclays and other banks of the LIBOR interest rate structures; the institutionalised level of money laundering as identified in the HSBC case; the serial abuse of the US sanctions provisions as indicated in the Standard Chartered Bank case; as well as many other examples of criminal actions such as theft of client funds, teeming and lading, abuse of client instructions, insider dealing, front running, churning, and market manipulation which have become the subject of international regulatory interventions…”
I supported my assertions with three examples of internationally-accepted definitions of organised crime.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the Parliamentary Commission conveniently ‘lost’ my submission, and subsequently claimed they had not received any evidence from me. Later, when it was miraculously discovered to have been in their possession all the time, they told me that large parts of the report would need to be redacted, because it contained ‘evidence which the banks would not like’.
I now realise that I was wrong about one element of my reporting. It is not just the British banking industry which has become an enterprise criminal mafia, the definition extends to a considerable number of global banks as well. Today we learn of the settlement raised against Banque Paribas (BNP Paribas SA, BNPP.PA) for their part in overtly abusing US laws and sanctions requirements. The French bank is likely to pay $8 billion to $9 billion as part of a potential settlement with U.S. authorities over violations of sanctions, according to reports familiar with the matter.
U.S. authorities are probing whether BNP Paribas evaded U.S. sanctions relating primarily to Sudan between 2002 and 2009, and whether it stripped out identifying information from wire transfers so they could pass through the U.S. financial system without raising red flags, sources have said. The investigation has turned up more than $100 billion in books and records violations transactions involving Sudan, Iran and Cuba, one source said on Sunday.
The probes are being conducted by authorities including the U.S. Justice Department, the U.S. Attorney’s office in Manhattan, the U.S. Treasury Department, the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, and the New York Department of Financial Services.
Predictably, foreign politicians and industry apologists are whining and bleating about the actions of the US authorities, asserting that this is all part of some concerted US attack on European banking interests. Speaking for myself, I rather doubt it, but I also don’t give a damn if it is. The issue is very simple, if you want to play fast and loose with US regulations, then don’t whinge if the US regulators capture you.
This episode neatly identifies the state that the global banking industry has reached, in terms of its criminogenic potential and its overt criminal behaviour. What these banks are doing is committing large-scale criminal acts on a grand scale. They are doing this because they think that no-one will do anything to stop them, and it has become a conscious decision to break the law in pursuit of criminal profits. The sums of money placed at risk from the actions of these organised criminals beggars belief. In the UK alone, the history of recent banking crime makes for very unhappy reading indeed.
In the 1980s the financial industry sold around 8.5m endowment insurance policies for repaying mortgage loans. These were not suitable for all borrowers. Banking staff received commission for selling the policies. The risks were often not explained to the borrowers. Banks made profits but eight out of 10 policies failed to pay the promised returns and did not even provide the amounts needed to redeem the mortgages. A 2000 UK Government report estimated that 60% of borrowers had been the victims of mis-selling, which is merely another word for downright criminal fraud, and were facing a shortfall of around £40bn.
This was followed by the pensions fraud scandal where people were encouraged to abandon good employer-based pension schemes and join a private one instead. The £13.5bn scandal affected some 1.4 million people. The late 1990s saw the precipice bonds scandal. Some 250,000 retired people were lured to invest £5bn in investments misleadingly described as low risk. Thousands of investors lost 80% of their savings.
The 21st century did not provide any respite from financial scandals. Payment protection insurance (PPI)is still being played out; some 3 million people were sold expensive and unnecessary insurance and are likely to be paid up to £40bn in compensation. More recently we have had the Libor problems and small-company loan scandal. In between the above, banks engaged in organised and aggressive tax avoidance, tax fraud, money laundering, and now we have the news of the Barclays Dark Pool frauds, just to mention a few of their misdeeds.
If this kind of criminal activity and its concomitant profitability were being carried on by any other agency or group of individuals, anywhere in the world, Governments and law enforcement agencies would have been coordinating their efforts to direct their organised crime strike forces to take down the criminals involved. But because the players in this criminal game are bankers, then for some bizarre reason, Governments and law enforcement take their hands off the controls.
At the moment, the US authorities are making examples of foreign banks who abuse their systems and controls, but they have also penalised their own banking entities. I predict it will not be too long before the US authorities start to demand the extradition of key foreign players to stand trial for their part in these banking crimes. Locking up some bankers who have profited too easily from these crimes, is a long-overdue outcome. The air will be a whole lot sweeter when the US courts start handing out some lengthy sentences for this level of organised banking crime!
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 9:10 pm Post subject:
Billionaire businessman is executed in Iran for his part in $2.6bn state bank scam
Mahafarid Amir Khosravi was put to death at Evin prison, near Tehran
Businessman executed for his part in scam involving Iranian bank
Credit from bank then used to purchase state-owned companies
His lawyer claims the execution was done in secret, and he was not told
Executions in Iran usually performed by hanging
By LUCY CROSSLEY
PUBLISHED: 17:16, 25 May 2014 | UPDATED: 17:46, 25 May 2014
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2638832/Billionaire-businessma n-executed-Iran-2-6bn-state-bank-scam.html
A billionaire businessman has been executed in Iran for his part in a $2.6 billion state bank scam following the largest fraud case since the country's 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Mahafarid Amir Khosravi, also known as Amir Mansour Aria, was put to death at Evin prison, just north of the capital, Tehran, according to Iran's state television.
The execution came after Iran's Supreme Court upheld his death sentence, but Khosravi's lawyer, Gholam Ali Riahi, claimed it was done in secret, and he was not given any notice his client's death.
Mahafarid Amir Khosravi, pictured during his trial in February, has been executed in Iran for his part in a $2.6 billion state bank scam
+2
Mahafarid Amir Khosravi, pictured during his trial in February, has been executed in Iran for his part in a $2.6 billion state bank scam
Death sentences in Iran are usually carried out by hanging.
'I had not been informed about the execution of my client,' Mr Riahi told news website khabaronline.ir.
'All the assets of my client are at the disposal of the prosecutor's office.'
State officials have not yet commented on Mr Riahi's claim.
The fraud involved using forged documents to get credit at one of Iran's top financial institutions, Bank Saderat, and dated back to 2007.
The credit was then used to purchase assets including state-owned companies such as major steel producer Khuzestan Steel Company.
The execution came after Iran's Supreme Court upheld his death sentence, but Khosravi's lawyer, Gholam Ali Riahi, says he was not given any notice his client's death
+2
The execution came after Iran's Supreme Court upheld his death sentence, but Khosravi's lawyer, Gholam Ali Riahi, says he was not given any notice his client's death
Khosravi's business empire included more than 35 companies from mineral water production to a football club, as well as a firm importing meat from Brazil.
According to Iranian media reports, the bank fraud began in 2007.
A total of 39 defendants were convicted in the case. Four received death sentences, two got life sentences and the rest received sentences of up to 25 years in prison.
The trials raised questions about corruption at senior levels in Iran's tightly controlled economy during the administration of former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Mahmoud Reza Khavari, a former head of Bank Melli, another major Iranian bank, escaped to Canada in 2011 after he resigned over the case.
He faces charges over the case in Iran and remains on the Islamic Republic's wanted list.
Khavari previously admitted that his bank partially was involved in the fraud, but has maintained his innocence.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 10:27 pm Post subject:
To REALLY get an idea of financial crimes, you should read Al Martin's 'The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran-Contra Insider'.
The reason Banks get away with such massive frauds is because the Global Elite are also into the frauds, and benefits grandly from them.
Here is some info from Amazon; I bought the book in February:
Book Description
Publication Date: 1 Jun 2001
What if a criminal cabal, a de facto white-collar crime syndicate, took over the US Government and used its systems and operations for its own profit?
According to government whistleblower Al Martin, this is exactly what happened. Al Martin is the man who knows too much. A self-described fourth level player of Iran Contra, Martin has first hand knowledge of the dirty deals, high-level scams, frauds, and treasonous activities of the US Shadow Government.
Al Martin's new book called "The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran Contra Insider" is a true crime story that's too hot for mainstream media.
It's a shocking expose' of Iran Contra scandals and it's totally uncensored. This book is a hidden history of American corruption.
His eye-witness accounts include first-hand knowledge of US Government drug trafficking, illegal weapons deals, as well as wholesale fraud by government perps -- securities fraud, real estate fraud, and insurance fraud.
Because of these criminal-government schemes, losses for taxpayers are in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
When George Bush, Bill Casey and Oliver North initiated their plan of State-sanctioned fraud and drug smuggling, they envisioned using 500 men to raise $35 billion.
When Iran Contra finally fell apart, they had ended up using 5,000 operatives and making $350 billion.
And who is Al Martin? After Al Martin retired as a Lt. Commander from the US Naval Reserves, his life went into the fast lane as a black ops specialist. His first intelligence assignment was in Peru, then he was tapped for a CIA-sanctioned operation smuggling American Express cards into Argentina in 1979.
After that he met US Government-sponsored con man Lawrence Richard Hamil, a Department of Defense shadow player, who taught him the ropes of profitable covert operations.
In 1984, Martin began marketing Hamil's "deals" through his Florida based Southeast Resources, Inc.
At a meeting with General Richard V. Secord and Hamil, Martin was briefed about Iran Contra operations and allowed to view voluminous CIA white papers concerning Operation Black Eagle, the code-name for the Bush-Casey-North program involving US Government-sanctioned narcotics trafficking, illicit weapons deals and wholesale fraud.
Now Al Martin tells the facts that mainstream media has ignored or covered-up for over 15 years.
He names names, dates and events which no one has dared write or publish before.
"The Conspirators" includes 384 pages of Al Martin Raw and Uncensored.
Show Less
Product details
Paperback: 374 pages
Publisher: National Liberty Press; 2nd edition (1 Jun 2001)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 097100420X
ISBN-13: 978-0971004207
Product Dimensions: 22.8 x 15.4 x 2.5 cm
Average Customer Review: Be the first to review this item
Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 1,391,484 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
Would you like to update product info, give feedback on images, or tell us about a lower price?
Al Martin's book, "The Conspirators," is a shocking and insightful expose of Bush family crimes. -- David Guyatt, author of
The book is tremendously important. One of the best exposes of Bush Family Crime to come along in many years. -- Jeff Davis, Tom Davis Books
“Absolutely fascinating." -- Antony Sutton, author of
From the Publisher
Al Martin's weekly column on the latest government frauds, corruption and malfeasance, "Behind the Scenes in the Beltway," is published online at Al Martin Raw. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
This determination to hold people to account for actions that caused intense financial misery contrasts strongly with Britain
Ian Birrell @ianbirrell Sunday 15 November 201515 comments
There are many reasons to admire Iceland, but here is another one: it has just sentenced five senior bankers and one prominent investor to prison for crimes relating to the economic meltdown in 2008. And with these two separate rulings made last month in the Supreme Court and Reykjavik district court, the nation that gambled so heavily on the markets and lost so disastrously in the consequent crash has sent 26 financiers to jail for combined sentences of 74 years.
READ MORE
More than 11,000 Icelanders offer to house Syrian refugees
The authorities pursued bank bosses, chief executives, civil servants and corporate raiders for crimes ranging from insider trading to fraud, money laundering, misleading markets, breach of duties and lying to the authorities. Others still await trial after this fishing nation with fewer people than Sunderland stupidly tried to take on the world’s financial titans.
Meanwhile the economy that collapsed so spectacularly has rebounded after letting banks go bust, imposing capital controls and protecting its own citizens over all other losers.Not all the convicted bankers ended up behind bars. But this determination to hold people to account for actions that caused intense financial misery contrasts strongly with Britain, most of the rest of Europe and the United States. Yes, fines totalling £150bn have been imposed on the 20 biggest banks for transgressions such as market manipulation, money-laundering and mis-selling mortgages. Yet these costs fall on shareholders and, by hampering the banks’ ability to lend, the wider community - while the perpetrators carry on collecting their obscene bonuses.
No wonder electorates struggling with austerity feel angry. As we await the latest inquiry into the Iraq War, we should not forget Britain never bothered holding a proper inquiry into the financial meltdown that still heavily impacts on public finances. There was the muted Vickers commission into banks, while next week sees the release of a major report into events at HBOS that led to a £20.5bn taxpayer bailout. Yet although the downturn was the most dramatic financial event for decades, we have not seen anything similar to the deep investigations and reforms unleashed in the United States.
READ MORE
Cameron plans to power UK by harnessing Iceland's volcanoes
The Pirate Party has just managed to legalise blasphemy in Iceland
Lessons from Iceland's 'pots and pans revolution'
The HBOS report is expected to answer why more of its bankers were not investigated by the Financial Services Authority. The only enforcement action it took was against the head of corporate lending, fined £500,000 and banned from the financial services industry for overzealous promotion of aggressive expansion. And one director lost his knighthood - just like Fred Goodwin, the shamed head of Royal Bank of Scotland. But the loss of these titles hardly compares with the prison sentences being handed out in Reykjavik.
In New York, a couple of minor British bankers have just been convicted of manipulating inter-bank lending rates. In London, the massive HSBC is playing political games over whether to move its headquarters to another country to stave off regulatory pressures.
This is the bank, remember, fined £1.2bn after a US investigation found it was laundering money for gangsters and rogue nations, then discovered to be helping wealthy clients evade tax in dozens of countries. Its former boss became a government minister and then chairman of the British Museum; his non-domiciled successor keeps saying mistakes are all in the past as he seeks looser controls.
Last week chancellor George Osborne said he understood public fury towards the sector. He talked tough, comparing rogue bankers who rip off ordinary people with shoplifters who go to prison, but claimed laws were not in place during the crash to allow regulators and lawmakers to pursue criminal charges against wrongdoers. ‘Some criminal charges have been brought, but not as many as would have been the case if the laws were better.’
New laws to make prosecution of bankers easier are welcome, with offences for reckless misconduct and rigging markets. Only time will tell if these prove effective. But just a few months ago the chancellor indicated he wanted an end to ‘banker bashing’, then days later the aggressive head of the City’s watchdog was ousted after saying he would ‘shoot first’ and ask questions later. Nor should we forget Barclay’s chief executive telling MPs ‘the time for remorse is over;’ the following year, he was forced to quit over the Libor scandal.
Restraining bad behaviour in the City of London boils down to attitudes; there were, after all, fraud and dishonesty laws that could have been used if the desire was there. In Iceland Olafur Hauksson, a former police officer from a fishing village, was put in charge of more than 100 investigators with a mission to bring financial miscreants to book. ‘Why should we have a part of our society that is not being policed or without responsibility,’ he asked. ‘It is dangerous that someone is too big to investigate. It gives a sense there is a safe haven.’
Hauksson was right - and this is even more true in Britain. We have one million people in financial services; it is our biggest exporter and a crucial chunk of our economy. So it is in the national interest to see this sector well-run, well-regulated and widely-trusted by the public. And those who support free markets, such as the Conservatives, should be the ones fighting hardest to root out the crooks, crony capitalists, pirates and tax dodgers that do such damage to the cause. This is why Iceland was right to jail bankers - and Britain wrong to merely slap a few wrists and strip away a couple of knighthoods.
More about: Iceland
979
Sponsored LinksPROMOTED STORIES FROM THE WEB
12 Gay Actors Who Play Straight Characters
StarFluff
The 10 Most Amazing Villas In The World
TopMensMag
15 Things Highly Successful Women Focus On Day To Day
4 All Minds and Bodies
15 Car Repairs That Look Like A COMPLETE JOKE
4AllFails
by Taboola
COMMENTS
Log in or register to comment
15 Comments
SubscribeRSS
4 hours ago
richard1949
why has the UK not jailed more bankers, well probably because it abides by the rule of law and only convicts beyond reasonable doubt and tries to avoid and ignore trial by social media.
Thwack God
ReplyShare-1
4 hours ago
Philip
We do not jail bankers because the Conservatives represent them...
ReplyShare2 replies+1
4 hours ago
richard1949
Interesting as most accusations were under Gordon Brown
ReplyShare1 reply-1
3 hours ago
Philip
Yes, they were accused under Brown...because under the Conservatives they are exempt from accusation...
ReplyShare+3
5 hours ago
John
If you want to hold people to account and start issuing jail time for those who are responsible for the 2008 financial collapse, I suggest you begin with Gordon Brown.
ReplyShare3 replies0
4 hours ago
Philip
Well, bright people would say it started in Wall Street and the USA in general...
ReplyShare2 replies+1
4 hours ago
richard1949
Obviously not that bright then, because they would have realised it started under the Clinton and his legislation and the relaxation and promotion of social mortgages
ReplyShare1 reply-1
4 hours ago
Philip
not that bright either----you can go back to Reagan, who started neoliberal disaster capitalism..and was supported by all presidents after -and made worse by George W
ReplyShare+1
6 hours ago
Steve Hill
You also conveniently forget to mention that in the (rare) cases where a UK banker has truly gone off the rails, as opposed to making a bad investment, we have indeed been ready and willing to impose long jail sentences.
Tom Haynes got 14 years in August for rigging the LIBOR rate. This month a further trial in New York also returned further guilty verdicts including against two British bankers, Anthony Allen and Anthony Conti. Sentencing has yet to take place.
It is really a bit silly to suggest that we let serious crimes go unpunished: there is no evidence of that whatsoever.
ReplyShare0
12 hours ago
davidh
Why?
Because the British Government is controlled by the City of London.
ReplyShare1 reply+1
4 hours ago
richard1949
No they actually controlled by five jewish bankers who meet each year in Zurich and send their intructions to all major governments in the world
ReplyShare-1
20 hours ago
Steve Hill
You really are not comparing like with like. Icelandic bankers (mates of the Icelandic ruling dynasty families) bet the country's GDP several times over. They invested heavily abroad in dodgy businesses, e.g. buying a hug stake in Woolworths before it went bust. There were no controls whatsoever, and the central banker who was supposed to be on watch ended up Prime Minister.
It was a cosy mafia.
If you really need a scapegoat, blame Bill Clinton. Rather than fund social housing (which Congress would probably have vetoed) he agreed to bail out the banks for any and all losses arising from lending money to people with no jobs or income. American banks said fine, and did what they perceived their government asked of them.
They also hedged their bets by selling on much of the risk to other banks around the world (who did not have the US government guarantee). But credit agencies were grading this paper as AAA. It would - to be honest - be monstrous to jail any banker for buying the stuff in these circumstances.
The Icelandic banks' behaviour was completely different. And far more reckless, and incestuous.
ReplyShare+2
21 hours ago
Oldgittom
There is no-one to control the banks, since UK-US banks control pols, parties, government, police, legal system & all. That's becoz the banks are owned by the 1% of aristocratic mafiosi, who have ruled for 1,000 years. C'mon! You suckers expect action from a Head Paisan, whose first act of office is to kiss the capo's ring?
ReplyShare-1
23 hours ago
SBlack
Investing in Icelandic banks looks a lot less risky when their bankers know jail is the penalty for illegal behaviour.
ReplyShare1 reply0 _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2015 11:00 am Post subject:
@ Whitehall_Bin_Men:
'This is the bank, remember, fined £1.2bn after a US investigation found it was laundering money for gangsters and rogue nations...'
All the Banks are at it, with complete US and UK knowledge and approval (obviously the Icelandic government does NOT approve; see:
'Operation Gladio' by Paul L. Williams. There are a number of other books on it, but that one is extremely comprehensive, and shows how the Banks, CIA, Vatican, Mafia, Drug Kingpins and Fascist Juntas worked together. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
The family members of US citizens killed in Mexico from drug violence have sued HSBC for permitting cartels to launder huge amounts of illicit money through the bank, a case that could have major implications for how accomplices of the drug trade are prosecuted.
The lawsuit claims HSBC is liable for the violence that stems from international drug trafficking because the London-based bank knowingly allowed drug cartels to launder hundreds of millions of dollars through HSBC subsidiaries, reported Reuters. In December 2012, HSBC agreed to pay $1.9 billion in fines to US authorities following charges that Mexico's Sinaloa Cartel and Colombia's Norte del Valle Cartel laundered $881 million through the bank.
The lawsuit refers to the murders of US citizens by Mexican drug cartels between 2010 and 2011, according to Bloomberg. The victims' family members are now attempting to hold HSBC accountable for their deaths under the US Anti-Terrorism Act.
"The Mexican drug cartels are terrorists who routinely commit horrific acts of violence to intimidate, coerce, and control the civilian population and the government,” a lawyer for the families wrote in an e-mail to Bloomberg. "HSBC was complicit in laundering billions of dollars for drug cartels and should be held accountable under the Anti-Terrorism Act for supporting their terrorism."
The bank has reportedly said it will contend the lawsuit.
InSight Crime Analysis
If HSBC is ordered to pay damages to the families victimized by cartel violence it could potentially open a new set of possibilities regarding who is liable to prosecution for their role in the international drug trade.
In the most obvious example, other banks besides HSBC would become very nervous. In 2010, Wachovia (which is now part of Wells Fargo) agreed to pay $160 million after US prosecutors found over $100 million in drug proceeds had been laundered through the bank. And these cases may just be the tip of the iceberg; in 2012 a US Department of Justice official said international drug traffickers launder $85 billion each year in the United States.
SEE ALSO: Coverage of Money Laundering
But as El Daily Post points out, a wide range of actors besides banks could also be considered liable for Mexico's drug violence, from real estate agents to car dealers to even drug consumers. Ruling against HSBC may expose a plethora of other US institutions to lawsuits as well.
A successful lawsuit could also embolden Mexican victims of the drug war to file similar complaints, who outnumber their US counterparts by an overwhelming majority. A staggering 60,000 people are believed to have died as a result of drug violence in Mexico between 2006 and 2012.
Whether the complaint has legal merit, however, is uncertain. The plaintiffs are suing HSBC under the US Anti-Terrorism Act, but no Mexican drug cartel has ever been listed as a foreign terrorist organization by US authorities. This case could therefore revive debate about whether cartels should be considered terrorist groups.
What are your thoughts? Click here to send InSight Crime your comments.
We also encourage readers to copy and distribute our work for non-commercial purposes, provided that it is attributed to InSight Crime in the byline, with a link to the original at both the top and bottom of the article. Check the Creative Commons website for more details of how to share our work, and please send us an email if you use an article.
Related Articles
Mexican Attorney General Identifies Most Wanted Criminals
Fuzzy Math? Some Skeptical of Calderon's Homicide Stats
Argentina Escapes Money Laundering Sanctions
GAO: Opportunities Exist to Stem US-Mexico Money Laundering
Money Laundering Threatens Colombia's Elections
Subscribe to Newsletter
Receive InSight Crime's Top Stories Weekly
About Us
InSight Crime is a foundation
dedicated to the study of the principal threat to national and citizen security in Latin America and the Caribbean: organized crime. We seek to deepen and inform the debate about organized crime in the Americas by providing the general public with regular reporting, analysis and investigation on the subject and on state efforts to combat it. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
This is just the tip of the iceberg; the CIA has been setting up or controlling banks for yonks to launder drug, arms and other 'Black' money; all of the major banks, including the Vatican bank, have knowingly laundered these dirty monies.
Literally tons of cocaine was airlifted or shipped into the US, and fed into the Black ghettoes, courtesy of the CIA (a little known part of Iran/Contra); Mena airport was a major entry point while Clinton was Governor of Arkansas, and he got his financial cut as well as his own personal cocaine supply. The Bush's were heavily involved, particularly Bush Sr., and they were all involved with massive bank and insurance frauds.
The info is out there, in books and videos, but nothing gets done. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
The Libor scandal seems to be waking people up to manipulation and fraud by the big banks.
There are many other types of fraud they’ve engaged in as well …
Here is a partial list:
Committing massive and pervasive fraud both when they initiated mortgage loans and when they foreclosed on them (and see this)
Pledging the same mortgage multiple times to different buyers. See this, this, this, this and this
Cheating homeowners by gaming laws meant to protect people from unfair foreclosure
Charging veterans unlawful mortgage fees
Engaging in mafia-style big-rigging fraud against local governments. See this, this and this
Cooking their books (and see this)
Bribing and bullying ratings agencies to inflate ratings on their risky investments
Pushing investments which they knew were terrible, and then betting against the same investments to make money for themselves. See this, this, this, this and this
Engaging in unlawful “frontrunning” to manipulate markets. See this, this, this, this, this and this
Engaging in unlawful “Wash Trades” to manipulate asset prices. See this, this and this
Otherwise manipulating markets. And see this
Shaving money off of virtually every pension transaction they handled over the course of decades, stealing collectively billions of dollars from pensions worldwide. Details here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here andhere
Participating in various Ponzi schemes. See this, this and this
Charging “storage fees” to store gold bullion … without even buying or storing any gold . And raiding allocated gold accounts
Laundering money for drug cartels. See this, this, this and this (indeed, drug dealers kept the banking system afloat during the depths of the 2008 financial crisis)
Laundering money for terrorists
Owning and largely running the Federal Reserve … which is itself arguably a Ponzi scheme
But at least the big banks do good things for society, like loaning money to Main Street, right?
Actually:
The big banks no longer do very much traditional banking. Most of their business is from financial speculation. For example, less than 10% of Bank of America’s assets come from traditional banking deposits. Instead, they are mainly engaged in financial speculation and derivatives. (and see this)
The big banks have slashed lending since they were bailed out by taxpayers … while smaller banks have increased lending. See this, this and this
A huge portion of the banks’ profits comes from taxpayer bailouts. For example, 77% of JP Morgan’s net income comes from taxpayer subsidies
The big banks are literally killing the economy … and waging war on the people of the world
And our democracy and republican form of government as well
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
← CA CAFR: Assemblymember Portantino Chief of Staff promises public statementFrederick Douglass advises today’s slaves to the 1% on Independence Day →
Washington's Blog _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
