{"id":186537,"date":"2013-12-26T20:34:00","date_gmt":"2013-12-27T01:34:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2013\/12\/26\/a-lot-of-people-wonder-why-there-havent-been-any-wall-street-prosecutions-but\/"},"modified":"2013-12-26T20:34:00","modified_gmt":"2013-12-27T01:34:00","slug":"a-lot-of-people-wonder-why-there-havent-been-any-wall-street-prosecutions-but","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2013\/12\/26\/a-lot-of-people-wonder-why-there-havent-been-any-wall-street-prosecutions-but\/","title":{"rendered":"A Lot of People Wonder Why There Haven’t Been Any Wall Street Prosecutions, but \u2026\u2026\u2026"},"content":{"rendered":"

This time it’s a United States District Judge on senior status for the Southern District of New York<\/a>, and Judge Jed Rakoff is asking this question in the New York Review of Books<\/i>:<\/p>\n

One possibility, already mentioned, is that no fraud was committed. This possibility should not be discounted. Every case is different, and I, for one, have no opinion about whether criminal fraud was committed in any given instance.<\/span>

<\/span>But the stated opinion of those government entities asked to examine the financial crisis overall is not that no fraud was committed. Quite the contrary. For example, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, in its final report, uses variants of the word \u201cfraud\u201d no fewer than 157 times in describing what led to the crisis, concluding that there was a \u201csystemic breakdown,\u201d not just in accountability, but also in ethical behavior.<\/span>

<\/span>As the commission found, the signs of fraud were everywhere to be seen, with the number of reports of suspected mortgage fraud rising twenty-fold between 1996 and 2005 and then doubling again in the next four years. As early as 2004, FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker was publicly warning of the \u201cpervasive problem\u201d of mortgage fraud, driven by the voracious demand for mortgage-backed securities. Similar warnings, many from within the financial community, were disregarded, not because they were viewed as inaccurate, but because, as one high-level banker put it, \u201cA decision was made that \u2018We\u2019re going to have to hold our nose and start buying the stated product if we want to stay in business.\u2019\u201d<\/span>

<\/span>Without giving further examples, the point is that, in the aftermath of the financial crisis, the prevailing view of many government officials (as well as others) was that the crisis was in material respects the product of intentional fraud. In a nutshell, the fraud, they argued, was a simple one. Subprime mortgages, i.e., mortgages of dubious creditworthiness, increasingly provided the chief collateral for highly leveraged securities that were marketed as AAA, i.e., securities of very low risk. How could this transformation of a sow\u2019s ear into a silk purse be accomplished unless someone dissembled along the way?<\/span>

<\/span>\u2026\u2026\u2026<\/span>

<\/span>suggest that this is not the best way to proceed. Although it is supposedly justified because it prevents future crimes, I suggest that the future deterrent value of successfully prosecuting individuals far outweighs the prophylactic benefits of imposing internal compliance measures that are often little more than window-dressing. Just going after the company is also both technically and morally suspect. It is technically suspect because, under the law, you should not indict or threaten to indict a company unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that some managerial agent of the company committed the alleged crime; and if you can prove that, why not indict the manager? And from a moral standpoint, punishing a company and its many innocent employees and shareholders for the crimes committed by some unprosecuted individuals seems contrary to elementary notions of moral responsibility.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Coming from a federal judge, one of the first who refused to approve the standard, “No harm, no foul,” consent decrees from the SEC and the DoJ, this is fairly shocking to hear.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This time it’s a United States District Judge on senior status for the Southern District of New York, and Judge Jed Rakoff is asking this question in the New York Review of Books: One possibility, already mentioned, is that no fraud was committed. This possibility should not be discounted. Every case is different, and I, …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[970,1004,972],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-186537","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-corruption","category-finance","category-justice"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/186537"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=186537"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/186537\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=186537"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=186537"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=186537"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}