LIBOR 'arrests imminent' - no doubt just a few traders...

LIBOR 'arrests imminent' - no doubt just a few traders...

Author
Discussion

williamp

19,256 posts

273 months

Monday 3rd August 2015
quotequote all
14 years for financial fraud, and the lowest corporation tax in the G20. A strong message sent to the world. I would exect the FS sector to grow in the near future

Bluebarge

4,519 posts

178 months

Monday 3rd August 2015
quotequote all
I suspect the number of "victims" of the crime would also have an impact. LIBOR is used for many loan products, so any artificial inflation of the rate would potentially affect millions of people, making them pay more than they should.

TTmonkey

20,911 posts

247 months

Monday 3rd August 2015
quotequote all
Why change his plea? What on earth were they thinking?

And this "he has Asperger's" sh*t too. FFS.

What sentence would he of got if he had continued to co-operate and not forced a major trial?

anonymous-user

54 months

Monday 3rd August 2015
quotequote all
Keep in mind there were also eight offences, not one.

Eric Mc said:
I'm not sure that is correct. The number of successful fraud cases brought in the UK is very low - and the number of people who receive any sort of harsh sentencing is also very low. The US, from what I can see, is far harsher on financial crime than the UK.

I would also like to see some substantiation that rape cases produce lower sentences than fraud cases, in UK courts.
Indeed. This is just an exceptional case producing a really high sentences. Any generalising is rubbish.

drivetrain said:
Perhaps the sentence you quoted came across as being flippant, in which case my apologies, it wasn't intended to be.

I agree with you in principle although I'm not so sure about the sentences dished out to the rioters, I don't remember them as being very severe but I stand to be corrected.
No problem. The rioters were sentenced more harshly: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/91014...



anonymous-user

54 months

Monday 3rd August 2015
quotequote all
Bluebarge said:
I suspect the number of "victims" of the crime would also have an impact. LIBOR is used for many loan products, so any artificial inflation of the rate would potentially affect millions of people, making them pay more than they should.
According to the prosecutors and regulators in the barclays case, the most egregious manipulation of rates was down!

Ali G

3,526 posts

282 months

Monday 3rd August 2015
quotequote all
So 'investors' in Barclays lost out.

Good luck in arguing that with the SEC!

Transmitter Man

4,253 posts

224 months

Monday 3rd August 2015
quotequote all
trickywoo said:
Needed to happen IMO. A culture seemed to have developed in the city whereby activities like this were being excused on the basis 'that they aren't that bad really' and its not really costing anyone anything. A bit like thieves saying if you are insured why can't I steal your possessions as you'll get the money back.

A loud proportion of PH's banking fraternity regularly shouted this and browbeat sensible posters calling these activities into question by saying they don't understand how the city works. I expect them to be along in a minute to say how unfair this is.

Hopefully there will be a number of people thinking very carefully about how they conduct themselves in light of this.
The culture will never change.

I used to deliver Ferrari's to the Canary Wharf car park for HRO.

What did GG say, 'greed is good'.

Given half a chance...

Phil

BlackLabel

13,251 posts

123 months

Monday 3rd August 2015
quotequote all
hornetrider said:
Holy crapola. So the justice system sees financial fraud worse than paedophilia and rape.
Lengthy sentences for financial fraud is actually a deterrent - for example if they didn't hand out long sentences for things like VAT carousel fraud more people would do it - risk vs reward and all that. The same goes for tax evasion.

As for paedophiles and rapists - does the length of sentence for such crimes really act as a deterrent in the same way it does for financial crime? The Americans have far lengthier sentences than ours for these crimes yet rape and pedophilia is just as prevalent now over there as it was decades ago.

Of course I agree it's not all about deterrence, there is the punishment aspect too in which case you make a fair point.

johnfm

Original Poster:

13,668 posts

250 months

Monday 3rd August 2015
quotequote all
Well, it looks like I absolutely nailed this - though it was totally predictable. The classic scapegoat prosecution.

So, conspiracy to defraud. Be interested to know why no big senior people knew anything about this. What a load of twaddle. And 14 years?? What a ridiculous sentence. He was better off murdering all the witnesses and prosecutors - he would have got a lower sentence for mere murder.

Derek Smith

45,659 posts

248 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
I would also like to see some substantiation that rape cases produce lower sentences than fraud cases, in UK courts.
I'm not sure you would, but here goes.

A lass on a foreign exchange trip to the UK, 18 years, walking to her digs, was followed by a man who grabbed her, threatened her with a knife held to her throat, raped her, buggered her and then stuck his dick down her throat. All the time he was telling her he was going to kill her. Someone walked nearby and he ran off.

Less than 36 hours later, despite overwhelming DNA, the brief demanded, as they could then, an identity parade. A bit more torture for the kid. She collapsed on the parade but continued after seven minutes and identified him.

He pleaded not guilty, despite the evidence of sexual intercourse, despite the mark on the girl's throat from the knife, despite his previous for sexual offences, despite running away. The defence team's hope was that the victim might decide that getting better was more important than reliving the torture but she was made of sterner stuff and returned to this country. She asked for a screen between herself and the rapist, but the defence suggested that this would be against natural justice.

The judge, bless him, reckoned this was a sustained attack on an innocent woman and was one of the worst he'd had exposed in front of him.

Seven years, that's all.

This was in 2002 and we all knew, the police, the judge, the defence team and the bloke himself, that he would do the same thing again but this time would probably abduct the next victim and dispose of the body in a manner that might negate the DNA.

Half the time for fraud. But then there was no political necessity. The penalty would have no financial benefits to the country. Thee was, apparently, no need for a signal to be sent that this was somehow a bad thing to do.


Out in a bit over three years to do something worse sooner or later.

This chap is no danger to the public. He will not do the same thing again, he will assault anyone, or threaten to kill them - meaning it one of the inquiry team reckoned.

I could give you others if you want, Eric.


Eric Mc

122,029 posts

265 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
2002.

Do you think that's what he'd have got now?

Any more recent ones you could dig up?

Derek Smith

45,659 posts

248 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
BlackLabel said:
Lengthy sentences for financial fraud is actually a deterrent
I'm unaware of any research that suggests harsh sentencing deters anyone for any offence. Whilst research suggests various circumstance that put people off, one which is acknowledged by most researchers as a, if not the, major deterrent is the likelihood of being found guilty.

A draconian sentence is not high in the list, illogical though it seems.

The reasons people offend is a complex subject and one which consensus is unlikely to be arrived at any time soon. There are various reason that are popular> peer pressure, others getting away with it, supervision slack/non-existent and even just excitement.

There were police officer who risked their freedom, their financial security and more for a week's wages.

The idea that people balance risks carefully is not supported by the research. They just do it 'cause they think they will get away with it.

Derek Smith

45,659 posts

248 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
2002.

Do you think that's what he'd have got now?

Any more recent ones you could dig up?
Eric, you asked and were given. Just accept you were wrong.

jogon

2,971 posts

158 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
He'll be down in Ford open leisure camp before he knows it with day trips to see his son and a smart phone to do some Forex trading on the side. But does seem a harsh sentence.

Snozzwangler

12,230 posts

194 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
Eric Mc said:
2002.

Do you think that's what he'd have got now?

Any more recent ones you could dig up?
Eric, you asked and were given. Just accept you were wrong.
He seems to have been 'on one' this week.

turbobloke

103,953 posts

260 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
trickywoo said:
130R said:
ook a while but: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33763628

14 years in prison. They certainly threw him under the bus.
Needed to happen IMO. A culture seemed to have developed in the city whereby activities like this were being excused on the basis 'that they aren't that bad really' and its not really costing anyone anything. A bit like thieves saying if you are insured why can't I steal your possessions as you'll get the money back.

A loud proportion of PH's banking fraternity regularly shouted this and browbeat sensible posters calling these activities into question by saying they don't understand how the city works. I expect them to be along in a minute to say how unfair this is.
Whoever those banking fraternity PHers may be, personally I can't recall a single post saying that unlawful behaviour was or is acceptable. Could tou provide a quote and a link (or two) as something has apparently been missed.

Eric Mc

122,029 posts

265 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
Dragging up a 13 year old case to prove a point I don't think proves anything. Attitudes to crimes change over time. I expect that law treats rape a lot more seriously than it did 13 years ago. We know that even four or five years ago the authorities weren't keen on doing any serious investigation into child molesting. Look how that has suddenly changed in a few short years.

At last the law certainly seems to want to treat fraud a lot more seriously now (and about time too).

There are eight more cases linked to the LIBOR scandal due in court over the next few years. Let's see what happens with them.


turbobloke

103,953 posts

260 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Dragging up a 13 year old case to prove a point I don't think proves anything. Attitudes to crimes change over time. I expect that law treats rape a lot more seriously than it did 13 years ago.
Violence, vulnerable woman, multiple rape in day-long ordeal: 9 years, 2015.

http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/13217674.J...

Nothing like 14 years, not even double figures.



Eric Mc

122,029 posts

265 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
We can moan and whinge all day long about the length of sentencing. It's always a divisive topic.

Adrian W

13,871 posts

228 months

Tuesday 4th August 2015
quotequote all
What about the others, LBC just had an ex banker on saying there is no way he could have carried this out without his bosses knowing,

He also said that at the daily 11am Libor meeting everyone knew all large banks were doing it, but everyone especially the smaller banks were scared to say anything

Edited by Adrian W on Tuesday 4th August 08:48