First sentence for rate rigging

Generali

kabayiri wrote: »

I wonder how much of this sentence is inspired by a "look how tough we are" message.

I wish I could find a link, but I listened to a radio program which mentioned that our American cousins are not impressed at all with Libor abuse.

Is it a case of we (UK) act or they act on our behalf?

The Americans reckon that all the dodgy stuff goes through London. Goldman Sachs book all of their equity trades to the London office or at least did when I worked there.

mystic_trev

vivatifosi wrote: »

Not suggesting that he shouldn't go to jail, but 14 years sounds terribly punitive when compared to sentences for rape, murder, child abuse, etc.

I think there are at least another 12 Prosecutions pending? The sentence sends out a message to the others 'fess up' and get 5 years, mostly spent in an Open Prison, or plead not guilty and risk the chance of a more severe sentence.

The message has been sent out!

michaels

Did they break a specific law or is there some sort of catch all fraud law they are being charged under?

kabayiri

mystic_trev wrote: »

I think there are at least another 12 Prosecutions pending? The sentence sends out a message to the others 'fess up' and get 5 years, mostly spent in an Open Prison, or plead not guilty and risk the chance of a more severe sentence.

The message has been sent out!

Isn't this a classic American method? It seems to have worked on FIFA.

Politically is it a balancing act though? You need to be seen to be taking a tough line, without making it look like the whole Libor rate setting process is flawed on a systemic level.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

Did they break a specific law or is there some sort of catch all fraud law they are being charged under?

Concluding remarks from the judge from R vs Tom Hayes:

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/r-v-tom-hayes-sentencing1.pdf

It was Conspiracy to Defraud.

ruggedtoast

kabayiri wrote: »

I wonder how much of this sentence is inspired by a "look how tough we are" message.

I wish I could find a link, but I listened to a radio program which mentioned that our American cousins are not impressed at all with Libor abuse.

Is it a case of we (UK) act or they act on our behalf?

According to the news, he was terrified of being extradited to America (under our one way extradition agreement so was actually pushing to be tried in the UK.

The Americans certainly know how to prosecute financial crime alright.

chewmylegoff

michaels wrote: »

Did they break a specific law or is there some sort of catch all fraud law they are being charged under?

The charge was conspiracy to defraud, although there is now a specific criminal offence of benchmark manipulation under section 91 of the financial services act 2012 which was introduced to shut the empty stable door. That offence only applied to libor on introduction but now applies to specific benchmarks for gold, silver, fx, ice brent, ronia and sonia.

To be fair it was about time that the worst character in the history of eastenders was criminalised; however the new offence has a max tariff of 7 years, which I expect will form part of the basis for the inevitable appeal.

vivatifosi

princeofpounds wrote: »

I don't think it's possible to convey quite how important the nature of the financial variables he was fiddling are. They affect everything, most notably the amount that everyone pays on their mortgages. And I don't mean just UK everyone.


Now probably sometimes he wanted it lower and sometimes higher, so the net impact is not entirely clear and never will be. But overall the market was paying him a profit every time he did this, so you could estimate the damage from that profit I suppose.

I don't doubt that you are right in terms of the seriousness. I had in mind that something like 7 years would be the likely sentence, so double that seemed very harsh. I think Leeson got 7 years and that the Nat West 3 sentences were shorter, even though in the US. Though I guess everything is short compared to 150 years for Bernie Madoff.... now that really is a punitive sentence. Still, they've made a very clear statement and as chewy said, it could go to appeal anyway. I do wonder if he is the fall guy though.

Oh, and referencing back to the other points I mentioned, I think sentences for serial child sex offenders, violent rapists and some murderers should be way longer.

Mistermeaner

Agree re rapists etc. I'd be all for capital punishment and dismemberment but that's another thread.

Re fraud the sentence does seem harsh.

I'd be an advocate of certain people in certain roles being liable for prison on competence grounds - think doctors being done for negligence etc. I would extend this to key public roles: first on trial would be brown for his profligate and irresponsible spending.

Chanes

If he gets sent to America for trial he could spend the rest of his life in jail if found guilty. And in the US life means life.