DOCSLIB.ORG

International Prison Transfer Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
International Prison Transfer Program G THE B IN EN V C R H E S A N 8 8 D 8 B 1 AR SINCE WWW. NYLJ.COM VOLUME 246—NO. 66 TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2011 Outside Counsel Expert Analysis International Prison Transfer Program n our last column, we discussed benefit exists to the transfer of foreign the basics of extradition law and its nationals out of U.S. prisons. Currently, increasing relevance in white-collar almost 59,000 foreign nationals are cases.1 A related topic is the transfer imprisoned in the United States, which of foreign citizens convicted in the accounts for approximately 27 percent IUnited States to their home countries of the federal prison population.6 On to serve their sentence, as in the case By And average, it costs more than $25,000 of the “NatWest Three”—three British Robert G. Robert J. annually to incarcerate one prisoner.7 businessmen who pled guilty in 2007 Morvillo Anello to Enron-related fraud charges in the Governing Treaties U.S. District Court in Houston and numbers, fewer than half of the transfers served only six months in the United sought by foreign nationals serving The United States is party to 12 States before being transferred to the criminal sentences in the United bilateral and two multilateral treaties United Kingdom for the balance of their States are approved. The former chief with 74 other countries that provide 37-month sentences.2 of the International Prison Transfer for the execution of a foreign national’s Unit (IPTU), a unit within the Justice penal sentence in the defendant’s home Treaties facilitating such transfers 8 initially were formalized by the federal Department that administers such country. Under these treaties, a number government in the 1960s and 70s to allow transfer requests, has opined that the of requirements must be satisfied before for the return of U.S. citizens convicted high denial rate frustrates the United a transfer can take place. For instance, abroad to serve their sentence in the States’ treaty partners and recently led the Council of Europe Convention on United States in response to concerns Congress to pass legislation requiring the Transfer of Sentenced Persons regarding their harsh treatment in the IPTU to provide an annual report permits prisoners to be transferred foreign prisons. Today, these treaties are on the effectiveness of the treaties in when: 1) the sentenced person is a employed more frequently to transfer “bringing about the return of deportable citizen of the “administering State” (the foreign nationals out of the United States incarcerated aliens to the country of State to which he or she requests to be in a wide variety of cases, including which they are nationals.”4 transferred); 2) the judgment is final; white-collar cases with cross-border Real governmental benefits for both 3) the sentenced person consents to implications. the United States and home countries the transfer; 4) six months or more of Statistics reveal that for the period attend to the transfer of non-citizens to the sentence remain to be served; 5) 2008 to 2010, 595 foreign nationals their home country to serve a sentence “the acts or omissions on account of were transferred from the United of imprisonment. First, prison transfer which the sentence has been imposed States to serve sentences in their often is preferable to traditional removal constitute a criminal offense according home countries, as compared to the or deportation proceedings, which occur to the law of the administering State”; after a foreign national has completed and 6) the sentencing and administering return of 163 Americans from prisons 9 abroad.3 Despite the disproportionate his sentence and do not provide the States agree to transfer. home country with an opportunity to The request may be initiated by either “take precautionary steps to ensure the the administering or the sentencing safety of its populace, help the former state.10 The Inter-American Convention ROBERT G. MORVILLO and ROBERT J. ANELLO are partners prisoner to receive necessary medical or on Serving Criminal Sentences Abroad at Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, Iason, Anello & Bohrer. contains the same requirements with GRETCHAN R. OHLIG, an attorney, assisted in the preparation rehabilitative assistance, or reintegration of this article. into its society.”5 Second, an economic the additional requirement that “[t]he TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2011 sentence to be served must not be the is qualified for transfer, the warden and, as a general rule, that factor will death penalty.”11 will compile a “classification packet” be considered.24 (which includes a presentence report, The OEO also considers law Administration of Transfers judgment, fingerprints, photographs, enforcement concerns that would arise 19 The administration of inmate and a case summary) and forward the in any typical sentencing and parole transfers is carried out in the United application to the Assistant Director decision. These include the seriousness States pursuant to the IPTU created by of the BOP’s Correctional Programs of the offense, the impact transfer will the federal government in the mid-70s Division, who reviews and forwards the have on “public sensibilities,” public after the United States entered into the materials to the OEO’s International policy, the likelihood of reintegration 20 bilateral Treaty on the Execution of Penal Prison Transfer Unit. and renewed criminal activity in the Sentences with Mexico. The IPTU is a The OEO has full discretion in deciding receiving country, possible sentencing part of the Justice Department’s Office of whether to grant a transfer request, disparities, and the law enforcement Enforcement Operations (OEO), which and applications can be denied for any and prosecutorial needs in the sending 21 25 acts pursuant to powers delegated by the reason. Nevertheless, the OEO has country. Finally, the OEO Guidelines Attorney General12 under the Transfer of issued non-binding internal guidelines state that it only makes sense to allow Offenders to and from Foreign Countries for evaluating prisoner applications foreign nationals to serve out their Act (the “Transfer Act”).13 for transfer. The guidelines focus on sentence in their home country if The Transfer Act and its regulations three main issues: 1) whether transfer they will remain there after release. specifically confer upon the Attorney will facilitate the defendant’s social Accordingly, the OEO considers General or his designee “the authority rehabilitation; 2) the law enforcement the defendant’s existing ties to the to find appropriate or inappropriate the concerns of the sending and receiving United States, whether he or she transfer of offenders to or from a foreign countries; and 3) whether the inmate, has previously received a prisoner country under a treaty.”14 Transfers may if transferred, is likely to return to the transfer, and previous deportations 26 only be made to and from the United United States. and illegal reentries. States where: 1) a treaty governing The Chief of the IPTP has stated such transfers exists; 2) the offender that “[o]ne of the major goals of the has consented; 3) the conviction and transfer program is to return the Statistics reveal that for sentence are final with no appeal or prisoner to his home environment collateral attack pending; and 4) the where, hopefully, there is familial the period 2008 to 2010, requirement of dual criminality is and peer support, for in this type of 595 foreign nationals satisfied.15 Dual criminality requires that environment, the prisoner has the best the offense for which the defendant has chance of successful rehabilitation 22 were transferred from the been sentenced is an offense in both the and reintegration into society.” transferring and receiving countries.16 In the evaluation of whether social United States to serve rehabilitation will be furthered by an sentences in their home Transfer Out of United States inmate’s transfer, factors considered include the defendant’s acceptance countries. Pursuant to Transfer Act regulations, of responsibility, criminal history the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is tasked (distinguishing between the “low-level, with informing all inmates who are minor, first-time or infrequent offender” In evaluating these factors, the citizens or nationals of a foreign country and a “career criminal”), seriousness OEO case analyst assigned to the of their ability to request a transfer of the offense, criminal and family ties case contacts all interested parties, to their country of citizenship upon to the sending and receiving countries, including the prosecuting U.S. Attorney’s arrival at their designated facility.17 humanitarian concerns, and the length Office and any other involved federal The period between sentencing and of time the defendant has been in the agencies such as the Federal Bureau of arrival at said facility can take several United States.23 Investigation, Internal Revenue Service, months and is considered “dead time” The length of time the inmate has and Office of Homeland Security.27 for purposes of a prisoner transfer resided in the United States is an Prosecutors are asked to provide application.18 important factor in prison transfer facts and recommendations to assist Inmates interested in a transfer are decisions. Experts note that “[d] the OEO in making a determination required to submit a Transfer Inquiry omiciliary status is conclusively whether to approve the transfer request. Form to the warden at the institution presumed where the inmate has made Practitioners have found that “[a] where he or she is confined. Upon the effort to obtain lawful permanent lthough the views and recommendations receipt and verification that the inmate resident status in the United States” of the U.S. Attorney’s Office are TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2011 accorded greater weight than those of and the foreign government arrange 9. July 1, 1985, 35 U.S.T.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Implications for White-Collar Criminals [Note]
    The New U.S.-U.K. Extradition Regime: Implications for White-Collar Criminals [Note] Item Type Article; text Authors Copenhaver-Celi, Jennifer Nicole Citation 25 Ariz. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 157 (2008) Publisher The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ) Journal Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law Rights Copyright © The Author(s) Download date 05/10/2021 09:03:41 Item License http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ Version Final published version Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/659051 THE NEW U.S.-U.K. EXTRADITION REGIME: IMPLICATIONS FOR WHITE-COLLAR CRIMINALS Jennifer Nicole Copenhaver-Celi* I. INTRODUCTION On July 13, 2006, three British citizens, David Bermingham, Giles Darby, and Gary Mulgrew ("the NatWest Three") were flown to Houston, Texas to face fraud charges.' The victim of their alleged fraud was a British corporation. Nearly all of the allegedly criminal dealings took place in Great Britain. Yet, the NatWest Three will be 2 tried in the United States. Ian Norris is another British citizen 3facing extradition to the United States. His alleged crime is price-fixing. The NatWest Three and Ian Norris were extradited under a new treaty between the United Kingdom and the United States, the 2003 Extradition Treaty,4 and under a new British statute, the 2003 Extradition Act.5 Extradition arrangements under the treaty and the statute provoked public outrage in the United Kingdom. A range of public figures have spoken out against the arrangements, from politicians on the left and right, to businessmen, to civil-liberties activists.6 Much of the uproar was over a lack of reciprocity.7 When the NatWest Three were extradited in July 2006, the United States had *.
    [Show full text]
  • Extradition and the Natwest Three: Unintended Consequences Economist, July 15, 2006 Reciprocity Is Not the Issue; Safeguarding the Right to a Fair Trial Is
    Extradition and the NatWest Three: Unintended consequences Economist, July 15, 2006 Reciprocity is not the issue; safeguarding the right to a fair trial is THEY weren't dragged away in leg-irons, but the dispatch by air on July 13th of three British bankers to America to stand trial was as dramatic as legal spectacles get. David Bermingham, Gary Mulgrew and Giles Darby--the so-called NatWest Three--are charged with helping to pull off a £11m ($20m) fraud linked to the collapsed energy giant, Enron. The suspects are British; their victim is British; virtually all the alleged wrongful dealing was carried out in Britain. Their trial, however, like that of Enron's executives, will be in Houston. Outrage over their plight, and the flawed fast-track bilateral extradition treaty that produced it, has united left and right, law lords and NGOs, businessmen and civil-liberties activists (see page 34). Most of the fuss has been about reciprocity--or the lack of it. The three were handed over under the terms of a treaty signed by Britain and America in March 2003 and broadly enshrined in Britain's omnibus Extradition Act later that year. The treaty and the act reduced the supporting material that America must provide in requesting extradition from Britain. But America (which had a lousy record of surrendering Irish terrorists to Britain) has yet to ratify the treaty. Under the old rules America had to present "prima facie" evidence of guilt on the basis of which a jury, in the absence of a defence, could have convicted somebody.
    [Show full text]
  • Briefing Corporate Crime with Copy.Indd
    CORPORATE CRIME BRIEFING Bribery Act 2010: still a sleeping giant Having just celebrated its third birthday, the Bribery Act 2010 (2010 Act) is still a Enforcement before the Bribery Act 2010 sleeping giant. In 2010 and 2011, there One rationale for the Bribery Act 2010 (2010 Act) was to replace the notoriously was an alarmist atmosphere concerning its diffi cult Victorian legislation and make it easier for the Serious Fraud Offi ce (SFO) to perceived broad jurisdictional scope and the bring enforcement proceedings. However, despite the challenges of the pre-2010 Act requirement to create and maintain adequate legislation, the SFO has a respectable track record of bringing successful enforcement procedures to prevent bribery (see feature proceedings. For example: article “Bribery Act 2010: what does it mean for your company?”, www.practicallaw.com/8- • In 2009, Mabey & Johnson Ltd was convicted of overseas bribery (see News brief 505-9543). Companies also feared draconian “Serious Fraud Offi ce: targeting dividends”, www.practicallaw.com/3-517-3268). enforcement, particularly for those used to • In 2010, Innospec Ltd pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to corrupt ([2010] US enforcement of the US Foreign Corrupt EW Misc 7 (EWCC); see News brief “Self-reporting corporate corruption: where are we Practices Act of 1977 (FCPA). after Innospec?”, www.practicallaw.com/2-502-1218). These fears have not yet been realised. • In 2011, BAE Systems plc pleaded guilty to accounting irregularities following its Headlines suggesting that the 2010 Act was investigation by the SFO for bribery allegations (www.practicallaw.com/2-504-8661). the “FCPA on steroids” in hindsight appear • In 2011, the SFO obtained a civil recovery order against Macmillan Publishers Limited wide of the mark and the required adequate after it self-reported attempts by its agent to bribe World Bank employees to win procedures have turned out to be prevailing book sales in southern Sudan.
    [Show full text]
  • Kindle \\ Corporate Crime / Download
    Corporate crime » Book ~ HL2SK17XWV Corporate crime By - Reference Series Books LLC Dez 2011, 2011. Taschenbuch. Book Condition: Neu. 247x192x14 mm. This item is printed on demand - Print on Demand Neuware - Source: Wikipedia. Pages: 124. Chapters: Enron, MCI Inc., Arthur Andersen, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Industrial espionage, Pfizer, Samuel D. Waksal, Bank of Credit and Commerce International, Halliburton, NatWest Three, Sony BMG copy protection rootkit scandal, Tyco International, KPMG tax shelter fraud, RegisterFly, Crazy Eddie, Parmalat bankruptcy timeline, Seveso disaster, Federal Trade Commission, Options backdating, Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, Holdings of American International Group, Bribery, Polly Peck, FirstEnergy, Cookie Jar Group, Franchise fraud, Precarity, Corporate manslaughter, McJob, Anti-corporate activism, White-collar crime, CUC International, William K. Black, Adelphia Communications Corporation, Baptist Foundation of Arizona, Robert Douglas Hartmann, Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, Media Vision, Satyam scandal, Precarious work, Contingent workforce, State-corporate crime, Ovson Egg, Trial of Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling, List of corporate scandals, Compass Group, Eurest Support Services, Statement on Auditing Standards No. 99: Consideration of Fraud, Byrraju Ramalinga Raju, John Peter Galanis, Titan Corp., Jeffrey Grayson, PurchasePro, Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, Micheline Charest, Medco Health Solutions, Pro Arts Inc., Wiwa family lawsuits against Royal Dutch Shell, Minecode, Langbar International,... READ ONLINE [ 2.91 MB ] Reviews If you need to adding benefit, a must buy book. This really is for all who statte that there had not been a well worth reading. It is extremely difficult to leave it before concluding, once you begin to read the book. -- Claud Bernhard It is an remarkable pdf which i have ever go through.
    [Show full text]
  • Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: Lessons for the Business and Human Rights Sphere from Six Regulatory Areas
    Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: Lessons for the Business and Human Rights Sphere from Six Regulatory Areas Dr. Jennifer A. Zerk Jennifer Zerk Consulting A report for the Harvard Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative to help inform the mandate of the UNSG’s Special Representative on Business and Human Rights June 2010 ⎪ Working Paper No. 59 A Working Paper of the: Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative A Cooperative Project among: The Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government The Center for Public Leadership The Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations The Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy 1 Citation This paper may be cited as: Zerk, Jennifer A. 2010. “Extraterritorial jurisdiction: lessons for the business and human rights sphere from six regulatory areas.” Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative Working Paper No. 59. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. Comments may be directed to the author – [email protected] Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative The Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government is a multi-disciplinary and multi-stakeholder program that seeks to study and enhance the public contributions of private enterprise. It explores the intersection of corporate responsibility, corporate governance and strategy, public policy, and the media. It bridges theory and practice, builds leadership skills, and supports constructive dialogue and collaboration among different sectors. It was founded in 2004 with the support of Walter H. Shorenstein, Chevron Corporation, The Coca-Cola Company, and General Motors. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not imply endorsement by the Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative, the UN Special Representative on Business and Human Rights, the John F.
    [Show full text]
  • Lettering to the Max the Art & History of Calligraphy
    KORERO PRESS Lettering to the Max Ivan Castro, Alex Trochut Summary Lettering, the drawing, designing, and illustration of words, has a personal uniqueness that is increasingly valued in today's digital society, whether personal or professional. This manual, by the internationally renowned Iván Castro, outlines the basic materials and skills to get you started. Typographical concepts and the principles of construction and composition are decoded. In addition, Ivan outlines several practical projects that allow the reader, not just to practice, but to develop their own ideas. In-depth but accessible, this book is the ideal beginner's guide and an excellent reference for the more well versed. Korero Press 9781912740079 Pub Date: 3/1/21 Contributor Bio On Sale Date: 3/1/21 Ivan Castro is a graphic designer based in Barcelona, Spain, who specializes in calligraphy, lettering, and $32.95 USD typography. His work involves everything from advertising to editorial, and from packaging to logo design and Discount Code: LON gig posters. Although Ivan claims to have no specific style, one could say that he has a strong respect for the Trade Paperback history of popular culture. He has been working in the field for 20 years, and has been teaching calligraphy 128 Pages and lettering for 15 years in the main design schools in Barcelona. He travels frequently, holding workshops Full color throughout Carton Qty: 24 and giving lectures at design festivals and conferences. Alex Trochut was born in 1981 in Barcelona, Spain. Art / Techniques After completing his studies at Elisava Escola Superior de Disseny, Alex established his own design studio in ART003000 Barcelona before relocating to New York City.
    [Show full text]
  • Hayes' Fate No Sea Change for White Collar Extradition Fears by Melissa Lipman
    Portfolio Media. Inc. | 111 West 19th Street, 5th Floor | New York, NY 10011 | www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 | Fax: +1 646 783 7161 | [email protected] Hayes' Fate No Sea Change For White Collar Extradition Fears By Melissa Lipman Law360, London (October 7, 2016, 6:46 PM BST) -- The 11-year jail term handed to former swaps trader Tom Hayes in late 2015 for Libor manipulation shocked long-held perceptions that British courts are softer on financial crime than their U.S. counterparts, but attorneys said the case doesn't herald a sea change in white collar defendants' prospects on either side of the Atlantic. British financial fraudsters who also have fallen afoul of U.S. laws often work hard to avoid extradition to America, calculating that U.K. courts tend to be more lenient. U.S. public appetite for prosecuting bankers is still running high, plus maximum sentences in the U.S. generally are longer and early releases few and far between. Hayes, a former UBS AG and Citigroup Inc. trader who was indicted by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2012 for rigging the London Interbank Offered Rate, later claimed in court that he was "suicidal" over the possibility of being extradited to the U.S. But ultimately, his play to court prosecution in the U.K. netted him sentence that, reduced from 14 years on appeal, dwarfed the two years given a former Rabobank trader after being convicted in New York in the DOJ's only Libor trial so far. "People might think that the sentence in the Hayes case, which was extraordinary by English standards, has changed the way people think about [extradition], but I think Hayes is a fairly distinct case," said Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP's Elizabeth Robertson.
    [Show full text]
  • The Domestic Politics of International Extradition
    Texas A&M University School of Law Texas A&M Law Scholarship Faculty Scholarship 7-2012 The Domestic Politics of International Extradition William Magnuson Texas A&M University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation William Magnuson, The Domestic Politics of International Extradition, 52 Va. J. Int'l L. 839 (2012). Available at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar/757 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Texas A&M Law Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Texas A&M Law Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Domestic Politics of International Extradition WILLIAM MAGNUSON Extradition poses a set of unique challenges for current theories of internationallaw. State decisions regarding extradition involve the intersection of domestic criminal law, complex international treaties, and often overtly political considerations, thus def ing neat explanation by legal theorists. This Article argues that current theory fails to adequately explain the international law of extradition because it relies on state-centric models of international relations. By focusing our attention on unitary state interests, commentators overlook the important ways in which domestic politics shapes and influences state behavior. More particulary, this Article argues that domestic groups and institutions both constrain and empower government decision-makers in structuring international extradition arrangements. Government officals often have conflicting incentives regarding extradition decisions, and these tensions help explain the tradeoffs states have made between commitment andflexibility in extradition treaties.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter One - Educational Approach Overview, Style Sheet, and Business Math Overview
    Auditing Spring 2012 by Jim Peters Table of Contents CHAPTER ONE - EDUCATIONAL APPROACH OVERVIEW, STYLE SHEET, AND BUSINESS MATH OVERVIEW ............ 1-1 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................................ 1-1 EDUCATIONAL APPROACH ........................................................................................................................................... 1-1 HOW TO STUDY TEXT MATERIALS AND CASES ................................................................................................................. 1-3 HOW TO STRUCTURE ANSWERS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONS .............................................................................................. 1-4 Descriptive ........................................................................................................................................................ 1-4 Recommendations for action ........................................................................................................................... 1-5 Evaluation Questions ....................................................................................................................................... 1-5 Diagnosis .......................................................................................................................................................... 1-6 PROFESSIONAL WRITING AND SPEAKING .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Is Extradition a Real and Significant Threat to Foreign Antitrust Offenders? Daseul Kim
    Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business Volume 28 Issue 3 Spring Spring 2008 "Perfectly Properly Triable" in the United States: Is Extradition a Real and Significant Threat to Foreign Antitrust Offenders? Daseul Kim Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njilb Part of the Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons, Criminal Law Commons, International Law Commons, and the International Trade Commons Recommended Citation Daseul Kim, "Perfectly Properly Triable" in the United States: Is Extradition a Real and Significant Threat to Foreign Antitrust Offenders?, 28 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus. 583 (2007-2008) This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business by an authorized administrator of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. "Perfectly Properly Triable" in the United States: Is Extradition a Real and Significant Threat to Foreign Antitrust Offenders?' Daseul Kim* Imagine that you are a U.K. citizen who has been running a manufacturing business for several years in Windsor, England. One day, the U.K. authorities arrest you for violating U.S. antitrust laws by price- fixing; your own government then surrenders you to the United States, where you will be tried and sentenced for the alleged antitrust violations in the U.S. courts. As surreal as this scenario may sound, this is exactly what the Bow Street Magistrates' Court in London decided when it held that Ian P. Norris, a U.K. citizen and the former CEO of Morgan Crucible Company Plc, was extraditable for allegedly violating U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Fm Oct06 Dragnet(1).Pdf
    DRAG.NET DRAG.NET Fraudsters – especially the new breed of criminal that’s exploiting web technology – have largely brought into question the adequacy of existing legislation – and kept one step ahead of the UK’s what actually constitutes fraud. The problem, according to legal experts, is that the specificity of the current regulations antiquated legislation, but it’s governing this area and their allowance of technical defences has made bringing cases enormously expensive and securing about to be upgraded. Neil Hodge convictions virtually impossible. The Jubilee line trial cost £60m alone, for example. asks the lawyers whether the fraud As a result, the government has announced that it’s taking a bill will close all the loopholes. co-ordinated approach to tackling the problem. It has intro- duced the fraud bill, which is currently before Parliament, and it will bring forward another bill to allow for non-jury trials in a limited range of serious and complex fraud cases. In addition, the government has just published for consulta- tion the final report of the Fraud Review, which began a year ago. This advocates the establishment of a financial court juris- diction so that the different proceedings arising from serious fraud cases can be combined in one court and be heard by specialist judges. It suggests allowing plea-bargaining as an t the end of 2005 Norwich Union estimated that alternative to a full criminal trial. Afraud had cost the UK economy £16bn over the year – the The report’s other proposals include setting up a national equivalent of each adult in the country being £340 out of strategic authority as a public-private partnership to devise and pocket.
    [Show full text]
  • The Smartest Guys in the Room - Postscript
    The Private Investor · Issue 177 · July 2015 The Smartest Guys in the Room - Postscript In the last issue, I wrote a few remarks about Enron and mark-to-market accounting. A bit of further reading took to the UK connection here with the ‘Natwest Three’ whose involvement with Enron led three NatWest employees to jail sentences in the United States. Obviously I do not want to comment on this—but in an exculpatory book by one of the men (A Price to Pay: The Inside Story of the NatWest Three by David Bermingham) give an amazing insight into ‘Investment Banking’ when applied to a UK Clearing bank. As the story is told NatWest, which had bought an American boutique, (Greenwich) retired the then Chief Executive of NatWest Markets and persuaded the Greenwich Joint Chief Executive to come to London and run a reconstituted organisation. The man in question, Mr. Kruger, a brilliant but ruthless individual we are told changed the name to Greenwich Natwest. Moreover he found the Structured Trade Finance Department being run by some employee or other guilty of ‘old bank’ thinking and turfed him smartly out and replaced him by one Gary Mulgrew, later one of the co-indicted colleagues of Mr. Bermingham and one whose new-bank thinking eventually propelled him into an American prison. What was Structured Trade Finance? Well it can mean many things to many people we are coyly told, but the resources of the department were mainly used for off-balance sheet financial transactions. What is off- balance sheet finance? Well the example we are given is that of a sale-and-leaseback which ‘in one way’ can be regarded as ‘assets and liabilities that don’t appear in the balance sheet’.
    [Show full text]