Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bankers Plead Guilty in Enron Case

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 06:56 PM
Original message
Bankers Plead Guilty in Enron Case
Source: AP

HOUSTON (AP) Three British bankers who were set to go to trial for their roles in a fraudulent scheme with former Enron Chief Financial Officer Andrew Fastow changed their pleas to guilty Wednesday.

David Bermingham, Giles Darby and Gary Mulgrew originally pleaded not guilty to seven counts of wire fraud. Prosecutors alleged that they colluded with Fastow in a secret financial scam in 2000 to enrich themselves at their employers' expense.

They were set to go on trial in January, but each pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud in a court hearing before U.S. District Judge Ewing Werlein Jr.

The three former executives at Greenwich NatWest, a unit of Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC, became a cause celebre in Britain throughout extradition proceedings that lasted two years.

Read more: http://money.excite.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt_top.jsp?news_id=...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Seven years
It took seven years.

How many years will it be before the crooks behind all this credit mess we are having now are brought to justice? Probably none. No one is even calling it the fraud that it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Part of the delay was the extradition
They were among the first people to be extradited under a new extradition agreement, under which the US no longer had to show any evidence of guilt to extradite suspects, just a charge in the USA. Their lawyers fought this through various courts, saying they couldn't be guaranteed a fair trial in the US any more, and there wasn't even any examination of evidence in the UK under the new agreement.

As Wikipedia summarises:

The Three were arrested in Britain on 23 April 2004 and extradition proceedings commenced in June of that year. <7> In September a judge ruled that extradition could proceed.

Extradition from the UK to the US is governed by the controversial Extradition Act 2003.

On 20 February 2006 the Natwest Three's appeal against the extradition was rejected by the High Court, and on 21 June 2006, the House of Lords threw out the appeal;<8> on 27 June 2006 the three lost an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. There were then rumours in the UK press that the British government would support their case but this was rejected by Attorney General Lord Goldsmith on July 7, 2006.<9>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NatWest_Three


Their case has generated criticism of extradition laws that mean the US is not required to provide "prima facie" or solid evidence of wrongdoing to extradite a UK citizen.

Britain must still provide the US with evidence of "probable cause" if it wishes to extradite someone from America.

The affair is being seen as a test case in the UK of the government's Extradition Act 2003 - which was developed in the wake of the 11 September attacks in 2001.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5103730.stm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. So even when its a win, its even a bigger loss
Gah

What a horrible way to get justice for the Enron swindle. We get the Enron crooks but lose another big chunk of our rights.

Thanks for the info
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 07:40 PM
Response to Original message
4. They were the first charged because a civil suit was filed with these guys named
and the Bush administration was scared sh*tless of the discovery phase of that civil suit. So, they immediately slapped some charges on them, so that they would be unable to testify in the civil suit, for fear of implicated themselves in the criminal cases which the U.S. government was conveniently holding over its head.

This has been the history of the U.S. prosecutions. Get anyone who might testify in a civil suit and who might implicate Thomas White, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney or George Bush indicted in federal court so that they can never talk.

Notice that the wheels of justice have moved as slow as molasses in most of the Enron cases, but because the lawsuit involving these guys was filed very quickly, the U.S, government filed its charges with lightening fast speed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-28-07 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
5. Three Brits?
Edited on Wed Nov-28-07 08:03 PM by KansDem
Don't we have enough con-artists here that we don't need to import them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ck4829 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-29-07 06:01 AM
Response to Original message
6. Remember Neil Coulbeck?
The banker who was 'suicided', but not very well, because the police had his death listed as "unexplained"?

I think this is the case that him in it at one point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 21st 2014, 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC