« Noting the potential sentencing reform benefit from the latest budget deal | Main | States find (unsurprisingly) that civil commitment for sex offenders not a simple solution »
October 29, 2015
"The Corporation as Snitch: The New DOJ Guidelines on Prosecuting White Collar Crime"
The title of this post is the title of this notable new essay by Elizabeth Joh and Thomas Joo available via SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Volkswagen, the world’s largest auto maker, acknowledged in September 2015 that it had equipped its cars with software designed to cheat diesel emissions tests. The VW scandal may become the first major test of the Department of Justice’s recently announced guidelines that focus on individual accountability in white collar criminal investigations. Criminal investigations into safety defects at two other leading car makers, General Motors and Toyota, yielded no criminal charges against any individuals.
But in a recent speech announcing the new guidelines, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates stated, “Crime is crime,” whether it takes place “on the street corner or in the boardroom.” “The rules have just changed.” We raise questions about this new approach and some of its possible implications. The new cooperation policy’s emphasis on individual prosecutions could itself result in leniency: prosecutors may award excessively generous credit to corporations in order to build cases against individuals.
October 29, 2015 at 10:36 AM | Permalink
Comments
The Supremacy once worked for an agency investigated by the feds. The latter also went after the state. The Supremacy thought the prosecution was pretextual, to make easy money by the government. On policy grounds, the Supremacy wanted to persuade the judge the questioned conduct was a benefit deserving extra payment and not penalties. The Supremacy budgeted $50000 to cause $ million damage inside the local federal attorney's office. The Supremacy would get to hunt and destroy the life of another cult criminal, a great but one of the least appreciated sports.
The agency asked the Supremacy to not do that because of a deal. Instead of $9 millions, $1.7 million plus a corporate compliance program. Irresistible to the scared leadership. Being loyal, the Supremacy said, OK. The Supremacy attended yearly half day indoctrination sessions depicting Stalinist methods of political intimidation. It said nothing because the content was from the feds and not from the speakers.
Six years later, after the compliance program ended, the boss says, remember your offer? Wish we had taken it. A total culture of snitching and suspiciousness replaced the relaxed culture of mutual support. The cost? Over $10 million. Had they been totally defeated in court, they would have been better off.
Always attack the enemy. Always generate personal and money costs that will shock and awe the enemy by the massive damage they must endure to get their pittance. To deter.
,
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 29, 2015 3:09:03 PM
Manufacturing in the US is nearly defunct thanks to the rapacious and predatory lawyer profession. The lawyer shows no mercy. It is a patriotic duty to resist to the utmost, and to counter attack the prosecutor and the judge, personally. Defense lawyers owe their jobs to the other side, and will never deter the other side. One must hire another lawyer malpractice specialist to terrorize the defense lawyer daily into carrying out its duty of zealous representation. The client is surrounded by traitors from the lawyer profession. It needs to send someone in their employ to law school, to in turn be take seriously when that agent of the client terrorizes the lawyer malpractice specialist into terrorizing the defense lawyer into terrorizing the enemies of the client.
Bill Otis would reply, just don't break the rules, and avoid any involvement. The problem is that everyone productive violates 3 felony laws a day. So that is not a remedy. That felony count may be used against prosecutors and judges. Indeed, the above attacks on prosecutors and judges are mandated by 8.3 (a) and (b), and each of its violations should in turn be reported or another violation is committed.
Maintaining The Integrity Of The Profession
Rule 8.3 Reporting Professional Misconduct
(a) A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority.
(b) A lawyer who knows that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge's fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 29, 2015 6:27:08 PM
In my experience, the pointing out of the Rules of Conduct is just about the fastest way to get permanently banned from a lawyer blog, much faster than lack of civility, bad language, personalized death threats, links to sex with animals porn sites, and spam.
The above citation of the Rules of Conduct is the ultimate test of Prof. Berman's tolerance of dissenting speech.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Oct 29, 2015 6:44:35 PM
Helpful news sharing for White Collar Crime...
Posted by: Hammerschmidt Broughton Law Corporation | Jan 9, 2016 1:58:59 PM
