Corporate Crime without Conviction

[rman]

"KPMG admits its criminal wrongdoing in this tax shelter fraud that cost the government 2.5 Billion dollars (...) Was there a conviction? No. The company was charged with a felony and the government gave them a deferred prosecution agreement. These kinds of agreements were intended for juvenile delinquents, to clear the courts of minor issues."

"...of the 34 cases that we could identify, 23 of them have come in the last 3 years. That's twice as many as in the previous ten years."


Democracy Now
Crime without Conviction: U.S. Makes Deals With Corporate Criminals Instead of Prosecuting
Thursday, December 29th, 2005
www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/29/151220
(audio, video)

"Corporations that commit securities and accounting fraud can now expect to get sweetheart deals from the Justice Department, and they don't face public exposure for their misdeeds. We speak with Russell Mokhiber of Corporate Crime Reporter (www.corporatecrimereporter.com)."

"A report released yesterday found that under a new policy implemented by the Justice Department in 2003, a number of major corporations caught committing serious crimes have not been prosecuted or convicted by the U.S government. The report, titled, "Crime without Conviction: The Rise of Deferred and Non-Prosecution Agreements" by the watch-dog group, Corporate Crime Reporter, named 34 major corporations that have entered into special deals with the U.S government."

"Under these deals, prosecutors agree not to criminally prosecute the corporation in exchange for cooperation against executives, implementation of corporate monitors and fines. In fact, the report finds that no major corporation caught engaging in accounting or securities fraud has been convicted since the Arthur Andersen conviction in June 2002."

[Double T]

1. The Den of Thieves stick together........

what else would you expect?

[yurbud]

2. hey freepers, this is what the GOP thinks of your pension and 401K

their friends can steal it and get a slap on the wrist.

[rman]

3. bump

[Telly Savalas]

4. What's wrong with targeting the individuals who are responsible

for the criminal acts?

Makes more sense to gun for them than to try to take down janitors who work for the corporations or pension funds that hold their stock.

That's a really weird report. Very informative, but it's as if its moralizing tone ignores many of the interesting nuances it discusses regarding the newer prosecutorial strategies.

[rman]

5. i'm not sure what you're getting at

The report does not argue that individuals who are responsible for the criminal acts should not be targeted. It argues that corporations that performed a criminal act should be prosecuted - as opposed to getting deferred prosecution. When a corporations is found "not guilty" of a crime then there's no ground to prosecute the individuals who were involved in the crime.

Also i am curious which nuances regarding the newer prosecutorial strategies you find interesting. I'd say the interesting bit is the fact that the newer prosecutorial strategies amount to non-prosecution in case of criminal wrongdoing by a corporation. Also i'd think there's plenty reason to point out the immorality of it. I mean - stealing 2.5 billion from the government, and get not even a slap on the wrist.

[Telly Savalas]

6. The report observes that part of the point of the deferred prosecutions

is to get the company to cough up the executives responsible for the criminal acts. The following passage is typical of what I'm talking about:

Just help us put the individuals executives in jail, and we well let you off the hook.

No conviction.

No record of criminal wrongdoing.

So, a double standard is being set – if not by law, then by prosecutorial discretion.

On the one hand, if you are a living, breathing, human being who commits a crime, you will be prosecuted, convicted and sent to prison.

A corporation is an economic arrangement. It's behaviours are subject to the individuals who control it. It can't be put in jail, whereas its CEO and CFO can. If a deferred prosecution can help put such individuals in jail and give the authorities leverage into forcing the corporation into better behaviour, as this report suggests they do, then why shouldn't they be used as a tool?