I suppose we should be happy that something – anything – is being done.
But they’re keeping it civil, even as lesser people are being criminally charged for things like “food stamp fraud”. It shouldn’t
whitewash, but it probably will:
But it would also suggest that authorities have all but removed a greater threat: criminal charges. After nearly two years of stitching together evidence, criminal investigators have concluded that porous risk controls at the firm, rather than fraud, allowed the customer money to disappear, according to the law enforcement officials with knowledge of the case.
Even the fact that they spend two years “stitching together evidence” means this is just being treated so, so differently. “Porous risk controls”? I should try that on a jury, and then when the prosecutor sneers – as he should – just pull out a copy of the article about Corzine and MF Global and the “missing” $1.2 billion.
Sorry. Civil suits and lamentations about “porous risk controls” are not going to cut it with us over here at Lawyers on Strike.