Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(71,996 posts)
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:06 PM Feb 2013

Execs off the hook at S&P

Source: Los Angeles Times

Execs off the hook at S&P

The federal and state lawsuits against S&P are well and good, but no people are on the hook in these cases. What kind of deterrence is that?



You may have heard last week about a couple of big lawsuits brought by federal and state governments, alleging that the credit rating agency Standard & Poor's concocted a fraudulent scheme that contributed to trillions of dollars in investment losses and the cratering of pretty much the entire world financial system.

Those are serious charges, and the federal government's demand for $5 billion in penalties isn't peanuts. Yet there's something bloodless about the lawsuits, for the simple reason that they don't point the finger at any particular person who was responsible for these dastardly doings.

For example, you won't find the name Harold McGraw III anywhere in the court papers. Who?

McGraw was chairman, chief executive and president of McGraw-Hill, S&P's parent company, in the period at issue, 2004 to 2007. (He's still in place today.) Did he profit from S&P's wrongdoing? Let's assume so: he not only owns 10 million company shares but received $44.5 million in compensation over those years, according to corporate disclosures. Did he know or care about what was happening at S&P? One would hope so because it was by far the most profitable domain in his empire, contributing an average of more than 70% of McGraw-Hill's operating profit.

..............................


Read more: Link to sourchttp://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik-20130208,0,1163345.columne

28 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Execs off the hook at S&P (Original Post) kpete Feb 2013 OP
Anyone need more proof these execs own the country, govt and all? nt valerief Feb 2013 #1
Wall Street runs this country... awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #21
Crime pays. n/t L0oniX Feb 2013 #2
They first went with a civil suit because it is easier to prove. alfredo Feb 2013 #3
They will not change until they spend at leat 5 years behind bars Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #4
As heartbreaking as paying fines may be for them Cirque du So-What Feb 2013 #5
Heartbreaking? Fuddnik Feb 2013 #9
'Heartbreaking' was meant ironically Cirque du So-What Feb 2013 #11
All it takes is one anti government teabagger on the jury to set the Wall st thugs free. alfredo Feb 2013 #14
Right. Thanks, alfredo. elleng Feb 2013 #17
Are you saying there could still be criminal suits against individuals? RickFromMN Feb 2013 #22
I'd say the state Ag's will do the deed. NY's AG is a good Dem. alfredo Feb 2013 #23
Do the crime sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #6
Is Lanny Breur, Eric Holder, or Mary Jo Scott handling the case? Fuddnik Feb 2013 #7
Fixed link. BadgerKid Feb 2013 #8
CEOs have labor agreements, why don't you? n/t Hugin Feb 2013 #10
Corporations are people, my friend! bucolic_frolic Feb 2013 #12
I will believe in corporate personhood when one gets hung by its wrists, beaten with rifle butts, alfredo Feb 2013 #15
Execs OWN the hook. nt valerief Feb 2013 #13
Please excuse me if this sounds like I'm making excuses for this misbehavior, elleng Feb 2013 #16
Well, the Obama administration always has the option to drop a drone on them. fasttense Feb 2013 #18
It's been more than 4 years . . . snot Feb 2013 #24
The crap's probably been going on for a much longer period of time, elleng Feb 2013 #25
Steal a little, and they put you in jail... triplepoint Feb 2013 #19
Banksters are nothing more than crooks who deserve to spend the rest of their lives in prison. Octafish Feb 2013 #20
the government will lose... dtom67 Feb 2013 #26
I re-watched dotymed Feb 2013 #27
If corporations are treated as people Theyletmeeatcake2 Feb 2013 #28

alfredo

(60,074 posts)
3. They first went with a civil suit because it is easier to prove.
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:33 PM
Feb 2013

Costing them money is costing them what is most dear to them.

Cirque du So-What

(25,941 posts)
5. As heartbreaking as paying fines may be for them
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:22 PM
Feb 2013

incarceration is still far, far worse. I'm too lazy to look it up today, but I've read that when white-collar crime is punished with incarceration, it has an inhibiting influence upon other potential white-collar criminals - more so than any other type of crime, including those that may earn the perpetrator a trip to death row.

Cirque du So-What

(25,941 posts)
11. 'Heartbreaking' was meant ironically
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:00 PM
Feb 2013

as I know the possibility of fines are of no consequence either to the officers of the company or to the shareholders, who made out literally like bandits in spite of the paltry fines that may or may not be imposed.

RickFromMN

(478 posts)
22. Are you saying there could still be criminal suits against individuals?
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 12:57 AM
Feb 2013

I hate to agree with others, but I believe fines from a civil suit will not deter individuals because I believe the corporation will pay the fines.

I fear the individuals will still get bonuses.

Could individuals be held personally liable for the fines from a civil suit settlement?

I suspect trying to send individuals to jail would be difficult.
I suspect proving individuals were criminally negligent or criminally duplicitous would be very difficult.
 

sulphurdunn

(6,891 posts)
6. Do the crime
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:24 PM
Feb 2013

pay the fine with other peoples money, rather do the crime do the time and pay restitution is apparently the new standard for top tier corporate felons.

bucolic_frolic

(43,176 posts)
12. Corporations are people, my friend!
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:22 PM
Feb 2013

Therefore the people in corporations can't be people

and can't be held responsible.

alfredo

(60,074 posts)
15. I will believe in corporate personhood when one gets hung by its wrists, beaten with rifle butts,
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:56 PM
Feb 2013

then left to suffocate on its own blood.

elleng

(130,964 posts)
16. Please excuse me if this sounds like I'm making excuses for this misbehavior,
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 03:11 PM
Feb 2013

which I don't intend to do; I'm interested in the process, and hope the public can understand what goes into such a case.

The government has to prove its case, and doing so will entail citing and proving specific acts by individuals. We know that S&P is a corporation, made up of individuals who do good and bad acts. The individuals we'd like to see punished must be proven to have been responsible; this is part of the trial process. It will take time. I know that the foundation for this case has been underway for some years.

I expect there are many individuals and individual acts in the developing trial and evidence record, as many acts and decisions occurred during the time period at issue. It would not be rational publicly to name any individuals at this point.

 

fasttense

(17,301 posts)
18. Well, the Obama administration always has the option to drop a drone on them.
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 05:01 PM
Feb 2013

Then there would be no trial process.

I guess that's reserved for people who don't give them campaign contributions and not their good buddies at S&P. Though there's really no way to tell if Al Quada gave them contribution through a PAC or not.

elleng

(130,964 posts)
25. The crap's probably been going on for a much longer period of time,
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:46 AM
Feb 2013

but I do know that this particular matter has been in the works for at least 2-3 years.

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
20. Banksters are nothing more than crooks who deserve to spend the rest of their lives in prison.
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 05:54 PM
Feb 2013

Government officials who let them off the hook are traitors who deserve prison and more.

SDIs is what William K. Black called Standard & Poor's and its cousins -- Systemically Dangerous Institutions:

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2011/08/nprs-robert-siegel-interviews-william-k.html

Gee. I'm so old I remember when the Justice Department went after crooked banks and such.

dtom67

(634 posts)
26. the government will lose...
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:02 AM
Feb 2013

They will lose because I believe this suit is charging that S & P gave citi and BoA fraudulent rating on their toxic derivatives. On their own worthless junk. They (the banks) didn't know the assets were toxic? They needed SP to tell them? They are probably the ones who bribed S and P to give them the good ratings in the first place.
they are all crooks. Its not worth even pointing it out anymore...

dotymed

(5,610 posts)
27. I re-watched
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:35 AM
Feb 2013

JFK last night.
The prosecutor was convinced that this was a coup de tat of the American Govt.
He was right.

Theyletmeeatcake2

(348 posts)
28. If corporations are treated as people
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:28 AM
Feb 2013

Then they can go to jail ,stop earning income ,meet Bendover or suffer the death penalty.......this really is a rigged game !

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Execs off the hook at S&a...