A day late and a dollar short on pursuing the banksters. I am not holding my breath that there will be criminal prosecutions to the bank execs or anyone high rank since we are looking at the statue of limitations of pursuing this now. This will be punted to Loretta Lynch’s hands should be become the next AG. And if so, she will be the one holding the bag and not Holder.
A formal policy of holding back on investigations and prosecutions of financial executives might be traced to a June 16, 1999 memo from a then young Department of Justice Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder. In what has become known as the “Holder Memo,” Holder opened the door for fellow prosecutors to consider the economic impact prosecuting certain financial crimes might have on the economy, excusing the criminal behavior for an apparent more important societal benefit. Some say the lack of investigation and prosecution resulted in a significant rise in crime on Wall Street.
[ Signed on June 16, 1999 ]
M E M O R A N D U M TO: All Component Heads and United States Attorneys
FROM: THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
SUBJECT: Bringing Criminal Charges Against Corporations
More and more often, federal prosecutors are faced with criminal conduct committed by or on behalf of corporations. The Department is committed to prosecuting both the culpable individuals and, when appropriate, the corporation on whose behalf they acted. The attached document, Federal Prosecution of Corporations, provides guidance as to what factors should generally inform a prosecutor in making the decision whether to charge a corporation in a particular case. I believe these factors provide a useful framework in which prosecutors can analyze their cases and provide a common vocabulary for them to discuss their decision with fellow prosecutors, supervisors, and defense counsel. These factors are, however, not outcome-determinative and are only guidelines. Federal prosecutors are not required to reference these factors in a particular case, nor are they required to document the weight they accorded specific factors in reaching their decision. The factors and the commentary were developed through the hard work of an ad hoc working group coordinated by the Fraud Section of the Criminal Division and made up of representatives of United States Attorneys’ Offices, the Executive Office of United States Attorneys, and Divisions of the Department with criminal law enforcement responsibilities. Experience with these guidelines may lead to changes or adjustments in the text and commentary. Therefore, please forward any comments about the guidelines, as well as instances in which the factors proved useful or not useful in specific cases to Shirah Neiman, Deputy United States Attorney, Southern District of New York, and Philip Urofsky, Trial Attorney, Fraud Section, Criminal Division. I look forward to hearing comments from the field as to the application of these factors in practice. Encl. Federal
Prosecution of Corporations