June 2024 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

HSBC Hit With Swiss Restrictions After Compliance Breaches
by Gunnar Larson 19 Jun '24

19 Jun '24

HSBC Hit With Swiss Restrictions After Compliance Breaches <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1848998?nl_pk=a94fc…> By Alex Davidson Switzerland's financial regulator said Tuesday that HSBC's Swiss private bank had breached anti-money laundering requirements in banking transactions with two high-profile individuals, restricting its new business relationships until it completes reviews overseen by a monitor. Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1848998?nl_pk=a94fc…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1848998?nl_pk=a94fc…>

1 0

Serco Settles Landmark Shareholder Dispute Mid-Trial
by Gunnar Larson 19 Jun '24

19 Jun '24

Serco Settles Landmark Shareholder Dispute Mid-Trial <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1849014?nl_pk=a94fc…> By Eddie Beaver Serco settled a landmark shareholders' claim on Tuesday with investors who sued the outsourcing giant for compensation over an overbilling scandal that caused its share price to nosedive. Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1849014?nl_pk=a94fc…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1849014?nl_pk=a94fc…>

1 0

UK - Crime - New Guidelines On Perverting The Course Of Justice – On The Path To More Clarity?
by Gunnar Larson 18 Jun '24

18 Jun '24

https://www.mondaq.com/uk/crime/1478758/new-guidelines-on-perverting-the-co… New Guidelines On Perverting The Course Of Justice – On The Path To More Clarity? PP Peters & Peters MORE The Sentencing Council introduced new guidelines for perverting the course of justice and witness intimidation in England and Wales, aiming to ensure consistency and clarity in sentencing. These guidelines are expected to provide a structured approach and address variations in previous case law. UK Criminal Law Photo of Diana Czugler Photo of Arunn Thiruchelvam AUTHORS The concept of 'perverting the course of justice' might commonly feature in televised series, where crooked cops tamper with evidence for money or baddies interfere with witnesses, but before HBO and Netflix came on the scene, it had a long-established history as an offence in the common law of England and Wales. In October 2023, the Sentencing Council introduced new guidelines for sentencing offenders convicted of perverting the course of justice and witness intimidation in England and Wales. These aim to provide consistency and clarity across all cases, whereas before a wide range of case law had to be relied on to devise the correct type or length of sentences based on the individual circumstances of each case. We look at how the guidelines, which have now been in force for just over six months, will likely impact sentencing going forward in less severe cases. This is of particular interest at a time when the offence is once again in the limelight, following a recent high-profile boiler room fraud case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which has resulted on 7 May 2024 in an individual receiving a custodial sentence for perverting the course of justice. An old offence The current interpretation of the doctrine was crafted in 1891, when Justice Pollock B considered whether the defendant's attempt to fool arbitrators in a dispute about the quality of grains amounted to a fraud or cheat against the administration of public justice. In R v Vreones, he offered the dictum that "the real offence... is the doing of some act which has a tendency and is intended to pervert the administration of public justice". Since this dictum, the law around perverting the course of justice has been used and developed to assist the courts in a wide range of situations, such as: – discontinuing a criminal prosecution in return for payments; – making false statement to police officers investigating an offence; – making a false retraction of a true allegation of rape; – doing an act calculated to assist another to avoid arrest; – interfering with a witness or a juror; or – the whole gambit of potential scenarios that would make for good crime cop drama. Perverting the course of justice has remained a serious offence: it is indictable only, with maximum life imprisonment and an offence range between a community order and seven years in custody. Long-standing principles thrown into question Before the new guidelines were introduced, practitioners relied on the long-standing principle that custodial sentences should be imposed in all but the most exceptional cases. Indeed, before the guidelines came out, the courts considered, in R v Abdulwahab [2018] EWCA Crim 1399, that conduct intended to pervert the course of justice almost invariably called for a custodial sentence; the idea being that deterrence was necessary. In this case, the appellant, a young man with no previous convictions, had given a false account of events when interviewed under caution. His friend had used his leased car to deal drugs. The appellant claimed that he had left it at a car park for his friend to collect, when in fact, his friend had driven the car to the car park himself. Drugs were found in the car, and the friend and two other men were arrested for intent to supply Class A and Class B drugs. The appellant voluntarily attended the police station a few days later to collect the car and was interviewed under caution when he gave the false account. The police had CCTV evidence contradicted his account. On reviewing the 15-month custodial sentence that he had received, and giving full credit for his guilty plea, the appeal judge observed that there was a "clear, deliberate, and focused lie told by the appellant with intent to pervert the course of justice" by either providing his friend with a defence or by weakening the prosecution case against him. However, he also observed that "there does not appear to have been any evidence pointing unequivocally to this appellant having gone to the police station always intending to put forward that lie...". In the Court of Appeal, the appellant submitted that his lie not been elaborate or well thought out, it did not exonerate the friend from suspicion, it was put forward only during the interview under caution and, although it was maintained throughout the interview, it was not repeated on other occasions, and the false account did not in fact obstruct the course of justice to any significant extent and did not adversely affect the police investigation. The judgment further explored that there was "no Definitive Sentencing Guideline for offences of this nature". However, a number of relevant principles could be drawn from another case, R v Radcliffe [2016] 1 Cr App R(S) 65, and other decisions of the Court of Appeal. These included that: 1. conduct which tends and intends to pervert the course of justice striking "at the heart of the administration of justice and almost invariably calls for a custodial sentence"; 2. the appropriate sentence depends on the particular circumstances of each case and these can vary widely and therefore only limited assistance can be derived from considering previous decisions in other cases; 3. in assessing the seriousness of any particular offence of perverting the course of justice, the seriousness of the underlying offence, the nature of the deceptive conduct, the period of time over which it was continued, whether it cast suspicion on or led to the arrest of an innocent person, and the success or otherwise of the attempt should also be considered; and 4. the offender's previous character and any personal mitigation must be taken into account. New structure The sentencing guidelines offer a step-by-step approach for reaching a conclusion on sentencing which broadly reflects the common law approach previously relied on. As per all sentencing guidelines issued under the Sentencing Code, step 1 involves "determining the offence category". This requires assessing the seriousness of the offence to provide a starting point for sentencing. The seriousness of the offence is determined by assessing culpability and harm, based on three categories: A – high culpability, B – medium culpability, C – lower culpability. Some demonstrable behaviour for each category includes: – high culpability: conduct over a sustained period of time and sophisticated and/or planned nature of conduct, as well as seriousness of underlying offence; – medium culpability: factors present in A and C which balance each other out and/or the offender's culpability falls between the facts described in A and C; and – lower culpability: unplanned and/or limited in scope and duration, unsophisticated nature of conduct, involved through coercion, intimidation and underlying offence not serious for lower culpability. A hypothetical review If we were to hypothetically review Abdulwahab with the help of the sentencing guidelines, the first step would also be to assess the young man's culpability. Here, it may be argued that he was of medium/low culpability. Although the underlying offence was "serious", all other factors, such as the lack of sophistication in the lie, the fact that he did not attend the police station with a plan to lie, and that the lie was not repeated, point towards low culpability. Next, the level of harm should be assessed. This is also divided into three categories: – Category 1: where there has been serious consequences or distress for an innocent party, a serious impact on the administration of justice, and a substantial delay caused to the course of justice. – Category 2: where suspicion was cast on an innocent party and there has been some, distress, some impact, and some delay. – Category 3: limited distress, limited impact, limited delay. In our hypothetical review, a judge may find that the young man had caused a category 3 level of harm: no innocent party was involved, the impact on the administration of justice and the delay caused to the course of justice were limited (although bearing in mind that had it not been for the CCTV the police already had in their possession, the impact would have been more significant). Once the level of culpability and the level of harm have been assessed and a prognosis has been reached, step 2 of the sentencing guidelines calls for both to be used to identify the corresponding starting point to reach a sentence within a category range. The guidelines provide a table to help assess the starting point and category range, which specifies "the starting point applied to all offenders, irrespective of plea or previous convictions". Should our hypothetical appellant be a B3, i.e. someone of medium culpability (category B) with low level of harm (category 3), the starting point would be nine months' custody and the category range between six months' and one year's custody. Once the starting point has been reached, the sentencing guidelines provide additional considerations to be considered in relation to community orders and custodial sentences. Steps 3 to 8 can then be used to arrive at an appropriate sentence. These are not considered in detail here, but include: – Step 3: consider any factors which indicate a reduction for assistance to the prosecution. – Step 4: reduction for guilty pleas. – Step 5: totality principle. – Step 6: compensation and ancillary orders. – Step 7: reasons. – Step 8: consideration for time spent on bail. All of these considerations are usually taken into account for the conviction of criminal offences, which the judge considered in Abdulwahab. Time will tell In Abdulwahab, the Court of Appeal accepted that the 15 months' custodial sentence that had been handed down was too long and that 11 months were more adequate. In his judgment, the judge accepted the appellant's submissions finding that "the sentence after trial which the learned judge had in mind was manifestly excessive in length... [he] had therefore erred in taking too high a starting point for sentence after trial". In the context of our hypothetical review, this updated sentence would fall within the range of the guidelines, albeit at the higher end of the category range. The guidelines have been in place for only a few months, so their effectiveness and how they will affect the sentencing landscape remain to be seen. However, their introduction is likely to be positive, and it is very much hoped that they will offer consistency and clarity for all involved, from lawyers, their clients and the courts. What remains crystal clear is that notwithstanding the introduction of the guidelines, serious wrongdoing will continue attracting sufficiently severe punishment. This is apparent from the recent 18-month custodial sentence handed down by Southwark Crown Court in a prosecution brought by the FCA for a relatively sophisticated and premeditated attempt at perverting the course of justice (the forging of documents), which was committed in the context of broader, serious offending by finance professionals (who ended up receiving lengthy custodial sentences of their own for fraud offences). It was undoubtedly considered an aggravating feature in the case that the forged document was provided to FCA investigators to mislead them. The individual – who was not found to have played any part in the boiler room fraud scheme itself – pleaded guilty but was nonetheless sentenced to 18 months in prison. Originally published 20 May, 2024. The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

1 1

BREAKING: NY High Court Denies Trump's Gag Order Appeal
by Gunnar Larson 18 Jun '24

18 Jun '24

BREAKING: NY High Court Denies Trump's Gag Order Appeal <https://www.law360.com/compliance/articles/1849139?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1fb-4d8e…> By Frank G. Runyeon New York state's highest court on Tuesday denied Donald Trump's rapid appeal of the gag order that limited his speech during his criminal hush money trial, finding it did not raise serious constitutional issues. 1 document attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/compliance/articles/1849139?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1fb-4d8e…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/compliance/articles/1849139?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1fb-4d8e…>

1 0

Crypto Trading Firm Nabs NY BitLicense
by Gunnar Larson 18 Jun '24

18 Jun '24

Crypto Trading Firm Nabs NY BitLicense <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1848893?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…> By Aislinn Keely Crypto trading firm and liquidity provider Cumberland DRW announced Monday that the New York Department of Financial Services has granted it a BitLicense, which allows it to operate a crypto business within the state. Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1848893?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1848893?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…>

1 0

The Senate Race in Ohio Is the Sickest in U.S. History in Terms of Billionaire Money from Outside the State
by Gunnar Larson 18 Jun '24

18 Jun '24

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2024/06/the-senate-race-in-ohio-is-the-sicke… By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: June 18, 2024 ~ Senator Sherrod Brown Senator Sherrod Brown Senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat and life-long Ohioan, is running for his fourth term in the U.S. Senate, after more than 17 years of proving consistently with his voice and actions that it’s the working class of Ohio that he stands up for in Congress. It would seem that Brown’s reelection should be an easy win. Instead, it will be one of the most expensive Senate races in U.S. history with the outcome dependent on just how vile and vicious the attack ads funded by out-of-state billionaires are against Brown. According to AdImpact.com, outside groups have reserved $92.8 million in ads they plan to run supporting Brown’s Republican challenger, Bernie Moreno, a man who has bragged about his early “lower-middle-class status,” but whom the New York Times describes as being “born into a rich and politically connected family” in Bogotá, Columbia. How did Senator Brown end up with a target on his back? It comes down to two things. Republicans need to oust Brown to grab majority control of the U.S. Senate; and Brown is the Chair of the powerful Senate Banking Committee where key Presidential nominees need to get confirmed. Putting a right-wing Republican in the Chairmanship of the Senate Banking Committee would grease the skids for a MAGA agenda. The Club for Growth Action Super PAC played a major role in making sure Moreno won the Republican primary so he could go head-to-head with Brown in the general election. The billionaire-supported PAC ran ads during the primary touting Trump’s endorsement of Moreno while stating that “Bernie will stand up to liberal nut jobs.” See one of those ads here. According to Federal Election Commission data, Club for Growth Action has raised $46.29 million from January 1, 2023 through April 30, 2024. Two billionaires are responsible for two-thirds of that money. Neither of those billionaires live or vote or work in Ohio, and yet their money could sway the outcome of the Senate election in Ohio. The Club for Growth has pushed for things that the majority of Americans are against: the privatization of Social Security; the destruction of workers’ rights and unions; and the deregulation of dangerous industries. The largest donor to Club for Growth Action is Jeff Yass, a billionaire who resides in Pennsylvania. From January 1, 2023 to June 7, 2024, Yass has donated $20.5 million to the Club for Growth Action Super PAC. The second largest donor is Richard Uihlein, who has chipped in $10.26 million. Yass is Co-Founder of Susquehanna International Group (SIG), a hedge fund and global quantitative trading firm. In 2022, the nonprofit investigative news site, ProPublica, reported that Yass has “avoided $1 billion in taxes while largely escaping public scrutiny. He’s now pouring his money into campaigns to cut taxes and support election deniers.” Richard Uihlein is an heir to the Schlitz brewing fortune. He and his wife, Elizabeth, founded Uline, a shipping supplies company. According to The Hill publication, the 2022 midterms marked Uihlein’s largest ever donations to political campaigns – a staggering $80.7 million. But it’s not just right-wing Super PACs that Senator Brown is up against. According to FEC records, Moreno’s own primary campaign account, “Bernie Moreno for Senate,” is seeing a huge influx of donors who reside in New York, Florida, Texas, Virginia, and, peculiarly, Minnesota, many of whom have maxed out their individual donations to Moreno of $3300 for the primary and another $3300 for the general election. Notable among this group are people employed by private equity firms such as Blackstone, Goldman Sachs (which owns a private equity arm), Elliott Management, Lone Star Funds, Fortress Investment Group and numerous others. Private equity and hedge funds enjoy a craven tax break called “Carried Interest,” where billionaires can end up paying a lower tax rate than teachers, plumbers and factory workers in Ohio. What Ohioans can do to outwit the swamp creatures in this election is to line up 10 neighbors or friends who were planning to sit out this election and drive them to the polls on November 5.

1 0

Calif. Becomes Last State To Ink Deal Over Blackbaud Breach
by Gunnar Larson 18 Jun '24

18 Jun '24

Calif. Becomes Last State To Ink Deal Over Blackbaud Breach <https://www.law360.com/health/articles/1848956?nl_pk=6422bbc2-a823-4be5-9a9…> By Allison Grande Blackbaud Inc. has agreed to pay $6.75 million to resolve data security claims brought by California's attorney general, who was the only one to sit out a nearly $50 million settlement that the software provider reached last year with every other state over a 2020 ransomware attack that affected thousands of its customers. 2 documents attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/health/articles/1848956?nl_pk=6422bbc2-a823-4be5-9a9…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/health/articles/1848956?nl_pk=6422bbc2-a823-4be5-9a9…>

1 0

SEC Alleges Texas Man Offered Virgin Sham $200M 'Lifeline'
by Gunnar Larson 18 Jun '24

18 Jun '24

SEC Alleges Texas Man Offered Virgin Sham $200M 'Lifeline' <https://www.law360.com/delaware/articles/1848867?nl_pk=8f2e5a76-bb66-462b-a…> By Gina Kim Securities regulators sued a venture capitalist and his investment firm in Texas federal court Monday, accusing the firm of making a bogus offer to invest $200 million into Virgin Orbit last year despite having less than $1 in its bank account and causing stock prices to swell before plummeting when the deal collapsed. Complaint attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/delaware/articles/1848867?nl_pk=8f2e5a76-bb66-462b-a…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/delaware/articles/1848867?nl_pk=8f2e5a76-bb66-462b-a…>

1 0

Hacker Facing Rare, Deadly Cancer Avoids Prison Time
by Gunnar Larson 18 Jun '24

18 Jun '24

Hacker Facing Rare, Deadly Cancer Avoids Prison Time <https://www.law360.com/cybersecurity-privacy/articles/1848753?nl_pk=3dfd2fd…> By Chart Riggall Despite "vehemently" rejecting defense counsel's arguments seeking a more lenient sentence for a cybersecurity contractor facing up to five years in prison for hacking into a hospital's computer systems, a Georgia federal judge nevertheless handed down a two-year house arrest sentence on Monday, citing the defendant's extremely rare and aggressive form of cancer. Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/cybersecurity-privacy/articles/1848753?nl_pk=3dfd2fd…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/cybersecurity-privacy/articles/1848753?nl_pk=3dfd2fd…>

1 0

Clients Say McGrath Kavinoky 'Bullied' Them Into Abuse Deal
by Gunnar Larson 18 Jun '24

18 Jun '24

Clients Say McGrath Kavinoky 'Bullied' Them Into Abuse Deal <https://www.law360.com/banking/articles/1848696?nl_pk=feb6bbba-7878-4d39-be…> By Jack Karp California firm McGrath Kavinoky LLP, which inked more than $374 million in settlements for women who say they were sexually abused by a UCLA Health gynecologist, misled its clients and "bullied" them into accepting far smaller amounts than they were promised, according to a lawsuit in state court by two ex-clients. Complaint attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/banking/articles/1848696?nl_pk=feb6bbba-7878-4d39-be…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/banking/articles/1848696?nl_pk=feb6bbba-7878-4d39-be…>

1 0