Yesterday we learned that Mathew Martoma, on trial for orchestrating “the largest insider trading scheme in history,” got himself expelled from Harvard Law School 15 years ago for creating fake transcripts to boost his grades. Obviously, this is not a great thing to have come to light if you are about to ask a jury to believe you are an innocent man, particularly if the judge presiding over your case is going to allow the story to be included by the prosecution.
But apparently changing his Civil Procedure grade from B to A (Contracts from B+ to A; Criminal Law B to A) was but a warm up for the deluge of lies the artist formerly known as Ajai Mathew Thomas would go on to tell! The subsequent ones, courtesy of the findings of Harvard’s administrative board, included:
- Claiming the fake transcript was only meant to be seen by his parents
Mr. Thomas asserts that he did not purposefully send the judges the altered transcript. He contends that they received it by accident. According to Mr. Thomas, he altered his transcript only for the purpose of deceiving his parents.
- Blaming the mix up on his brother
At the end of December of in early January, Mr. Thomas’s application for a clerkship was sent to 23 judges in the United States Court of Appeals. The applications included the altered transcript. . . . Mr. Thomas has stated that it was his intention that the real transcript be sent with his applications. According to his statement, he arranged with his brother for the latter to prepare the packets of materials for mailing to each judge; his brother came across the altered transcript and, mistakenly believing that it was the real transcript, included it with the application.
- Potentially the best lie among the lot, the one in which he said that after he was asked to interview with the judges who received the altered grades, he tried his hardest to come off as a candidate they wouldn’t want to hire…
On January 26 and 27, Mr. Thomas interviewed for a clerkship with Judge Sentelle, Judge Randolph, and Judge Ginsburg of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Mr. Thomas did not disclose to the judges that the transcript that they had received was not accurate…Mr. Thomas has stated that it was his intention, in order to avoid any harmful effect from the altered transcript, not to be offered a clerkship and that he tried not to be a successful candidate at the interviews.
- …but damn it, they saw through his act!
Two of the three judges who interviewed Mr. Thomas thought after the interviews that he was an extremely attractive candidate for a clerkship. One judge decided to offer him a clerkship. He reported that Mr. Thomas’s conduct at the interview was consistent only with his wanting the job.
During the proceedings, Martoma changed the date of an email before submitting it as evidence of his innocence. He also submitted a computer forensic report about the email with the falsified date, but did not tell the disciplinary committee that the company that produced the forensic report was his creation.