insider-trading

  • 02 Jun 2014 at 1:59 PM

Carl Icahn Puts The Wall Street Journal On Notice

In a telephone interview with Bloomberg Television’s Trish Regan, billionaire investor Carl Icahn responded to articles in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times over the weekend suggesting he was implicated in an insider trading investigation. The investigation, which is being conducted by the FBI, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and federal prosecutors in Manhattan, also involves three-time Masters golf tournament winner Phil Mickelson and Las Vegas gambling impresario Billy Walters. “We do not know of any investigation. Further, we are always very careful to observe all legal requirements in all of our activities,” Icahn said. “We believe that making inflammatory and speculative statements, especially when we’ve had an unblemished record for 50 years, is completely irresponsible on the part of the Wall Street Journal.” [BusinessWeek]

Titan Capital Management co-founder Steven Slawson has had his troubles in the past, but now he’s really in the soup, what with the criminal insider-trading charges in a case that has already won three guilty pleas. Oh, yeah, and with his alleged source ready to hop up onto the witness stand to tell a jury about all of the money Slawson paid him for inside dirt on a child’s clothing company.

No matter: Slawson is positively eager for the chance to prove that professedly innocent people can stay out of jail under such circumstances. Read more »

Rajat Gupta, the Goldman Sachs director who waited but 23 seconds after a Goldman board meeting to call hedge fund manager Raj Rajaratnam with material, non-public information, has lost his bid to stay out of jail. Read more »

2014: Not a good year to be named Steve A. Cohen. For any expecting parents out there thinking about going with S.A.C., consider Bill or Ted instead. Moving forward perhaps thing one should fall under names we don’t give kids anymore, like Mussolini or Stalin. Read more »

To be fair, we don’t actually know 1) how much money was raised and 2) if his friend needed a heart. It could’ve been a kidney or liver or a lung. What we do know is that U.S. District Judge Richard Sullivan was somehow unmoved by this argument, made on behalf of ex-SAC employee and convicted insider trader Mike Steinberg: Read more »

Michael Steinberg, a portfolio manager at Steven A. Cohen’s SAC Capital Advisors who was found guilty last year on insider trading charges, has asked for a two-year sentence, far shorter than the term recommended by probation officials. In a 65-page sentencing memo, Steinberg’s lawyer Barry Berke referred to his “character and broader life accomplishments” in arguing that his sentence should be only two years in prison. A report by the court’s probation department recommended that Steinberg be sentenced to a prison term of 4-1/4 to 5-1/4 years for his December conviction on one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and four counts of securities fraud. “Mr. Steinberg is a man of many admirable individual characteristics — but more than that, he is a giver and a doer, someone whose contributions to the happiness, success and well-being of his family, friends, and many others are second to none,” Berke wrote to U.S. District Judge Richard Sullivan. [Reuters]

Just seconds after the prosecutor arguing the appeal introduced herself, the judges grilled her about the case and implied that Mr. Bharara’s office steered insider trading trials to Judge Richard J. Sullivan, who oversaw Mr. Chiasson’s and Mr. Newman’s trial and a subsequent case against another trader. The questioning appeared to send a cautionary message to Judge Sullivan, who is known for often siding with the government, and took a swipe at prosecutors for cherry-picking judges. Judge Barrington D. Parker — interrupting the prosecutor, Antonia M. Apps — referred to Judge Sullivan as the government’s apparent “preferred venue” for insider trading cases. While Ms. Apps argued that consolidating the cases created “judicial efficiencies,” another member of the appellate panel noted the “sheer coincidence that the judge who bought into the government’s theory was the one” assigned to the recent trials. [Dealbook]