You might think that merely suggesting the hire a person like “Joe” Gao Jue would be a crime in just about any jurisdiction. After all, simply mentioning the extension a prestigious job offer to an “immature, irresponsible and unreliable” person described by those interviewing him as the “worst… candidate they had ever seen,” a person so inept as to be unable even to properly fill out a work visa application or send a sexually-explicit e-mail to the right person, let alone analyze companies or securities, seems more than enough grounds for criminal charges of industrial sabotage. And that’s before you know that Gao was the son of China’s commerce minister, and just one of 222 well-connected folks to get jobs they almost certainly didn’t deserve at JPMorgan Chase in order to better serve the bank’s ambitions to service the companies those failchildren’s parents ran, which certainly sounds like bribery, which is another crime.
But no! To both!
Deputy district judge Emily Cheung told the court, when explaining the reasons for her not guilty verdict, that [Catherine] Leung had not played a major role in the decision to hire Ang’s son, Ang Ren-yi, and that Leung had followed procedures required under JPMorgan’s client referral programme…. Cheung said in a three hour-long explanation of her verdict that it was the responsibility of JPMorgan’s Junior Resources Management team to make checks with the bank’s legal and compliance department when employees were being hired under the scheme….
In 2016, JPMorgan agreed to pay U.S. authorities $264 million to resolve allegations it hired the relatives of Chinese officials, including those working at state owned enterprises in order to win banking deals.