Here’s the thing: It’s not a great idea to lie to a judge. Even if you really didn’t mean to, and likewise didn’t maliciously intend to withhold evidence from the defense, and even if it all didn’t really matter to the outcome, and even if the defendants were on trial for the near-capital offense of ripping off Anthony Scaramucci, and even if that august personage made his bones faking it ‘til he made it (and telling the occasional untruth himself), you shouldn’t, because judges really, really do not like being lied to. And you’d really better think awfully hard before it happens again, because next time, she’s not going to let you off as easily as simply ordering a new trial.
A hedge fund executive convicted of fraud should get a new trial because prosecutors withheld evidence that cold have helped him, a Manhattan federal judge ruled Friday, delivering a scathing rebuke to prosecutors for giving “misleading and flat-out incorrect” answers about what they had.
U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla, who presided at the criminal trial, said Anilesh Ahuja and trader Jeremy Shor, stopped short of dismissing the charges Friday, saying that errors made by the government -- while “unacceptable” -- were not severe enough to warrant throwing out the case.
For more of the latest in litigation, regulation, deals and financial services trends, sign up for Finance Docket, a partnership between Breaking Media publications Above the Law and Dealbreaker.