frodi enron

FaGal · 24-09-04, 20:54

Regalo report di Lamon Rutten (sovrintendente della commissione per commercio e sviluppo dell'ONU e responsabile dell'area commodities) sulle sofisticate tecniche di frode utilizzate da Enron nel trading delle commodities, con uso di derivati e non solo

email@messaggiami.net
oggetto: report frodi

FaGal · 08-01-05, 11:05

Enron Directors Reach $168M Settlement
01.07.2005, 08:42 PM

Eighteen former directors of scandalized Enron Corp. have reached a $168 million settlement, including a $13 million payout out of some of their own pockets, with shareholders burned by the financial shenanigans that culminated in the company's stunning collapse.

The agreement announced late Friday requires 10 of the former Enron directors to contribute a combined $13 million from the profits that they reaped from selling company stock before Enron revealed it had been grossly exaggerating its sales and profits. The debacle foreshadowed a wave of accounting scandals that sparked an overhaul of the country's corporate governance practices.

The directors paying an unspecified amount of money are: Robert Belfer, Norman Blake, Ronnie Chan, John Duncan, Joe Foy, Wendy Gramm, Robert Jaedicke, Charles LeMaistre, Rebecca Mark-Jubasche and Ken Harrison, according to attorneys involved in the case.

Other directors who aren't personally paying money but are nevertheless covered by the settlement are: Paulo Ferraz-Pererira, John Mendelsohn, Jerome Meyer, Frank Savage, John Urquhart, John Wakeham, Charls Walker and Herbert Winokur.

None of the directors are admitting any wrongdoing as part of the settlement, which still requires final court approval.

It represents the fourth major settlement negotiated by attorneys who filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of Enron's shareholders nearly three years ago. Including the latest settlement, the lawsuit so far has retrieved just under $500 million for shareholders in a debacle that helped spark a wave of new laws designed to improve corporate America's accounting practices.

Enron's financial meltdown wiped out tens of billions in shareholder wealth.

The latest settlement doesn't include two of Enron's former chief executives, Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling, both of whom face criminal charges for their alleged misconduct leading up to the company's late 2001 collapse. Andrew Fastow, who has pleaded guilty to engaging in illegal conspiracy while he was Enron's chief financial officer, also isn't a part of the settlement.

Enron's shareholders are still seeking damages from a long list of other prominent defendants, including major banks and brokerages such as J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., and Credit Suisse First Boston for playing an alleged role in Enron's skullduggery.

Forcing 10 of Enron directors to dig into their own pockets to part of the settlement was especially important, said William Lerach, an attorney representing University of California, the lead plaintiff in the shareholder suit.

"Hopefully, this will send a message to corporate boardrooms of the importance of directors performing their legal duties," Lerach said.

The University of California announced the settlement with the Enron directors on the same day that New York state Comptroller disclosed that 10 directors who presided over the fraudulent practices at Worldcom will personally contribute $18 million toward a settlement in that case.

Enron's directors last year agreed to pay a combined $1.5 million of their money to resolve a U.S. Department of Labor lawsuit alleging the company had mismanaged its employees' retirement funds.

Insurance companies will contribute $155 million toward the latest Enron settlement, exhausting the coverage for the company's directors and officers.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2005/...ap1747478.html

FaGal · 08-01-05, 11:09

The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari on Friday on Arthur Anderson's appeal of its conviction of felony criminal charges in connection with allegedly destroying and altering Enron Corp.-related documents.

The Supreme Court will review this Firth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that upheld the former Big Five accounting firm's June 2002 conviction by a jury in a Houston federal court. The key issue in the case will be whether the jury instructions that U.S. District Judge Melinda Harmon approved during the trial were too vague and broad for jurors to determine whether Anderson's actions constituted obstruction of justice.

The Justice Departent charged Anderson with obstruction of justice for its mass destruction of Enron-related documents in late 2001 as the Securities and Exchange Commission and Congressional Committees began investigating Enron's complicated financial structure. As we all know, Enron catapulted into bankruptcy in early December 2001 amid revelations of accounting schemes to mask debt and inflate profits.

As Enron's auditor, Anderson contended that it was only implementing its document-retention policy that called for destroying unneeded documentation to streamline files. Andersen argued during trial that employees who shredded tons of documents followed the policy and there was no intent to undermine any investigation of Enron.

Although an Anderson victory at the Supreme Court would be a Pyrrhic victory for the firm, this is a positive development for the Enron case in general. The Justice Department's prosecution of Anderson reflected an egregious lack of prosecutorial discretion -- the prosecution of Anderson ultimately caused the loss of thousands of jobs, most of which never had anything to do with Enron. Moreover, as noted here awhile back, the accounting industry has still not recovered from the Anderson fallout, and big business is finding it difficult to find enough auditors to fulfill the new Enron-era regulatory obligations.

Thus, a Supreme Court reversal will not help Anderson much, but it just might send the right message to a Justice Department that increasingly appears oblivious to the negative economic impact that results from using criminal prosecutions to regulate customary business practices.

FaGal · 09-01-05, 09:56

Enron outside directors settlement

On the heels of this post earlier this week about the impending outside directors' settlement in the WorldCom case, this NY Times article reports on the impending $168 million settlement involving the class action securities fraud and related claims against eighteen former directors on Enron Corp.'s Board of Directors. Most of the settling directors were outside directors of Enron.

This settlement has actually been in the works for several months as the class action plaintiffs' lawyers became concerned that the extraordinary defense costs of Enron's former officers and directors would soon exhaust the insurance proceeds available to fund a settlement under Enron's officers & directors' liability insurance policies.

Consequently, in October, the plaintiffs reached a tentative settlement with the Enron board members that provided for payment of the remaining insurance proceeds ($200 million) under the O&D policies despite the fact that such a result would leave dozens of former Enron officers and directors not included in the settlement without insurance coverage for their defense costs. In addition, certain settling directors agreed to pay an additional total of $13 million out of their own pockets, which was essentially 10% of each such director's net gain from their Enron stock sales during the class period. The D&O liability insurers agreed to contribute $155 million toward the settlement, which exhausted the insurance coverage for the non-settling directors and officers.

With that agreement in principle in hand, Enron's outside directors in late October obtained an injunction against Enron's O&D liability insurers from the U.S. District Court in Houston that enjoined the insurers from using any further policy proceeds to pay defense costs of former Enron officers and directors pending the District Court's consideration of the proposed settlement. Since that time, the plaintiffs, the outside directors, and non-settling former Enron officers and directors such as Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling have cut a deal in which $13 million of the insurance proceeds will be set aside for their future defense costs in return for the non-settling officers and directors' consent to the outside directors' settlement. The class action plaintiffs will get $155 million of the remaining insurance proceeds under the settlement and $32 million of the proceeds has been earmarked in the settlement for the Enron bankruptcy estate. The settlement does not include many former Enron officers, including all former Enron officers who have either pleaded guilty to criminal charges or who are currently facing criminal charges.

The outside directors settlement is the fourth major settlement in the class action lawsuit that was commenced against Enron's former officers, directors, and financial institutions nearly three years ago on the heels of Enron's hyper-publicized accounting scandal. Including the latest settlement, the class action has generated just under $500 million, which is really rather paltry compared to the over $30 billion in damages that the plaintiffs have alleged in the class action.

Indeed, contrary to the generally laudatory press accounts relating to this and other settlements in cases such as Enron and WorldCom, the handling of the Enron class action by the plaintiffs' lead lawyers -- Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP -- has been subject to sharp criticism among professionals close to the case. The genesis of that criticism was the plaintiffs' lawyers alleged involvement in allowing a proposed $750 million settlement with Arthur Anderson slip away in early 2002 during the early stages while Anderson was still a going concern operation. In addition to the substantial settlement payment, that proposed settlement would have involved a resolution of the criminal charges against Anderson in a manner that would have allowed Anderson to continue in business as a major accounting firm, saving thousands of jobs in the process. When the proposed deal allegedly blew up in a dispute between the plaintiffs' lawyers and the financial institution defendants, Anderson's criminal trial went forward, resulting in the felony conviction of Anderson that prompted Anderson's demise as an accounting firm. Anderson remains a defendant in the Enron class action, but it is a virtual shell that no longer has the resources necessary to pay $750 million in either damages or a settlement in the Enron class action. Consequently, the plaintiff's lawyers appear to have left a considerable amount on the table, and have not made up for it yet.

Nevertheless, the plaintiffs in the class action are still seeking billions in damages from a large group of financial institutions for allegedly assisting Enron in defrauding shareholders and creditors. The financial institutions include J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., and Credit Suisse First Boston, to name just a few.

The Enron directors paying the total of $13 million out of their pockets are Robert Belfer, Norman Blake, Ronnie Chan, John Duncan, Joe Foy, Wendy Gramm, Robert Jaedicke, Charles LeMaistre, Rebecca Mark-Jubasche and Ken Harrison. The other directors covered by the settlement who are not required to pony up any money out their own pockets are Paulo Ferraz-Pererira, John Mendelsohn, Jerome Meyer, Frank Savage, John Urquhart, John Wakeham, Charles Walker and Herbert Winokur. As is typical in such deals, none of the directors are admitting any wrongdoing as part of the settlement, which still requires final court approval.
http://blog.kir.com/

FaGal · 09-01-05, 09:56

Ken Lay promotes his website

The Houston Chronicle's main Enron reporter -- Mary Flood -- weighs in today with this piece on how former Enron chairman and CEO Kenneth Lay is using sponsored links to direct websurfers to his website. Sponsored links appear prominently in searches for a word or name in an Internet search engine. They serve the dual purpose of making websites more noticeable and being a revenue source for search engines.

What are the chances that any prospective juror at Mr. Lay's criminal trial who admits to reading Mr. Lay's website will make in on the jury? Slim and none, in my view.
http://www.kenlayinfo.com/public/default.aspx

Avrà preso spunto da qui?

http://www.previti.it/

24-09-04, 20:54	#1 (permalink)
FaGal Member Data registrazione: Jul 2002 Messaggi: 21,553 Popolarità: 0	frodi enron Regalo report di Lamon Rutten (sovrintendente della commissione per commercio e sviluppo dell'ONU e responsabile dell'area commodities) sulle sofisticate tecniche di frode utilizzate da Enron nel trading delle commodities, con uso di derivati e non solo email@messaggiami.net oggetto: report frodi

Strumenti discussione
Visualizza versione stampabile Invia questa pagina via e-mail
Modalità visualizzazione	Valuta questa discussione
Modalità lineare Passa a modalità ibrida Passa a modalità elenco	Valuta questa discussione:

08-01-05, 11:05	#2 (permalink)
FaGal Member Data registrazione: Jul 2002 Messaggi: 21,553 Popolarità: 0	Enron Directors Reach $168M Settlement 01.07.2005, 08:42 PM Eighteen former directors of scandalized Enron Corp. have reached a $168 million settlement, including a $13 million payout out of some of their own pockets, with shareholders burned by the financial shenanigans that culminated in the company's stunning collapse. The agreement announced late Friday requires 10 of the former Enron directors to contribute a combined $13 million from the profits that they reaped from selling company stock before Enron revealed it had been grossly exaggerating its sales and profits. The debacle foreshadowed a wave of accounting scandals that sparked an overhaul of the country's corporate governance practices. The directors paying an unspecified amount of money are: Robert Belfer, Norman Blake, Ronnie Chan, John Duncan, Joe Foy, Wendy Gramm, Robert Jaedicke, Charles LeMaistre, Rebecca Mark-Jubasche and Ken Harrison, according to attorneys involved in the case. Other directors who aren't personally paying money but are nevertheless covered by the settlement are: Paulo Ferraz-Pererira, John Mendelsohn, Jerome Meyer, Frank Savage, John Urquhart, John Wakeham, Charls Walker and Herbert Winokur. None of the directors are admitting any wrongdoing as part of the settlement, which still requires final court approval. It represents the fourth major settlement negotiated by attorneys who filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of Enron's shareholders nearly three years ago. Including the latest settlement, the lawsuit so far has retrieved just under $500 million for shareholders in a debacle that helped spark a wave of new laws designed to improve corporate America's accounting practices. Enron's financial meltdown wiped out tens of billions in shareholder wealth. The latest settlement doesn't include two of Enron's former chief executives, Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling, both of whom face criminal charges for their alleged misconduct leading up to the company's late 2001 collapse. Andrew Fastow, who has pleaded guilty to engaging in illegal conspiracy while he was Enron's chief financial officer, also isn't a part of the settlement. Enron's shareholders are still seeking damages from a long list of other prominent defendants, including major banks and brokerages such as J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., and Credit Suisse First Boston for playing an alleged role in Enron's skullduggery. Forcing 10 of Enron directors to dig into their own pockets to part of the settlement was especially important, said William Lerach, an attorney representing University of California, the lead plaintiff in the shareholder suit. "Hopefully, this will send a message to corporate boardrooms of the importance of directors performing their legal duties," Lerach said. The University of California announced the settlement with the Enron directors on the same day that New York state Comptroller disclosed that 10 directors who presided over the fraudulent practices at Worldcom will personally contribute $18 million toward a settlement in that case. Enron's directors last year agreed to pay a combined $1.5 million of their money to resolve a U.S. Department of Labor lawsuit alleging the company had mismanaged its employees' retirement funds. Insurance companies will contribute $155 million toward the latest Enron settlement, exhausting the coverage for the company's directors and officers. http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2005/...ap1747478.html

08-01-05, 11:09	#3 (permalink)
FaGal Member Data registrazione: Jul 2002 Messaggi: 21,553 Popolarità: 0	The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari on Friday on Arthur Anderson's appeal of its conviction of felony criminal charges in connection with allegedly destroying and altering Enron Corp.-related documents. The Supreme Court will review this Firth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that upheld the former Big Five accounting firm's June 2002 conviction by a jury in a Houston federal court. The key issue in the case will be whether the jury instructions that U.S. District Judge Melinda Harmon approved during the trial were too vague and broad for jurors to determine whether Anderson's actions constituted obstruction of justice. The Justice Departent charged Anderson with obstruction of justice for its mass destruction of Enron-related documents in late 2001 as the Securities and Exchange Commission and Congressional Committees began investigating Enron's complicated financial structure. As we all know, Enron catapulted into bankruptcy in early December 2001 amid revelations of accounting schemes to mask debt and inflate profits. As Enron's auditor, Anderson contended that it was only implementing its document-retention policy that called for destroying unneeded documentation to streamline files. Andersen argued during trial that employees who shredded tons of documents followed the policy and there was no intent to undermine any investigation of Enron. Although an Anderson victory at the Supreme Court would be a Pyrrhic victory for the firm, this is a positive development for the Enron case in general. The Justice Department's prosecution of Anderson reflected an egregious lack of prosecutorial discretion -- the prosecution of Anderson ultimately caused the loss of thousands of jobs, most of which never had anything to do with Enron. Moreover, as noted here awhile back, the accounting industry has still not recovered from the Anderson fallout, and big business is finding it difficult to find enough auditors to fulfill the new Enron-era regulatory obligations. Thus, a Supreme Court reversal will not help Anderson much, but it just might send the right message to a Justice Department that increasingly appears oblivious to the negative economic impact that results from using criminal prosecutions to regulate customary business practices.

09-01-05, 09:56	#4 (permalink)
FaGal Member Data registrazione: Jul 2002 Messaggi: 21,553 Popolarità: 0	Enron outside directors settlement On the heels of this post earlier this week about the impending outside directors' settlement in the WorldCom case, this NY Times article reports on the impending $168 million settlement involving the class action securities fraud and related claims against eighteen former directors on Enron Corp.'s Board of Directors. Most of the settling directors were outside directors of Enron. This settlement has actually been in the works for several months as the class action plaintiffs' lawyers became concerned that the extraordinary defense costs of Enron's former officers and directors would soon exhaust the insurance proceeds available to fund a settlement under Enron's officers & directors' liability insurance policies. Consequently, in October, the plaintiffs reached a tentative settlement with the Enron board members that provided for payment of the remaining insurance proceeds ($200 million) under the O&D policies despite the fact that such a result would leave dozens of former Enron officers and directors not included in the settlement without insurance coverage for their defense costs. In addition, certain settling directors agreed to pay an additional total of $13 million out of their own pockets, which was essentially 10% of each such director's net gain from their Enron stock sales during the class period. The D&O liability insurers agreed to contribute $155 million toward the settlement, which exhausted the insurance coverage for the non-settling directors and officers. With that agreement in principle in hand, Enron's outside directors in late October obtained an injunction against Enron's O&D liability insurers from the U.S. District Court in Houston that enjoined the insurers from using any further policy proceeds to pay defense costs of former Enron officers and directors pending the District Court's consideration of the proposed settlement. Since that time, the plaintiffs, the outside directors, and non-settling former Enron officers and directors such as Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling have cut a deal in which $13 million of the insurance proceeds will be set aside for their future defense costs in return for the non-settling officers and directors' consent to the outside directors' settlement. The class action plaintiffs will get $155 million of the remaining insurance proceeds under the settlement and $32 million of the proceeds has been earmarked in the settlement for the Enron bankruptcy estate. The settlement does not include many former Enron officers, including all former Enron officers who have either pleaded guilty to criminal charges or who are currently facing criminal charges. The outside directors settlement is the fourth major settlement in the class action lawsuit that was commenced against Enron's former officers, directors, and financial institutions nearly three years ago on the heels of Enron's hyper-publicized accounting scandal. Including the latest settlement, the class action has generated just under $500 million, which is really rather paltry compared to the over $30 billion in damages that the plaintiffs have alleged in the class action. Indeed, contrary to the generally laudatory press accounts relating to this and other settlements in cases such as Enron and WorldCom, the handling of the Enron class action by the plaintiffs' lead lawyers -- Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP -- has been subject to sharp criticism among professionals close to the case. The genesis of that criticism was the plaintiffs' lawyers alleged involvement in allowing a proposed $750 million settlement with Arthur Anderson slip away in early 2002 during the early stages while Anderson was still a going concern operation. In addition to the substantial settlement payment, that proposed settlement would have involved a resolution of the criminal charges against Anderson in a manner that would have allowed Anderson to continue in business as a major accounting firm, saving thousands of jobs in the process. When the proposed deal allegedly blew up in a dispute between the plaintiffs' lawyers and the financial institution defendants, Anderson's criminal trial went forward, resulting in the felony conviction of Anderson that prompted Anderson's demise as an accounting firm. Anderson remains a defendant in the Enron class action, but it is a virtual shell that no longer has the resources necessary to pay $750 million in either damages or a settlement in the Enron class action. Consequently, the plaintiff's lawyers appear to have left a considerable amount on the table, and have not made up for it yet. Nevertheless, the plaintiffs in the class action are still seeking billions in damages from a large group of financial institutions for allegedly assisting Enron in defrauding shareholders and creditors. The financial institutions include J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., and Credit Suisse First Boston, to name just a few. The Enron directors paying the total of $13 million out of their pockets are Robert Belfer, Norman Blake, Ronnie Chan, John Duncan, Joe Foy, Wendy Gramm, Robert Jaedicke, Charles LeMaistre, Rebecca Mark-Jubasche and Ken Harrison. The other directors covered by the settlement who are not required to pony up any money out their own pockets are Paulo Ferraz-Pererira, John Mendelsohn, Jerome Meyer, Frank Savage, John Urquhart, John Wakeham, Charles Walker and Herbert Winokur. As is typical in such deals, none of the directors are admitting any wrongdoing as part of the settlement, which still requires final court approval. http://blog.kir.com/

09-01-05, 09:56	#5 (permalink)
FaGal Member Data registrazione: Jul 2002 Messaggi: 21,553 Popolarità: 0	Ken Lay promotes his website The Houston Chronicle's main Enron reporter -- Mary Flood -- weighs in today with this piece on how former Enron chairman and CEO Kenneth Lay is using sponsored links to direct websurfers to his website. Sponsored links appear prominently in searches for a word or name in an Internet search engine. They serve the dual purpose of making websites more noticeable and being a revenue source for search engines. What are the chances that any prospective juror at Mr. Lay's criminal trial who admits to reading Mr. Lay's website will make in on the jury? Slim and none, in my view. http://www.kenlayinfo.com/public/default.aspx Avrà preso spunto da qui? http://www.previti.it/

	Chi siamo- Pubblicità- Contatti- Disclaimer- Mappa- Credits
© 2000-2012 Browneditore S.p.A. - Tutti i diritti riservati. Prima di utilizzare anche parzialmente i contenuti di questo sito, vogliate cortesemente consultare il disclaimer.