Michael Lewis Article on Goldman and Serge Aleynikov

[rwk]

In the battle between conflicting values, some people are more bothered by violations of fairness, and some by violations of loyalty. CalVolibrator and others seem to be in the latter camp.

Both fairness and loyalty are normal human values. Which is the more important is an entirely personal judgment. There will never be consensus.

That Aleynikov violated GS policy is not in dispute. That the federal charges were overreach would seem to be pretty clear as well. The appeals judge ruled, not that the prosecutor failed to prove his case, but that there never was a case to begin with. That's a pretty stinging rebuke to the prosecutor (and to GS). A junior assistant prosecutor, or any trained lawyer, should be able to figure out whether a law applies in a particular case.

GS can still sue Aleynikov, but compensation would be based on GS' loss.

As for Michael Lewis, he is a story teller, not an investigative journalist. Maybe he overreached with this story. I wasn't involved, so I don't know all the facts. We never do. There was at least one factual inaccuracy in the story, and a lot of unanswered questions.

 

[CalVolibrator]

interesting, according to your line of reasoning its now people like me who are a danger to society. I find it actually pretty sleek how you got there so smoothly.

There is a deterrent element in there when a dumb fatty burns her lips on a hot coffee and is awarded a million dollars for her incredible suffering. That you take no issue with. Why? Because a big corporation paid for which it does not make much of a difference? But you root for the guy who got couple more years for his crime than would have been just without any element of deterrence. Is that the application of justice you are talking about? That is how you define your sense of justifiability?

According to your logic we should show forgiveness to all criminal offenders and potentially let them go on the lose.

I think you are twisting my words quite a bit but let me answer your question very directly: No I do not think 8 years is unreasonably harsh. If a rapist is convicted to 5 years then I find it unreasonably lenient. But 8 years for corporate espionage and theft with criminal intent and personal enrichment is an offense that sound at least still within the bounds, especially given the fact that the deterrence was cited as one of the reasons for the ruling. You may disagree with that and I respect that but making it as if I display "dangerously low levels of empathy" sounds like you just graduated from a rhetorics and speech course and need to practice verbal persuasiveness.

Quote from Ghost of Cutten:

This implies that you don't pay attention to proportionality, rehabilitation, or justice. Remember there is a cost to incarceration, both for the state, the individual, and the friends & family of the individual, plus society from the loss of the felon's future contribution to society after release. Also, a criminal is only criminal to the extent of their crime - punishing them beyond this is (morally) criminal in itself, and in some cases can be worse than the original offense.

For example, what moral harm does a marijuana 'dealer' who sells a join to a friend do? And how does that harm compare to the harm inflicted by a 25 year sentence? There are many cases of people doing foolish acts, often in their youth, this does not mean they deserve, or that society benefits from, locking them up until they are old men. It is clear to me that you and the judge (or politican making the law, in the case of lack of sentencing discretion) are the criminal here, not the dealer.

Any deterrence element of a sentence should be no more than is necessary to deter, and should not become so long as to be clearly unjust, disproportionate, or destructive.

For example, using your logic, we could have capital punishment for littering, justified as a deterrent. Assuming you are not so stupid as to support that, you must give reasons. Presumably, the complete imbalance between harm caused by the crime, and harm caused by the punishment, is what would restrain you and make you recommend a more lenient sentence. So, ask yourself upon what principles you would base your recommended sentence. Then apply those to small-time marijuana users/'dealers' and see if you can still justify sentences greater than the average sentence for rape, child abuse, massacres of foreign civilians, 2nd degree murder etc. Obviously you can't.

To ignore this is to demonstrate dangerously low levels of empathy, compassion, and forgiveness (or to just have no logical reasoning ability, which I doubt is the case here). This makes for dishonourable, despicable, and dangerous men and women, who have no business being anywhere near law making or other areas of responsibility. A hanging judge is worse than the majority of criminals he puts away.

 

[CalVolibrator]

I cannot help it but feel you are the only one completely blind. If you truly fall for the rhetoric and complete change of facts presented by ML then I am very disappointed. That poor Russian deserves all of our support. You may actually donate to his family, I am sure they will shortly make an account number available. (or maybe not, given they had not the slightest issue to immediately post bail in the amount of 800,000 USD).

P.S.: On second thought and re-read of your post I am absolutely convinced you just smoked a big huge bong and would be int he position to even hug Saddam and Adolf right now).

Quote from Ghost of Cutten:

After reading the article, I feel sad that many of the people involved seem to have cared mostly about their narrow perceived self-interest and nothing about their duty to act in a humane way and to uphold principles of justice or fairness. In fact, I'm not sure I can even hold them responsible for this, they just seem genuinely blind to any sense of a greater cosmic whole or wider humanity. Without knowing more, I'm not sure whether this is a lack of education, the poor state of US or world society, or just intrinsic flaws in their own character. However other people in far more straitened circumstances and life background have shown much greater virtues so I don't really see that as an excuse.

Unfortunately the sad reality is that most people are scumbags at least in part. At least the writer, and the defendant's lawyer seem to retain some common decency. And it's nice to see that the 'felon' seems to have gained some great wisdom from this. In fact it would not surprise me if at some point in the future he does something significant, and more worthwhile than helping to engorge the vampire squid's blood funnel.

If I were in charge of Goldman Sachs I'd start seriously planning for the future survival of the firm. A bad reputation cannot be endured indefinitely without serious financial and legal consequences. There also serious flaws in the US legal system which come to light here.

Overall this is just one in a stream of news over recent years that makes quite clear progress, civilisation and enlightenment have a very long way to go, and there is a heck of a lot of work that needs to be done on it.

 

[CalVolibrator]

300 dollars (repeated offense or not) and 29 years? Please show us a reference anywhere because this story must have made national TV. I think you make up a big fuxxing BS story.

See, GhostOfCutten, you start to open the can of worms and not only worms but all sorts of insects and other low lives are crawling out of it. Buyer beware.

Quote from ElCubano:

I have a brother who is on his 22 yr of a 29 yr sentence (habitual offender). The judge got back at him because my brother committed the same crime while out on furlough. The judge was in an election year for a higher position, don't remember exactly which one. The story came out in the newspaper and the judge got back at my brother for this, he did not honor the plea agreement which is a CONTRACT. He was a crack addict and stole less than $300.00. We took it all the way up to 3DCA( in a motion 3.80) after lower courts judge said he was leaning towards my brother. He apparently didn't want to step on the state attorneys toes and sighted with them. Even though the State attorneys office did not show up to court 3 times...the judge rescheduled it 3 times. The state attorneys office had nothing and the judge still rules against my brother. The 3DCA didn't even bother to read the opinion and ruled in the states favor.

there is a lot more to this than I wrote. It would take me a book to write exactly.. this is the gist of it.

 

[ElCubano]

Quote from CalVolibrator:

300 dollars (repeated offense or not) and 29 years? Please show us a reference anywhere because this story must have made national TV. I think you make up a big fuxxing BS story.

See, GhostOfCutten, you start to open the can of worms and not only worms but all sorts of insects and other low lives are crawling out of it. Buyer beware.

Believe it or not. I think the posters who have been here long enough would know its a true story. Have a fantastic day holmes.

 

[RedDuke]

Quote from CalVolibrator:

300 dollars (repeated offense or not) and 29 years? Please show us a reference anywhere because this story must have made national TV. I think you make up a big fuxxing BS story.
....

Just google about repeated offenders' unjust prison terms. It is quite possible in CA for example. It is not the amount that matters, but the fact that they keep doing it.

 

[sle]

Quote from CalVolibrator:
I worked for 3 tier1 investment banks, and one tier2 bank each time on the prop trading side in a quant trading capacity.

Quote from CalVolibrator:
If trading houses have to come up with round-the-block truck driving and tanker leases to make a dime then I reckon profit margins must be razor thin, but that is just a wild guess never having had exposure to a commodities trading desk.

Time to create the next packaged derivative...

I don't get it. How could you work in the industry for a long time in any sort of senior trading capacity and yet have zero understanding of business areas outside your own domain? Are you sure you were a quant trader and not just a glorified programmer that jumped from shop to shop every couple years?

 

[CalVolibrator]

you are twisting what I said. I said I never worked at a commodities trading desk. And I learned programming pretty much from scratch when I entered my quant math grad school program. I entered as practitioner with trading experience while the majority of peers had CS backgrounds in one way or the other. There are firms such as Citi, especially in the Asian region, where traders or sales people over time rotate and get exposure to different products. 25 year Citi/Salomon dinosaurs, who have traded stocks, mortgages, US treasury securities and what have you, are not unheard of. That is not really the case at most other sell-side banks.

Quote from sle:

I don't get it. How could you work in the industry for a long time in any sort of senior trading capacity and yet have zero understanding of business areas outside your own domain? Are you sure you were a quant trader and not just a glorified programmer that jumped from shop to shop every couple years?

 

[Rationalize]

Quote from sle:

I don't get it. How could you work in the industry for a long time in any sort of senior trading capacity and yet have zero understanding of business areas outside your own domain? Are you sure you were a quant trader and not just a glorified programmer that jumped from shop to shop every couple years?

+1

I had his old user name on ignore for this reason.

 

[CalVolibrator]

thanks for that stamp of approval but I judge my programming skills as being way below that of any developer who passes the interviews to work on sell-side or hedge fund financial trading applications. I understand enough to direct a team of programmers, one on-site, others remotely and on contract basis and enough to decide on which key technologies to utilize.

By the way, hardly anyone who specializes in equities or equity derivatives would ever touch fx, commodities or OISs, for example and vice versa. What I mentioned about Citi is a very rare exception. Only shows it is you guys who do not have the slightest inkling. This site is so full of dropouts, wannabees, and bullshitters, I would not use it for anything but a good laugh and the occasional rant.

P.S.: And seriously, anyone who gives a rat's ass whether that Russian dude got 5,8, or 20 years clearly demonstrates that they are not a front-office producer but a back office lemming. And I guess one previous poster is right, I display an extremely low empathy for charlatans, convicts, thieves, and wannabees who pretend to be someone they are not.

Quote from Rationalize:

+1

I had his old user name on ignore for this reason.