Broadcom options backdating indictment

Judge Carney’s decision is a case-hardened, bunker-buster, heat -seeking bomb — that hit the bulls-eye. Attorney Andrew Stolper, the lead prosecutor in the case, received particularly sharp criticism.Among other things, he cites the prosecutors for "intimidating and improperly influencing" witnesses, which "compromised the truth process and compromised the integrity of the trial"; for making improper leaks to the media; for improperly pressuring Broadcom to terminate Samueli; for obtaining an "inflammatory indictment" of Samueli; and crafting "an unconscionable plea agreement" with Samueli. Among other things, Judge Carney said that "the lead prosecutor somehow forget that truth is never negotiable." Of the case against Ruehle, Judge Carney said that to submit it to the jury "would make a mockery of Mr.The future of hundreds of companies and thousands of executives would hinge on that very point, as would Ruehle’s criminal trial.In 2010, Lie told New York Times’ Dealbook reporter Peter Lattman, “I never expected my study would lead to anything.There has been widespread news coverage of the dramatic December 15, 2009 decision of Central District of California Judge Cormac Carney to throw out the options backdating related criminal charges against Broadcom co-founder Henry T.Nicholas III and CFO William Ruehle, based on prosecutorial misconduct.

broadcom options backdating indictment-40broadcom options backdating indictment-42broadcom options backdating indictment-78

Ruehle and current or former officers of Irvine, Calif.-based Broadcom Corporation, engaged in a scheme to backdate stock options at the company from 1998 to 2003.

Yet, at the end of the day, the government only brought a handful of charges from all the investigations it opened.

This is a scenario we have seen repeatedly since the fall of Enron — the government does not want to be accused of being asleep at the switch (Enron) or of failing to notice and act upon obvious clues of misconduct (Madoff).

I strongly recommend taking a few minutes and reading the entire transcript (it is relatively short), because only a complete reading truly conveys the extent of Judge Carney’s censure.

His reproach of the prosecutors is comprehensive, extensive and scathing. Not by accident, as if he got a little angry and then got carried away. Judge Carney clearly and consciously intended to summon every molecule of the power of his position and marshalled every tool in the arsenal of language.