If you read about the evidence, you can’t really be surprised that Raj Rajaratnam was found guilty of insider trading. That he was found guilty on all counts was mildly interesting, but not much.
We may get some interesting new legal developments in insider trading law from the appellate decisions. But probably not. The case seems solid. It does not pose the more interesting legal analysis seen in the charges brought in some of the expert network case.
The most interesting aspect of Raj’s case is the government’s use of wiretaps and surveillance. The typical insider trading case relies on some extremely timely trades and a clear opportunity to have acquired knowledge about a significant corporate action. With Raj, his own voice betrayed him. The government was willing to spend considerable considerable effort to gather evidence.
Was it a legal victory? How do you measure success from a legal perspective?:
“We started out with 37 stocks, we’re down to 14,” defense attorney John Dowd said today after his client was found guilty on 9 counts of insider trading and 5 counts of conspiracy. “The score is 23 to 14 for the defense. We’ll see you in the Second Circuit.”
- Raj Rajaratnam’s High-Priced Legal Team Pleased With Thrilling 23-14 Victory in Dealbreaker
- Insider Trading 2011: How Technology and Social Networks Have ‘Friended’ Access to Confidential Information
- The Galleon Legacy: White-Collar Wiretaps by Dennis K. Berman in the Wall Street Journal
- Wall Street, Held Accountable in the New York Times opinion page