Bank Secrecy Act

The New Measure of DOJ Seriousness: The Charges It Defers

In an article on the upcoming HSBC settlement, Reuters seems impressed with the fine the bank may pay for the assistance it gave to drug gangs and terrorists and other crooks by  laundering their money: $1.8 billion. It goes on to talk about “how big a signal” DOJ wants to send with this settlement.

The emphasis, of course, should be on that word “settlement.” One that will likely result in a Deferred Prosecution Agreement, in which no one gets charged, not even for the egregious conduct HSBC engaged in.

Because ultimately, Reuters is measuring this big signal by the seriousness of the criminal charges DOJ doesn’t file.

In regulatory filings, HSBC has said it could face criminal charges. But similar U.S. investigations have culminated in deferred prosecution deals, where law-enforcement agencies delay or forgo prosecuting a company if it admits wrongdoing, pays a fine and agrees to clean up its compliance systems. If the company missteps again, the Justice Department could prosecute.

[snip]

The agreements “have become a mainstay of white collar criminal law enforcement,” U.S. Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer said in September during an appearance at the New York City Bar Association.

“I’ve heard people criticize them and I’ve heard people praise them. DPAs have had a truly transformative effect on particular companies and, more generally, on corporate culture across the globe.”

If U.S. prosecutors agree to a deferred agreement, they still could wield a powerful legal tool by accusing the bank of laundering money.

That would be a much more serious charge than if prosecutors, in a deferred agreement, charged HSBC with criminal violations of the Bank Secrecy Act, a law that requires banks to maintain programs that root out suspicious transactions.

[snip]

A charge of money laundering would be a rare move by the Justice Department and would send a signal to other big banks that the agency is intent on cracking down on dirty money moving through the U.S. financial system. [my emphasis]

No, seriously. A legitimate report just said that DOJ will send “a signal” based on ratcheting up the seriousness of the crimes it makes disappear with one of Lanny Breuer’s flaccid DPAs. It will send “a signal” with the seriousness of the charges it will effectively excuse.

Heck. If we’re not going to really charge these banksters, why not add on murder or drug trafficking or terrorism charges, or any of the other crimes they abetted? That would really send “a signal” now, wouldn’t it, deferring even more serious charges that real people would do hard time for?

The Senate has already accused HSBC of money laundering. But mere accusations–even with promises to do better–do nothing.

No matter how serious a charge those accusations involve excusing.

Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz @KellyFlood3 Hey, went to Mejico the other day. Fantastic food....and reasonably priced too. Like that place!
9mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @KellyFlood3 Meh, can live w/o that tree, but it ripped up a key water feed pip in the process. No water in house until tomorrow am.
10mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @shenebraskan This one is toast. Has a date with a chainsaw.
12mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @samhusseini: Great summary: “@evakatrina: Bernie Sanders: We Need More #Saudi Intervention. Wait, *what*? http://t.co/dcSgow3KB9
20mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mczajko Not sure. Hopefully the latter.
29mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @CostaSamaras: Probably should include this and other needed resiliency investments in the social cost of carbon estimates. https://t.c…
31mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @BryanSmart One excuse for not prosecuting the banks is bc a lot of people would lose their job. Guess what? @Object_InSpace
34mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @BryanSmart Sure. Just like helping Al Qaeda get money for terrorism is against law. Lynch didn't prosecute HSBC for that @Object_InSpace
34mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @TiaRachel: @emptywheel When my mom was a kid & angry at her mother, she'd tear off all the 'do not remove' tags to get her in trouble.
43mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @jackalltogether When you do can you make Vox Dot Com to publish it? I have a feeling we all need to know this.
45mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Someday "click that you've read these when you haven't" ToS agreements will seem as foreign to people as those DO NOT REMOVE pillow labels.
48mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @jackalltogether But whose idea was it and why all the warnings abt removing them?
49mreplyretweetfavorite
August 2015
S M T W T F S
« Jul    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031