A financial firm or any other defendant doesn’t allow a tolling agreement out of the goodness of its heart. It comes out of a negotiated process. The prosecutor gets to stop the clock on the statute of limitations but must give up something in return. Maybe they’re given the opportunity to stop Schneiderman from filing a case at all, or maybe they’ve moved immediately to the settlement phase. Or maybe Schneiderman got the tolling agreement in exchange for agreeing not to prosecute or name any individuals in the cases. A tolling agreement isn’t free, in other words. And it would be good to know the cost of this.
|By: David Dayen Friday October 5, 2012 10:40 am|
|By: David Dayen Tuesday October 2, 2012 6:10 am|
The delay in bringing the case cost tens of billions of potential exposure for JPMorgan Chase. And more than anything, the lack of federal participation in the suit shows that the federal agencies involved in the task force are simply disinterested in prosecution, forcing Schneiderman to cobble together an off-the-shelf suit from other sources to make it look like this move against the banks represents anything real. The timing, one month before voters go to the polls in the Presidential election, is similarly obvious.
|By: David Dayen Friday July 13, 2012 8:35 am|
For a separate story (stay tuned!), I spoke yesterday with Rep. Brad Miller (D-NC), a member of the House Financial Services Committee. And while I had him, I asked him about that assembly of housing groups yesterday, all of whom pointed to the Justice Department as the culprit for the lack of progress on investigations from the RMBS working group, the task force supposed to be probing securitization abuses during the housing bubble.
|By: David Dayen Friday April 13, 2012 8:20 am|
The Justice Department has responded to allegations that they have not staffed the RMBS working group, the division within their financial fraud task force co-chaired by Eric Schneiderman which is supposed to investigate and prosecute banks for securitization fraud.
|By: Jim White Friday November 5, 2010 1:30 pm|
As bmaz has pointed out in language blunt enough that one presumes even the willfully obtuse Holder Justice Department might understand it, many of us are bearing witness to investigator John H. Durham intentionally allowing the statute of limitations to expire on Jose Rodriguez’s crime of destroying videotaped evidence of torture. Marcy Wheeler’s torture timeline links to the documentation that the tape destruction occurred on November 8, 2005. The five year statute of limitations on that charge will expire in just a few days. Further, my understanding of the timeline is that the last known waterboardings took place in March, 2003. Some aspects of the torture statutes carry an eight year statute of limitations, so that deadline for waterboarding prosecutions will expire in just a few months. However, with over a hundred deaths of prisoners during US interrogations, there are a number of potential murder charges that are not subject to a statute of limitations.