Monday, May 29, 2006
NAB’s unauthorised traders
Spot the difference/s:
‘This case demonstrates that senior employees who hold positions of trust and responsibility will be held accountable for any dishonest conduct and, especially where both the employer and shareholders are deceived, significant jail sentences will be imposed by the court.’
- Jeffrey Lucy, Chairman of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), 15 June 2005 (commenting on the 29 months imprisonment (16 months minimum) sentencing of Luke Duffy, former head of the NAB foreign currency options desk)
‘This case further demonstrates that employees who hold positions of trust and responsibility will be held accountable for any dishonest conduct and, especially where both the employer and shareholders are deceived, jail sentences will be imposed by the court.’
- Jeffrey Lucy, 6 April 2006 (commenting on the 16 months imprisonment (8 months minimum) sentencing of Gianni Gray, a former NAB foreign currency options trader
‘This result shows that senior employees who breach their duties as officers of a company can cause significant damage to the company’s interests and shareholder value. ASIC will not tolerate dishonest conduct by company officers, and as yesterday’s decision by the jury demonstrates, the community will not tolerate dishonest conduct either.’
- Jeffrey Lucy, 29 May 2006 (commenting on the finding of guilt against David Bullen and Vincent Ficarra, both former NAB foreign currency options traders (the two are currently in jail, awaiting what I predict will be formalised as a ~24 months imprisonment (~12 months minimum) sentence.
--
See them? (There are three.) Most obviously and inconsequentially, the first two mention “jail sentences” while the final one doesn’t (even though such is a foregone conclusion in practice). Second, is that Duffy (who was the immediate supervisor of the other three) received a “significant” jail sentence, while Gray got just an ordinary (“insignificant”?) jail sentence. Again, no great surprises there – one would expect the boss to get more time than an underling.
What is surprising, though is that the awaiting-sentencing duo (but not Gray) get the label “senior employee”. While this is patently untrue of both, it is ludicrously so in Vincent Ficarra’s case. The 27 years old Ficarra’s role with NAB was his first job after graduating from university, and the “dishonest” (of which more about later) conduct in question started not long after he did. (David Bullen, at 37 years old, is a year or so older than Duffy, his former supervisor, and Gray, his former colleague)
Having followed this case reasonably closely, my considered opinion is that the jailing of Ficarra, in particular, is/was a monstrous travesty. (As is, to a lesser extent, that of Bullen and Gray, who must be considered, more than Ficarra, part-architects of their own misfortunes: Bullen because he played the Buddhist-nutbar card in his (self-represented) defence, and Gray because he (stupidly, IMO) pleaded guilty).
There’s a lot more to be said about this case, including the presiding judge’s curious (IMO) instruction to the jury of what “dishonesty” meant in the relevant context.
But for now, I’ll leave off with this tidbit. If the Ficarra jailing is indeed a monstrous travesty, it is the presiding judge’s second such result in quick succession. In March, County Court judge Geoff Chettle let 44 y.o. child-rapist Cheryl Whittle off with a wholly suspended jail sentence.
The boy Whittle raped (now a man in his late 20s) was interviewed on “Today Tonight” last Thursday (25/5). Understandably, he is bitter about the light (/non-) sentence Whittle received. His explanation was that there must be a gender double-standard at work. With respect, I can’t agree with him: the only plausible reason, IMO for Whittle getting off is because she was/is a baby boomer – female Xer molesters have gone to jail for less culpable acts aginst minors than Whittle’s (same URL).
Spot the difference/s:
‘This case demonstrates that senior employees who hold positions of trust and responsibility will be held accountable for any dishonest conduct and, especially where both the employer and shareholders are deceived, significant jail sentences will be imposed by the court.’
- Jeffrey Lucy, Chairman of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), 15 June 2005 (commenting on the 29 months imprisonment (16 months minimum) sentencing of Luke Duffy, former head of the NAB foreign currency options desk)
‘This case further demonstrates that employees who hold positions of trust and responsibility will be held accountable for any dishonest conduct and, especially where both the employer and shareholders are deceived, jail sentences will be imposed by the court.’
- Jeffrey Lucy, 6 April 2006 (commenting on the 16 months imprisonment (8 months minimum) sentencing of Gianni Gray, a former NAB foreign currency options trader
‘This result shows that senior employees who breach their duties as officers of a company can cause significant damage to the company’s interests and shareholder value. ASIC will not tolerate dishonest conduct by company officers, and as yesterday’s decision by the jury demonstrates, the community will not tolerate dishonest conduct either.’
- Jeffrey Lucy, 29 May 2006 (commenting on the finding of guilt against David Bullen and Vincent Ficarra, both former NAB foreign currency options traders (the two are currently in jail, awaiting what I predict will be formalised as a ~24 months imprisonment (~12 months minimum) sentence.
--
See them? (There are three.) Most obviously and inconsequentially, the first two mention “jail sentences” while the final one doesn’t (even though such is a foregone conclusion in practice). Second, is that Duffy (who was the immediate supervisor of the other three) received a “significant” jail sentence, while Gray got just an ordinary (“insignificant”?) jail sentence. Again, no great surprises there – one would expect the boss to get more time than an underling.
What is surprising, though is that the awaiting-sentencing duo (but not Gray) get the label “senior employee”. While this is patently untrue of both, it is ludicrously so in Vincent Ficarra’s case. The 27 years old Ficarra’s role with NAB was his first job after graduating from university, and the “dishonest” (of which more about later) conduct in question started not long after he did. (David Bullen, at 37 years old, is a year or so older than Duffy, his former supervisor, and Gray, his former colleague)
Having followed this case reasonably closely, my considered opinion is that the jailing of Ficarra, in particular, is/was a monstrous travesty. (As is, to a lesser extent, that of Bullen and Gray, who must be considered, more than Ficarra, part-architects of their own misfortunes: Bullen because he played the Buddhist-nutbar card in his (self-represented) defence, and Gray because he (stupidly, IMO) pleaded guilty).
There’s a lot more to be said about this case, including the presiding judge’s curious (IMO) instruction to the jury of what “dishonesty” meant in the relevant context.
But for now, I’ll leave off with this tidbit. If the Ficarra jailing is indeed a monstrous travesty, it is the presiding judge’s second such result in quick succession. In March, County Court judge Geoff Chettle let 44 y.o. child-rapist Cheryl Whittle off with a wholly suspended jail sentence.
The boy Whittle raped (now a man in his late 20s) was interviewed on “Today Tonight” last Thursday (25/5). Understandably, he is bitter about the light (/non-) sentence Whittle received. His explanation was that there must be a gender double-standard at work. With respect, I can’t agree with him: the only plausible reason, IMO for Whittle getting off is because she was/is a baby boomer – female Xer molesters have gone to jail for less culpable acts aginst minors than Whittle’s (same URL).
