Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

U.S. Prepared to Drop Insider Trading Charges in IBM Deal: Filing

Prosecutors intend to drop the charges, saying the evidence “falls short” of the appellate court’s standards.

Tomasz Bidermann / Shutterstock

U.S. prosecutors said they are prepared to drop charges against five men accused of engaging in insider trading ahead of an IBM acquisition, citing an appellate court ruling that limited the ability of authorities to pursue such cases.

In an unusual letter late Wednesday, prosecutors in the office of U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan asked U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter to dismiss the indictment.

If Carter does so, Bharara’s office could appeal his ruling last week that the December appellate court decision applied to the case. The appellate ruling prompted the judge to throw out the guilty pleas of four of the five men.

But prosecutors said if Carter does not dismiss the indictment, they intend to drop the charges, saying the evidence “falls short” of the appellate court’s standards.

A hearing is scheduled for later Thursday. A Bharara spokeswoman declined comment.
The case was the latest affected by the ruling of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that reversed the insider trading convictions of hedge fund managers Todd Newman and Anthony Chiasson.

The 2nd Circuit held that prosecutors must prove a trader knew that the source of a tip received a benefit in exchange for the information. It also narrowed what constitutes a benefit, saying it cannot be only friendship.

On Friday, Bharara asked the appellate court to reconsider the ruling, saying it will limit the ability of authorities to pursue such cases. Before the decision, Bharara’s office had won the convictions of 86 people for insider trading since 2009.

In the IBM case, prosecutors said Michael Dallas, a lawyer at IBM’s law firm, in 2009 told Trent Martin, then an analyst at Royal Bank of Scotland Group, about IBM’s planned $1.2 billion acquisition of SPSS.

While Dallas expected his friend Martin not to tell anyone else, the analyst bought SPSS stock and told his roommate, then Euro Pacific Capital Inc trader Thomas Conradt.

Conradt told his colleagues, traders David Weishaus, Daryl Payton and Benjamin Durant, according to authorities.

Carter last week cited the 2nd Circuit ruling in tossing the guilty pleas of Martin, Conradt, Weishaus and Payton ahead of a Feb. 23 trial for Durant.

Prosecutors had argued that because the information in the IBM case was misappropriated from the lawyer and not provided directly, the appellate decision did not apply.

Larry Krantz, Martin’s attorney, said he was pleased by Bharara’s decision. James Roth, Payton’s lawyer, said he believed his client would be “vindicated.”

The case is U.S. v. Conradt, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 12-cr-00887.

(By Nate Raymond; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Jeffrey Benkoe)

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

See More:

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh