Deferred prosecution agreements slowing down...

-- MDT

Labels: attorney client privilege, deferred prosecution

The Ethical Corporation profiles SFO enforcement chief, Richard Alderman, and a regulatory agency reborn. Although, as the SFO begins to embrace U.S.-style plea bargaining, hasn't the U.S. abandoned these same tactics?

-- MDT

Labels: attorney client privilege, Ethical Corporation, Filip Memo, plea agreement, Richard Alderman, Serious Fraud Office

Good synopsis from the Wisconsin Law Journal.

While the changes detailed a few weeks back by Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip obviously insulate companies from some prosecutorial pressure, some continue to argue the changes don't go far enough.

You can read the new guidelines yourself, right here.

And for a bit of history - go memo crazy - (Holder, McNulty, KPMG, etc) you could so worse than this article from Law.com.

-- MDT

Labels: attorney client privilege, Filip Memo, mcnulty memo, prosecution guidelines, s

The measure would look to provide more stringent guidelines in how corporate monitorships (which can be highly lucrative arrangements) are selected in deferred prosecution agreements with companies under investigation. The Legal Times blog has further details. For background on some recent and controversial monitorship dust-ups, see here.

Labels: attorney client privilege, Corporate Monitorships, prosecution guidelines

That would be David Uhlman, former head of Environmental Crimes, speaking to the Corporate Crime Reporter.

Labels: attorney client privilege, David Uhlman, DOJ, prosecution

The GAO (The Daily Caveat loves the GAO) has been asked by members of Congress to take a look at the use of outside compliance monitors by the Justice Department in criminal investigations - specifically, the way in which contracts have been awarded and overseen.

Take, for example, the $50 million dollar contract offered to The Ashcroft Group (that would be former Attorney General, John Ashcroft for those of you playing at home) by U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie in New Jersey.

Congress is considering a bill that would allow it oversight of the deferred prosecution agreements (controversial in their own right) that often result in this type of, potentially lucrative government monitoring. See this lengthy piece from The Washington Post for more details.

-- MDT

Labels: Ashcroft Group, attorney client privilege, GAO, monitorships

Russel Mokhiber at The Corporate Crime Reporter has the details.

-- MDT

Labels: attorney client privilege, Corporate Crime Reporter, Haynes and Boone, Russell Mokhiber

The passage of H.R. 3013, The Attorney Client Privilege Act of 2007, means we're one step further in the ongoing trench warfare between corporate entities and regulation. For background on the bill, check out this post from October 9, 2007. Strange bedfellows on this particular issue, to say the least.

-- MDT

Labels: attorney client privilege, corporate investigation, pre-trial agreements

Interesting stuff via Bloomberg. on pending legislation that would curb the power of prosecutors investigating corporate crime. The main tool that appears to be in jeopard of coming off the table is the ability of prosecutors to demand that companies under investigation offer up confidential information in talks with their lawyers - waiving attorney client privilege in order to win leniency in plea deals.

This is not exactly a new bill, as some version of it has been floating around for a year at least. and folks have been planning for the demise of the Thompson memo era for a long while now, basically since it was written. They got a boost recently when district court judge Lewis Kaplan of the Southern District of New York found fault with the DOJ's actions in its prosecution of a group of former KPMG executives, which as lead to renewed efforts to get a bill passed to protect the sanctity of attorney client privilege.

Investors, well...less so.

-- MDT

Labels: attorney client privilege, corporate investigation, legislation, pre-trial agreements, Thompson memo