The Anglo Irish Tapes

listermint

Scofflaw wrote: »

Willing to bet that there's absolutely nothing criminal in getting a bailout from the Central Bank under false pretences? Probably not even covered under any legislation.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Would defrauding the state regulator with a sum so vast that it has the potential to bring down its entire financial sector not constitute " war against the State" ?

Hedgemeister

I wonder which one of these two guys taped the conversation - or was the phone bugged?
Meanwhile, now would be a good time to quietly release some Budget bad news.

listermint

Hedgemeister wrote: »

I wonder which one of these two guys taped the conversation - or was the phone bugged?
Meanwhile, now would be a good time to quietly release some Budget bad news.

All calls internally in the bank are recorded on the banks own phone system.

Scofflaw

listermint wrote: »

Would defrauding the state regulator with a sum so vast that it has the potential to bring down its entire financial sector not constitute " war against the State" ?

Only in the very loosest sense - far too loose to pass muster in court. I really can't see what you could actually make stick, legally. It's not actually fraud. About the best you could do is focus on the lack of intent to pay back - but we don't know the form the contract for 'bridging loan' took. I'm presuming there is such a contract, and I guess you could make a civil case for bad faith, but nothing criminal.

And you can't pass retrospective criminalisation.

cordially,
Scofflaw

who_me

"Taking to the streets" isn't going to happen. For whatever reason - perhaps because we had a period of relative stability and wealth, who knows? - we've lost the culture of protest. Honestly, I'd feel like a bit of dick walking down the main street in the city, placard in hand, if there are only a few dozen others doing likewise. Pathetic maybe, but true.

Perhaps (very marginally) more likely - a national shutdown. Everyone just doesn't go to work for one day. No buses, trains, flights; shops & offices closed, emergency services only. Extremely unlikely still, but the Government couldn't just ignore it; given the economic ramifications of such a protest.

listermint

Scofflaw wrote: »

Only in the very loosest sense - far too loose to pass muster in court. I really can't see what you could actually make stick, legally. It's not actually fraud. About the best you could do is focus on the lack of intent to pay back - but we don't know the form the contract for 'bridging loan' took. I'm presuming there is such a contract, and I guess you could make a civil case for bad faith, but nothing criminal.

And you can't pass retrospective criminalisation.

cordially,
Scofflaw

On this point im interested on the interpretation that is not fraud ?

TheFOB

listermint wrote: »

Would defrauding the state regulator with a sum so vast that it has the potential to bring down its entire financial sector not constitute " war against the State" ?

Maybe they could be tried under Sec 10 or 11 of the Criminal Justice Act 2001.

Section 10.—(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he or she dishonestly, with the intention of making a gain for himself or herself or another, or of causing loss to another—

(a) destroys, defaces, conceals or falsifies any account or any document made or required for any accounting purpose,

(b) fails to make or complete any account or any such document, or

(c) in furnishing information for any purpose produces or makes use of any account, or any such document, which to his or her knowledge is or may be misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular.

...

(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on conviction on indictment to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or both.

Section 11.—(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he or she dishonestly, with the intention of making a gain for himself or herself or another, or of causing loss to another, destroys, defaces or conceals any valuable security, any will or other testamentary document or any original document of or belonging to, or filed or deposited in, any court or any government department or office.

...

(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on conviction on indictment to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or both.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0050/

Einhard

So what are people going to do??

Seriously, apologies for the large font, but all this moaning and carping is going to amount to SFA if there is no prosecution, or serious criminal investigation. We need to make our voices heard in this, byt taking to the streets en masse to express our fury. It's easy to ignore the outrage of people online, far more difficult when it's outside on the streets. I'm not one for protesting and marching for the sake of it, but this certainly warrants. I don't want these f*ckers hung, drawn, and quartered or whatever, but I do want them judged by their peers in court, and hopefully receive a very servere penalty. Most people want this, and the way to ensure we're taken seriously is to get out onto the streets and vent out frustration.

I'm not in Ireland at the moment, but am home in a few weeks, and would gladly give up some time to join a proper protest.

steddyeddy

Link from the Gaurdian newspaper about the two gangsters. Like other articles from abroad it highlights our lack of justice.

A top banker with the financial institution that almost bankrupted Ireland boasted that he had picked the figure of €7bn
(£5.9bn) they told the Irish government was needed to rescue the Anglo Irish Bank "out of his arse".


Taped phone calls between two senior executives at Anglo Irish have
compounded suspicions in the Republic that bankers lured the then Fianna Fáil
led government during the crash of September 2008 into a costly financial trap
by saving the debt-stricken bank with public money.


In the end the Irish taxpayer was forced to hand over €30bn to save Anglo
Irish Bank from collapse and resulted in the state going cap in hand to the
International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank and the EU to save the
country from national bankruptcy.


The bank's audio recordings – obtained by The Irish Independent – are of
conversations between two senior Anglo Irish managers in September 2008, John
Bowe and Peter Fitzgerald. Initially the bank had asked Ireland's central Bank
for €7bn to prop up its parlous finances following the Irish property crash.
Critics of the bailout have insisted Anglo Irish bank executives always knew
that the figure would be far higher – ultimately more than four times
higher.


On tape Fitzgerald asks Bowe how did he arrive at the figure of €7bn to which
the latter replies: "Just as Drummer [the then Anglo Irish Bank CEO David Drumm
now in exile and disgrace in Boston] would say, 'picked it out my arse.'"


The conversation also tends to back up the view that Anglo Irish bankers knew
that €7bn would never be enough to save the bank but once they had hoodwinked
the Dublin government the taxpayer would keep picking up the tab.


In their exchange Bowe says: "Yeah, and that number is seven, but the reality
is that actually we need more than that. But you know the strategy here is you
pull them in, you get them to write a big cheque and they have to keep, they
have to have support their money, you know."


On the Irish government getting entrapped by Anglo, Bowe adds: "If they say,
if they saw the enormity of it up front, they might decide, they might decide
they have a choice. You know what I mean? They might say the cost to the
taxpayer is too high. But ... em ... if it doesn't look big at the outset ... if
it looks big, big enough to be important, but not too big that it kind of spoils
everything, then then I think you have a chance."


The two bankers are also heard laughing and joking at a time when the bank
was tottering on the brink of destruction. They are heard saying they hope the
bank is nationalised so "we'd keep our jobs".


Bowe who was approached over the weekend about the 2008 conversations claimed
the remarks were "off-the-cuff comments" and denied he was trying to mislead the
state with underestimated figures.


Fitzgerald released a statement through his solicitor stating that "I am not
nor have I ever been aware of a strategy or intention on the part of the Anglo
Irish Bank to mislead authorities in relation to the forecasted funding position
of Anglo Irish Bank."


Despite the pair's denials, the taped conversations at a critical time in the
toxic bank's history will increase the pressure for a full parliamentary inquiry
into the bank rescue deal which cost the taxpayer a further €30bn after two
other debt-ridden banks, the Bank of Ireland and Allied Irish Bank had to be
saved from collapse.


Unlike the United States, no senior Irish banker has gone to jail or been
found guilty in any court so far. The leading lights in Anglo, once regarded as
masters of the financial universe who kept fuelling the Celtic Tiger, are now
among the most hated figures in the Republic's history.


Anglo Irish Bank epitomised the rise and ignominious fall of the Celtic Tiger
economy. It was the preferred lender for property speculators and builders.
Among its stellar business clients was Ireland's one-time richest man Sean Quinn
who borrowed hundreds of millions of euros from Anglo Irish to fund the building
of a worldwide property which has since melted away. Quinn's gambling with Anglo
Irish's loans resulted in him being made bankrupt and finally jailed for failing
to hand over assets to the bank once it was nationalised.

charlemont

Boombastic wrote: »

'call in the Gardas says FF'..is the headline on RTE News at one,


Are the Gardai not already on the case?

Scofflaw wrote: »

Willing to bet that there's absolutely nothing criminal in getting a bailout from the Central Bank under false pretences? Probably not even covered under any legislation.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Your normally on the ball when it comes to these things and I'd say your right again..

gobnaitolunacy

who_me wrote: »

"Taking to the streets" isn't going to happen. For whatever reason - perhaps because we had a period of relative stability and wealth, who knows? - we've lost the culture of protest. Honestly, I'd feel like a bit of dick walking down the main street in the city, placard in hand, if there are only a few dozen others doing likewise. Pathetic maybe, but true.

Perhaps (very marginally) more likely - a national shutdown. Everyone just doesn't go to work for one day. No buses, trains, flights; shops & offices closed, emergency services only. Extremely unlikely still, but the Government couldn't just ignore it; given the economic ramifications of such a protest.

Yup, mention the 'A' word and the streets are full of protesters and people threatened with getting burned out.:rolleyes:

That's where peoples' priorities lie in this country.

steddyeddy

Einhard wrote: »

So what are people going to do??

Seriously, apologies for the large font, but all this moaning and carping is going to amount to SFA if there is no prosecution, or serious criminal investigation. We need to make our voices heard in this, byt taking to the streets en masse to express our fury. It's easy to ignore the outrage of people online, far more difficult when it's outside on the streets. I'm not one for protesting and marching for the sake of it, but this certainly warrants. I don't want these f*ckers hung, drawn, and quartered or whatever, but I do want them judged by their peers in court, and hopefully receive a very servere penalty. Most people want this, and the way to ensure we're taken seriously is to get out onto the streets and vent out frustration.

I'm not in Ireland at the moment, but am home in a few weeks, and would gladly give up some time to join a proper protest.

Well I'll be leaving the country again in two years and probraby for good. I just tell people abroad that Ireland is a very corrput country and gangsters like these get off again and again while wasters spout the mantra "protesting doesn't solve anything".

Or we can actually protest. Something which I would be ver much in favour of doing.

steddyeddy

charlemont wrote: »

Your normally on the ball when it comes to these things and I'd say your right again..

Does it matter even if they did break a law? Look at Haughey and his family. Look at Lowry. This is Ireland lest we forget.

harris33

they should be brought to justice,its treason,scum brought misery on this lands hard working people,,stripped of all their assets,garda custody is the safest place for these traitors

charlemont

steddyeddy wrote: »

Does it matter even if they did break a law? Look at Haughey and his family. Look at Lowry. This is Ireland lest we forget.

Sadly you are right, Jack shít will happen..

dissed doc

fred funk }{ wrote: »

Surly that's enough evidence for them to see prison.

If you owe more than €5 million, then conspiracy to defraud the state is not an offence (Ref: the FUIRL Act 2009).

LowOdour

If what was aired on the radio this morning is worst that comes out in the tapes then its probably a non-story as im not sure how it would stand up in a court of law....sure could have just been abit of banter!!

This is just another notch on the bedpost of those that have been f*cking us over the last 10 years.

Boombastic

dissed doc wrote: »

If you owe more than €5 million, then conspiracy to defraud the state is not an offence (Ref: the FUIRL Act 2009).

FUIRL ACT 2009..Gogole throws up nothing.

harris33

LowOdour wrote: »

If what was aired on the radio this morning is worst that comes out in the tapes then its probably a non-story as im not sure how it would stand up in a court of law....sure could have just been abit of banter!!

This is just another notch on the bedpost of those that have been f*cking us over the last 10 years.

well a bit of banter has caused alot of pain,they should be brought to account:mad:

mikom

Boombastic wrote: »

FUIRL ACT 2009..Gogole throws up nothing.

Fuck u Ireland.

listermint

LowOdour wrote: »

If what was aired on the radio this morning is worst that comes out in the tapes then its probably a non-story as im not sure how it would stand up in a court of law....sure could have just been abit of banter!!

This is just another notch on the bedpost of those that have been f*cking us over the last 10 years.

great comment :rolleyes:, have you listened to the tapes .... try doing that first. They are readily available.

Grandpa Hassan

I am amazed that at that stage they were still using the dealing room phones. They would have known they were recorded. Should have used their blackberrys. Shows that it did not even register that what they were doing was out of order. I mean, a senior exec saying 'out of my arse' about the €7bn on a recorded line!? How did he not realise that that might come back to bite him in that very same arse!

Grandpa Hassan

listermint wrote: »

great comment :rolleyes:, have you listened to the tapes .... try doing that first. They are readily available.

He is right though. If you tried to use those tapes to get a conviction, a highly paid defence lawyer would drive an 18 wheel truck through the hole in the prosecution's argument, on the basis that it was just banter and macho posturing

Boombastic

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

I am amazed that at that stage they were still using the dealing room phones. They would have known they were recorded. Should have used their blackberrys. Shows that it did not even register that what they were doing was out of order. I mean, a senior exec saying 'out of my arse' about the €7bn on a recorded line!? How did he not realise that that might come back to bite him in that very same arse!

Arrogance

Leslie91

listermint wrote: »

This thread is bigger than you. get over it.



Anyway back on topic.


I am hopeful now that we will have a sustained and open back lash against the government about this matter.

The present Govt were not in charge at the time. Nobody was.

TheFOB

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

He is right though. If you tried to use those tapes to get a conviction, a highly paid defence lawyer would drive an 18 wheel truck through the hole in the prosecution's argument, on the basis that it was just banter and macho posturing

But it shows they purposly withheld information from the State to get the taxpayer to give them the initial €7b. It's Fraud and punishable by up to 10 years.

Hannibal Smith

We had a news story a couple of days ago reporting that banks are closing the net on mortgage arrears...reducing it to 2 months or something. And a few days later there's this...and still it all just swings around and we suffer the consequences. Kenny said he would sort this. ..he would renegotiate the loan and ease the burden on the tax payer.

I would love a statement from him telling of the next plan of action. ...I dont care about policy or procedure. ..we surely deserve some sort of assurance that these people are going to be prosecuted for the turmoil they created?

listermint

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

He is right though. If you tried to use those tapes to get a conviction, a highly paid defence lawyer would drive an 18 wheel truck through the hole in the prosecution's argument, on the basis that it was just banter and macho posturing

Hardly.. when they are clearly explaining that they were getting the regulator on the line so they would be hooked in to spend more, and they clearly outlined that the 7 billion was made up and the tax payer would be in for more.

there is nothing macho posturing about it, its conspiring to defraud. Which is exactly how it sounded. Their stupid jokes aside. Its like the end of a bond movie where the villains outline their entire plan.

noodler

Scofflaw wrote: »

Only in the very loosest sense - far too loose to pass muster in court. I really can't see what you could actually make stick, legally. It's not actually fraud. About the best you could do is focus on the lack of intent to pay back - but we don't know the form the contract for 'bridging loan' took. I'm presuming there is such a contract, and I guess you could make a civil case for bad faith, but nothing criminal.

And you can't pass retrospective criminalisation.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Unfortunately I am also no expert once we get into legal issues.

I can only hope there is something stronger than a non-enforceable code of ethics or conduct that can be used against them.

Those two men should have told the Government straight out. It was above their pay grade, they weren't involved in the negotiations, but they refused to forward information to the State in order to make/maintain financial gain.

Grandpa Hassan

TheFOB wrote: »

But it shows they purposly withheld information from the State to get the taxpayer to give them the initial €7b. It's Fraud and punishable by up to 10 years.

I agree. But any case would have to be based on what they actually told the Central bank (which would be detailed in the central bank minutes of the meetings), not a phone call between an exec and another member of staff (albeit senior) who had zero involvement in the discussions.

It is not like it is a phone call between two board members, deciding on a strategy to take to the central bank. It is one involved party shooting the breeze with a non involved party. And thus would be shot down in a court, I would imagine