Friday, May 25, 2012

eDiscovery Cautionary Tales: Inadvertent Disclosure Leaves Naked Short Selling Practices Exposed



http://ow.ly/b98B0

An article by Doug Austin posted on the eDiscovery Daily Blog.

This article discusses a litigation in which Overstock.com accused Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch of the practice of "naked short selling" in order to allegedly lower the value of Overstock's stock price.

The article references other articles about this litigation, and provides links to an un-redacted piece of evidence which was apparently inadvertently produced by counsel for Goldman Sachs. The un-redacted version of the document was allegedly kept secret by the defendants, and certainly will cause some concern regarding the act of naked short selling.

The article states, "Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone provides a commentary regarding information contained in the filing (language warning!), as follows:

“Now, however, through the magic of this unredacted document, the public will be able to see for itself what the banks’ attitudes are not just toward the “mythical” practice of naked short selling (hint: they volubly confess to the activity, in writing), but toward regulations and laws in general.

“Fuck the compliance area – procedures, schmecedures,” chirps Peter Melz, former president of Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corp. (a.k.a. Merrill Pro), when a subordinate worries about the company failing to comply with the rules governing short sales.

We also find out here how Wall Street professionals manipulated public opinion by buying off and/or intimidating experts in their respective fields. In one email made public in this document, a lobbyist for SIFMA, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, tells a Goldman executive how to engage an expert who otherwise would go work for “our more powerful enemies,” i.e. would work with Overstock on the company’s lawsuit.”"


No comments:

Post a Comment