GoldmanSachs666 Message Board

Fraud*
According to the Collins English Dictionary 10th Edition fraud can be defined as: "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage".[1] In the broadest sense, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual; the related adjective is fraudulent. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction. Fraud is a crime, and also a civil law violation. Defrauding people or entities of money or valuables is a common purpose of fraud, but there have also been fraudulent "discoveries", e.g. in science, to gain prestige rather than immediate monetary gain
*As defined in Wikipedia

Occupy Wall Street News

Loading...

Sunday, May 6, 2012

Goldman Sachs Successfully Eludes "Fraud" Label

It is interesting to see how the government and the judicial system manage to keep from using the word "fraud" in relationship to the causes of the financial crisis.  While it is certain that fraud was at the heart of the reasons for The Great Recession, no one can seems able to pin it on a person who should pay the consequences.  There have been, and will be in the future, many more instances of avoiding the words that need to be said:  the banks committed fraud at the expense of the people.

Goldman Sachs Wins Dismissal of Some Claims in CIFG Suit
By Chris Dolmetsch - Bloomberg Businessweek

Goldman Sachs asked the court in October to dismiss six of the eight claims in the suit, arguing that CIFG was informed of the risks associated with the investments, failed to conduct due diligence on its own, and hasn’t sought contractual remedies that would allow it to seek the repurchase of certain loans.
New York State Supreme Justice O. Peter Sherwood, in an order filed today, granted Goldman Sachs’s motion to dismiss three counts, including one for fraudulent inducement, while denying the New York-based investment bank’s motion to dismiss three other claims for breach of contract. 
. . . .
  
“Obviously, we’re disappointed that the court dismissed the fraud charge, but we’ll consider our options going forward,” David Berger, a lawyer for CIFG, said in a phone interview. The insurer’s lawyers were still reviewing the ruling and hadn’t decided whether to appeal, he said.

Michael DuVally, a spokesman for Goldman Sachs, declined to comment on the ruling in an e-mail. 
Read the whole piece here 


0 COMMENTS:

Post a Comment