The Criminal Complaints
On August 9, 2013, a U.S. Attorney filed criminal complaints against Javier Martin-Artajo and Julien Grout, two JPM employees involved in the case. The complaints, filed under seal, were prepared by a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and approved by two Assistant U.S. Attorneys. The government charged the traders with conspiracy to falsify books and records, commit wire fraud, and falsify filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). On August 14, the complaints were unsealed. (U.S.A. v. Martin-Artajo and U.S.A. v. Grout, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, Case Nos. 1:13-mj-1975 and 1976.)
On August 9, 2013, a U.S. Attorney filed criminal complaints against Javier Martin-Artajo and Julien Grout, two JPM employees involved in the case. The complaints, filed under seal, were prepared by a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and approved by two Assistant U.S. Attorneys. The government charged the traders with conspiracy to falsify books and records, commit wire fraud, and falsify filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). On August 14, the complaints were unsealed. (U.S.A. v. Martin-Artajo and U.S.A. v. Grout, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, Case Nos. 1:13-mj-1975 and 1976.)
The Civil Complaint
On August 14, the SEC filed a civil complaint against Martin-Artajo and Grout. The SEC charged them with violations of federal securities laws and regulations. (SEC v. Martin-Artajo and Grout, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 1:13-cv-5677.)
On August 14, the SEC filed a civil complaint against Martin-Artajo and Grout. The SEC charged them with violations of federal securities laws and regulations. (SEC v. Martin-Artajo and Grout, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 1:13-cv-5677.)
The Indictment
On September 16, a federal grand jury issued a five-count indictment against Martin-Artajo and Grout. They were charged with: conspiracy to falsify books and records, commit wire fraud, make false filings with the SEC, and commit securities fraud; false books and records; wire fraud; false filings with the SEC; and securities fraud. (U.S.A. v. Martin-Artajo and Grout, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 1:13-cr-707.)
On September 16, a federal grand jury issued a five-count indictment against Martin-Artajo and Grout. They were charged with: conspiracy to falsify books and records, commit wire fraud, make false filings with the SEC, and commit securities fraud; false books and records; wire fraud; false filings with the SEC; and securities fraud. (U.S.A. v. Martin-Artajo and Grout, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 1:13-cr-707.)
According to a September 18 letter from an Assistant U.S Attorney to the judge in the case, Martin-Artajo was arrested in August in Spain, and a request to extradite him to the U.S. was pending. The letter also said Grout was residing in France, where he remained a fugitive.
The "London Whale"
The headline of the April 2012 WSJ article was "London Whale Rattles Debt Market." The article identified Bruno Iksil as the JPM London employee whose huge volume of trades in credit derivatives roiled the market. The case became widely known as the "London Whale" case.
The headline of the April 2012 WSJ article was "London Whale Rattles Debt Market." The article identified Bruno Iksil as the JPM London employee whose huge volume of trades in credit derivatives roiled the market. The case became widely known as the "London Whale" case.
Iksil has not been charged. He is cooperating with the prosecutors in their investigation. He is not mentioned by name in the criminal complaints, the civil complaint, or the indictment. In the criminal complaints and the civil complaint, he is called a "cooperating witness." In the indictment, he is called a "co-conspirator."
Conclusion
The JPM case is not directly related to insurance, but it contains important lessons for persons interested in the welfare of the insurance industry. I think such persons should follow developments in the case.
The JPM case is not directly related to insurance, but it contains important lessons for persons interested in the welfare of the insurance industry. I think such persons should follow developments in the case.