April 27, 2024

DealBook: A Trader, an F.B.I. Witness, and Then a Suicide

Agents seizing materials in November from a Boston building housing three hedge funds.Brian Snyder/ReutersAgents in Boston last fall conducting one of three simultaneous raids on large hedge funds.

In a Manhattan courtroom last week, federal prosecutors played for a jury a secretly recorded telephone conversation between two Wall Street traders exchanging stock tips.

Two days later, one of those traders, Ephraim G. Karpel, hanged himself in his Fifth Avenue office, according to a law enforcement official.

Mr. Karpel was never charged with any wrongdoing, and until last week his name had not emerged in connection with the government’s vast investigation of insider trading.

Yet while working for a New York commodities firm, he had agreed in 2008 to cooperate with federal authorities, and for about a year he taped conversations with fellow traders, according to two people with direct knowledge of the matter who insisted on anonymity to discuss it.

“The government’s investigation changed his life forever and was his unraveling,” Fran Karpel, his wife, said in a telephone interview from her home in Livingston, N.J. “He sank deeper and deeper into a hole and couldn’t see a way out.”

Federal prosecutors’ increasingly aggressive and public stance in pursuing insider trading has led to headline-grabbing convictions and stepped-up compliance procedures at hedge funds.

But behind the scenes, the government’s hardball investigative tactics — using surveillance, pressuring witnesses and raiding offices — have also spawned a culture of fear on Wall Street and affected the lives of many who have not been accused of any crimes.

Whether the investigation played a role in Mr. Karpel’s death cannot be known. He had been depressed after losing his job, his wife said, and other factors may have contributed.

But according to Ms. Karpel, his death at age 50 came three years after a pair of agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation approached him outside the Applejack Diner, on the corner of 55th Street and Broadway. The agents took him inside the restaurant and, seated at a table toward the back, told him they had evidence of his involvement in an insider trading network.

The government’s supposed evidence included a telephone conversation between Mr. Karpel and Zvi Goffer, a trader whose phone the F.B.I. had tapped.

On the call, recorded on Dec. 31, 2007, Mr. Karpel told Mr. Goffer that the drugstore chain Walgreens had made an offer to acquire Matria Healthcare.

“I’ve got the trade for the month of January for you,” Mr. Karpel said, according to a transcript of the call. “It’s coming from a banker.”

That call was one of more than 20 wiretapped conversations played during Mr. Goffer’s two-month trial, which is now in jury deliberations.

The Walgreens deal never happened, but the recorded conversation led federal authorities to approach Mr. Karpel and seek his help in building insider trading cases. It is unclear how investigators thought that Mr. Karpel could help them.

“Ephraim was a very popular guy and knew a lot of people,” his wife said. “He always called it a fishing expedition.”

Indeed, Mr. Karpel had many Wall Street connections. He worked for 18 years at Mutual Shares, an investment firm run by the fund manager Michael F. Price, rising to the position of head trader. Mr. Karpel then left Mutual Shares to work as an analyst, a job he considered more cerebral and respectable.

He developed an expertise in metals and mining stocks. After a stint at P. Schoenfeld Asset Management, Mr. Karpel joined Tigris Financial Group, a commodities firm run by the investor Thomas S. Kaplan.

None of Mr. Karpel’s former employers has been accused of any wrongdoing.

Over the past two years, the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan, which has led the federal investigative effort in this area, has charged 49 people with insider trading crimes. Thirty-nine of them have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury, including Raj Rajaratnam, the billionaire hedge fund manager.

But the federal authorities’ techniques have rarely been seen on Wall Street before.

Late last year, F.B.I. agents conducted three simultaneous raids of large hedge funds. Two of those funds have since closed. And for the first time in an insider trading inquiry, the government has been using wiretaps — a method typically reserved for drug crimes and organized crime cases — to record the telephone conversations of Wall Street traders.

In one instance, the government came under official criticism for its wiretap practices. Earlier this year, Judge Richard J. Sullivan rebuked law enforcement officials for monitoring an intimate call between a trader and his wife, a conversation that was not germane to the trader’s case.

“The court is deeply troubled by this unnecessary, and apparently voyeuristic, intrusion,” wrote Judge Sullivan, a federal judge in Manhattan.

It was wiretaps that led the F.B.I. to confront Mr. Karpel on the street.

After the encounter, Mr. Karpel retained Daniel R. Alonso, then a partner at the law firm Kaye Scholer, who advised Mr. Karpel to cooperate with the government.

Mr. Alonso, now the chief assistant district attorney for Manhattan, would neither confirm nor deny that he had represented Mr. Karpel, citing legal ethics rules. Representatives of the F.B.I. and the United States attorney in Manhattan declined to comment.

Ms. Karpel said Mr. Alonso had counseled her and her husband to keep Mr. Karpel’s cooperation with the government quiet.

“Our lawyer said, ‘You can only discuss this with me, your rabbi or your therapist,’ ” Ms. Karpel said. “We didn’t have therapists and we belonged to a synagogue but didn’t want to talk to our rabbi, so we kept it a secret from everyone, even our family.”

“We were terrified,” Ms. Karpel added. “We had nobody to turn to.”

Ms. Karpel said her husband had been in horribly conflicted about his cooperation. She said he had been so worried about entrapping his friends that he began cutting himself off from Wall Street contacts.

By mid-2009, the F.B.I. began to lose interest in Mr. Karpel, according to his wife, and stopped asking for his help.

Around that time, however, his employer, Tigris, learned of his involvement in the investigation, according to a firm spokesman. Tigris dismissed him, but he continued to work with the company as an outside consultant until his death.

In recent months, Mr. Karpel had been in talks to join Javelin Partners, a fledgling Toronto firm that advises small mining companies. He never joined the firm but had been subleasing space at Javelin’s New York office on lower Fifth Avenue, which is where he was found.

After he lost his job at Tigris he became very depressed, Ms. Karpel said.

“He loved Wall Street and he loved his friends there,” she said. “He felt like he had to reinvent himself.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=d1a1409b7a71abff86add8e23c72ae5e

DealBook: In Galleon Case, Spotlight on Rajat Gupta

Throughout Raj Rajaratnam’s trial, which could go to the jury as soon as Monday, there has been an elephant in the courtroom: Rajat K. Gupta.

Mr. Gupta, once one of the world’s most respected businessmen, is not being tried here nor has he been charged criminally. Yet hardly a day has passed when the jury in Mr. Rajaratnam’s trial — the government’s biggest insider trading case in a generation — does not hear about Mr. Gupta, the former head of the consulting firm McKinsey Company.

Jurors listened to a wiretap on which Mr. Gupta, a former director at Goldman Sachs, tells Mr. Rajaratnam, who ran the Galleon Group hedge fund, about the bank’s secret board discussions.

Rajat K. Gupta, who has been named a co-conspirator.Alessandro Della Bella/Keystone, via Associated Press Rajat K. Gupta, who has been named a co-conspirator.

They heard a tape of Mr. Rajaratnam boasting to a colleague that a Goldman director had tipped him off to the bank’s earnings ahead of a public announcement. On another recorded call, Mr. Rajaratnam told his trader that he had received word that something good was going to happen at Goldman.

Prosecutors also presented phone bills and trading records establishing that Mr. Rajaratnam traded Goldman stock soon after his phone calls with Mr. Gupta.

Still, Mr. Gupta is not mentioned in the government’s indictment of Mr. Rajaratnam. The United States attorney’s office in Manhattan, which has been investigating Mr. Gupta’s role in the case for at least three years, has named him a co-conspirator of Mr. Rajaratnam’s but has not charged him criminally.

Instead, federal prosecutors have built their formal charges against Mr. Rajaratnam around five cooperating witnesses who have pleaded guilty to engaging in insider trading conspiracies with the defendant.

Legal experts say there are myriad reasons for prosecutors conducting a criminal investigation to indict some co-conspirators while not charging others.

“What drives these decisions is the strength of the evidence against each individual co-conspirator as well as tactical considerations,” Anthony M. Sabino, a law professor at St. John’s University, said.

There was no indication that Mr. Gupta would play any role in Mr. Rajaratnam’s case in the months leading up to the trial. But in early March, a week before jury selection, the Securities and Exchange Commission sent shock waves through corporate America when it filed a civil administrative proceeding against Mr. Gupta. The agency accused him of leaking boardroom discussions to Mr. Rajaratnam from both Goldman and Procter Gamble, where he also served as a director before resigning last month.

“The S.E.C. allegations are totally baseless,” Gary P. Naftalis, Mr. Gupta’s lawyer, said at the time. “Mr. Gupta’s 40-year record of ethical conduct, integrity and commitment to guarding his clients’ confidences is beyond reproach.”

Mr. Gupta’s sudden fall from grace has stunned the business world. An Indian from Kolkata and a graduate of the Harvard Business School, Mr. Gupta is the most prominent executive ensnared by the government’s wide-ranging investigation into insider trading at hedge funds.

As global managing director of McKinsey, Mr. Gupta, 62, was a trusted adviser to chief executives including Jeffrey R. Immelt of General Electric and Henry R. Kravis of the private equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts Company. A prominent philanthropist, he held a senior advisory post at the Bill Melinda Gates Foundation.

Over the past decade he grew close to Mr. Rajaratnam, a large financial supporter of the Indian School of Business, a highly regarded graduate school that Mr. Gupta helped start. Around his retirement from McKinsey in 2007, he went into business with Mr. Rajaratnam, founding a private equity firm. Mr. Gupta also invested with Mr. Rajaratnam.

It was during that period —a nine-month stretch in 2008 — that the government wiretapped Mr. Rajaratnam’s cellphone. Those recordings helped the government bring charges against 26 people, 20 of whom have pleaded guilty.

Federal prosecutors appear to have weaker evidence against Mr. Gupta than against some of Mr. Rajaratnam’s other co-conspirators. For instance, two cooperating witnesses — Anil Kumar and Rajiv Goel — are on multiple wiretaps swapping tips with Mr. Rajaratnam.

In Mr. Gupta’s case, federal prosecutors played only one wiretap on which Mr. Gupta divulged Goldman boardroom discussions to Mr. Rajaratnam. On a July 2008 call, Mr. Gupta told Mr. Rajaratnam that the bank’s board was contemplating a purchase of Wachovia or the American International Group.

Prosecutors did not present evidence, however, that Mr. Rajaratnam traded on this tip.

Certain rules could also prevent prosecutors from using against Mr. Gupta two of the most incriminating wiretaps played during the trial, legal experts say.

In one call, Mr. Rajaratnam tells a colleague, “I heard yesterday from somebody who’s on the board of Goldman Sachs that they are going to lose $2 per share.” In the other, Mr. Rajaratnam says to his trader, “I got a call saying something good is going to happen to Goldman.”

Because these conversations were between Mr. Rajaratnam and his employees, a judge could declare them inadmissible hearsay evidence, meaning it is too indirect or speculative to be used against Mr. Gupta.

But prosecutors could try to use the conversations against Mr. Gupta under what is known as the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule. The theory is that Mr. Rajaratnam’s statements about Goldman were made in furtherance of the suspected conspiracy between Mr. Rajaratnam and Mr. Gupta.

Without those two statements by Mr. Rajaratnam referring to tips about Goldman, prosecutors would be forced to rely on circumstantial evidence — like phone bills and trading records — to establish Mr. Gupta’s guilt.

In the S.E.C.’s civil case, the agency has a lower burden of proof than federal prosecutors do in a criminal action. An S.E.C. administrative judge is also not subject to hearsay rules.

In an unusual twist, Mr. Gupta sued the S.E.C. last month contending that an administrative proceeding unfairly had barred him from a jury trial in federal court. Mr. Gupta would have more protections there than he does in an administrative proceeding, including the right to review the S.E.C.’s evidence. A judge has not yet ruled on the issue.

If the S.E.C. prevails, a judge could impose financial penalties on Mr. Gupta and bar him from serving as an officer or director of a public company.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=c31454fb3157453737a8776297d1e4f0

Guilty Plea in Offshore Tax Evasion Case

The case includes as co-conspirators five unidentified bankers, who according to the indictment worked at a large international bank based in Britain .

The defendant, Vaibhav Dahake, admitted in United States District Court in New Jersey to conspiring to conceal accounts in India.

Mr. Dahake is an Indian native who became an American citizen in 2006 and now lives in Somerset, N.J.

The plea comes days after federal prosecutors said that an HSBC unit in India potentially helped thousands of Americans to dodge taxes. Prosecutors are expanding the government’s inquiry of offshore tax evaders and their banks.

“HSBC does not condone tax evasion and is cooperating with law enforcement in this matter,” an HSBC spokeswoman, Juanita Gutierrez, said.

Government lawyers cited Mr. Dahake in their request last week for permission to get information from HSBC about American residents who may be using HSBC India accounts to evade federal taxes.

“Dahake is not an isolated incident,” the government said in a court filing last week, which detailed solicitations by several HSBC bankers to clients with the promise of secrecy.

The government is requesting authority to serve a “John Doe” summons on the bank to obtain the names of an unknown number of individuals who may have engaged in tax fraud.

HSBC has been soliciting clients of Indian origin living outside India since at least 2002, through a unit called NRI Services, the court documents filed by the government last week said.

Prosecutors used the same John Doe summons strategy in their case against UBS, which ultimately settled government charges against it by paying $780 million and agreeing to hand over the names of nearly 5,000 clients to the United States.

UBS fought the government’s bid to gain clients’ names, but ultimately relented after prolonged diplomatic wrangling and resolution of an internal debate inside Switzerland about bank secrecy.

Several lawyers said HSBC might be more willing to cooperate with the government, in part because the bank is not bound by strict Swiss secrecy laws, and to protect themselves.

“There is a longstanding set of principles that guide the Justice Department in deciding whether to bring a criminal complaint versus a company, and one is cooperation,” said Scott D. Michel, a lawyer who counsels wealthy clients at Caplin Drysdale.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=d1749ea0fa5fea529ff34cf99baf678c