Barclays' Diamond turns to top lawyer for Libor scandal
Barclays bank former Chief Executive Bob Diamond arrives at Portcullis House to attend a Treasury select committee hearing in Westminster, London July 4, 2012.
Credit: Reuters/Luke MacGregor
LONDON/WASHINGTON |
LONDON/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Barclays' embattled former chief executive Bob Diamond is being represented by top white-collar defence lawyer Andrew Levander in a widening scandal over the manipulation of benchmark interest rates, Levander's law firm confirmed on Thursday.
More than a dozen current and former employees of several large banks under investigation have hired defence lawyers over the past year, but Levander's role is one of the most high-profile.
Levander, a partner at Dechert LLP, is one of the biggest names in the defence bar in the United States. He is currently also representing former New Jersey governor Jon Corzine in investigations into the collapse of the failed commodities brokerage he ran, MF Global.
He has also represented outside directors of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, former Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain and hedge-fund manager and philanthropist Ezra Merkin, who was sued over money lost in the Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff.
Levander, who is known for his trademark bow ties, had a prime seat by Corzine when the former CEO was grilled multiple times at congressional hearings in Washington late last year.
Diamond, too, has emerged as a central figure in the unfolding interest rate scandal, having been pushed out less than one week after Barclays agreed in June to pay $453 million (293.5 million pounds) to settle charges that it manipulated Libor.
Libor is the London interbank offered rate, which is compiled from estimates by large international banks of how much they believe they have to pay to borrow from each other.
British lawmakers on Tuesday accused him of misleading a parliamentary inquiry into the Libor scandal, an allegation that Diamond denied.
"Dechert has been representing Mr. Diamond on this matter from the onset of the Libor investigation in 2010," a spokeswoman for the firm said in a statement.
Another Dechert partner, Cheryl Krause, is also representing Diamond, and sat behind him at the U.K. parliamentary inquiry last week.
A spokesman for Barclays Plc declined to comment.
No individuals have yet been charged in the sprawling Libor probe, which involves several global banks and enforcement authorities.
Diamond had been CEO since the start of 2011, and been at Barclays for 16 years.
Libor is used for $550 trillion of interest rate derivatives contracts, as well as influencing rates on mortgages, student loans and credit cards.
(Reporting By Aruna Viswanatha in Washington and Steve Slater in London; Editing by Karey Wutkowski and Tim Dobbyn)
- Tweet this
- Link this
- Share this
- Digg this
- Reprints
Is Mr Diamond going to settle for an undisclosed sum from an undisclosed party? (Unlikely, he is a man of Honour.)
Or my personal favourite, cast doubt upon the integrity of the BoE. (Fingers crossed.)
I nominate Mr Tucker for the top job at the BoE, he deserves it.
Here’s why.
The original BoE lasted two years before it went bang. It has often been legally allowed NOT to return depositors money, for short periods of time. (20 years.) For three hundred years, the government has continually passed laws to enable the bank to keep going and not go bang.
I suggest this is stupid.
At the same time the BoE started Scotland had ‘free market banks’. These ran very well indeed for 120 years.
So there you go. In what way is calling for the BoE to be scrapped not a good idea.
Mr Diamond, if you please, could you do your utmost to destroy the BoE thank you.
Why only 120 years?
Good question, that’s when the meddling government passed more laws to try and sort out the BoE which unfortunately made the Scottish system illegal.
I strongly recommend we all support Mr Diamond to the very best of our abilities. (Don’t buy newspapers that rubbish him.) Jeer when the BoE is mentioned. Make up some rhyme about Mr Tucker being a little something or other.
The sides are clearly marked. Please pick one.
Then we need to destroy the FED, Federal reserve bank and then the world bank (if there is one yet, time travel tends to disorientate me.)
So there you go human race, FREE market economy or your current cess pit.
I am clearly insane BUT am I wrong?
Follow Reuters