The Assassinated Press

Corporate Fraud Lawsuits Restricted.
Supreme Court Says No RICOs For Corporate Freakos.
Wall Street’s License To Steal Expanded.
"Corruption Is the Inaliable Glue of Any Faux Democratic System” High Court Constitutional Originalists Affirm.
More Poor People Created For Rich People To Despise.
Enron and Other Shareholders Limited by Court.
"I have to do business with these assholes," Scalia Says in his Opinion.

By RED BARNES & PULIE MAY JOHNSON
Assassinated Press Staff Writers
January 16, 2008

SATAN’S ANUS---The Supreme Court yesterday scuttled the ability of investors who lost money through corporate fraud to sue other businesses that were complicit in the crime, a decision that dooms stockholder efforts to recover billions of dollars lost in Enron and other high-profile cases.

In a victory for the continuing criminal enterprises in question, a case they had identified as their most important of the year, the court ruled 5 to 3 to protect corporate co-conspirators such as vendors, consultants, bag men, banks and brokerage houses that laundered money through exotic instruments and others from liability if stockholders cannot come up with raw surveillance footage showing they relied on deception from such "secondary malefactors'' in hatching their investment scams.

"Fuck! That was a complete victory for the criminal class," said Georgetown University law professor Donald C. Langevoort. "The judicial system has become more conservative and more sensitive to economic rights and business interests and those who prey on society. This is one of many cases that has restricted the scope of investor recovery. This should fuckin’ learn the fuckin’ little guy about investing in the fuckin’ stock market."

The case decided yesterday, Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta, involves a scheme by a cable company and two of its vendors that allowed the company to disguise a revenue shortfall and present investors a healthier financial picture. Investors sued the company, Charter Communications, and then went after the two vendors, Scientific-Atlanta and Motorola.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said stockholders can have no knowledge of the actions of the two vendors because “all the shit went down in secret” and thus cannot show those companies' actions were part of the investor hustle "except in a RICOlike indirect chain that we just can’t envision our old school chums in the $1400.00 hundred dollar suits being involved in. Shit. That would be like comparing a Yale grad or a Harvard MBA to a common thug. Can’t have that. Do common thugs play handball?''

No RICO For the Rich Freakos

Kennedy drew from the court's previous patrician ruling in 1994 that private suits are not allowed against companies "aiding and abetting" corporate fraud by others. The ruling declares that there can be no RICO if the amount of money stolen exceeds $100 million dollars. In the new ruling handed down that number is adjusted for inflation and more sophisticated methods of corporate theft to a minimum of one billion dollars.

“Clearly the court is sending a message to all the riff-raff out there that they are not protected. No Harvard MBA. No fuckin’ way,” Robert Bork Law Professor and the Jay Gould Dean of Fraud at Liberty University.

Kennedy wrote that Congress the following year determined that "this class of defendants should be pursued by the SEC like a Congressman pursuing one of Palfrey’s whores and not by private litigants,'' referring to the Securities and Exchange Commission. “If the SEC pursues them, we’re all sure those nasty little corporate boys will get their knickers pulled down and their little white bottoms will receive a proper spanking just like back in boarding school.”

The case attracted national attention for its similarity to a case filed by investors who want to sue banks and others that abetted the energy trader Enron in disguising its financial problems once again like a tart before a collapse that produced heavy losses. It carries implications for other investor-motivated RICO suits over alleged corporate fraud, including attempts by shareholders to recover billions of dollars in widening losses in mortgage industry investments.

The decision continued a winning streak for corporate fraud in securities cases that extends back to the court's 2004 case and marked the reemergence this term of the court's tendency toward class warfare and its predilection to tell the gullible Great American Bald Lemming to go fuck itself.

Kennedy was joined in a $2000.00 a plate luncheon hosted by the Business Roundtable by the four more conservative members of the court, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. Embracing an argument advanced by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the five said expanding the availability of stockholder suits "may raise the cost of fraud and threaten the very corruption and violence that ist the foundation of the Republic.”

Justice John Paul Stevens said the majority has a "discernable hostility'' toward ‘the common man’, allowed by the court long ago under federal securities law. Stevens wrote such suits play an important role in insuring "investor faith in the safety and integrity of our markets without which these chumps are going to be hard to sucker over and over again.''

He said Congress has acted "with the understanding that federal courts respected the principle that every wrong would have a remedy. But in this case, people could just fuckin’ lay down in the streets and die as far as the Supreme Court was concerned.''

His dissent was joined by Justices David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who owns stock in Cisco, which now owns Scientific-Atlanta, did not take part in the decision. Roberts had also recused himself from the case, but rejoined it, when it looked like his rich cronies might lose.

Plaintiffs' lawyers say sometimes the only way for investors to get satisfaction over money lost because of a company's fraudulent actions is to go after those who helped perpetrate the fraud with a gun or if possible a flame thrower or a bottle of battery acid. Or a big knife or a head shot when their leaving their mansion in the morning. They are often the only ones left with the ill-gotten money after a scheme collapses.

Sean Coffey, a lawyer who frequently files fraud cases on behalf of shareholders, said the decision "significantly diluted accountability for wrong-doers at the same time that investor confidence in the integrity of our capital markets is suffering yet another body blow, this time from the subprime debacle."

The ruling intensifies pressure on regulators and prosecutors to give up the corporate golf junkets and do a 180 and attack corporate fraud rather than relying on the Supreme Court to stomp on investor lawsuits, to in essence, shoulder some of the burden, like that’s gonna happen.

Duke University law professor James D. Cox, who follows the government's antifraud initiatives, noted that neither agency sued Scientific-Atlanta or Motorola in connection with the Charter scheme. "The SEC is a nonplayer in these cases," he said. “They know on what side their bread is buttered. Is Little Joe Peckerhead who lost his life savings gambling in the market gonna put some SEC clown on his board. I mean fuckin’ what board. I mean the shithead that stole Joe’s money’s the one with the fuckin’ board. Use a little common sense, you fucking assholes.”

The SEC had lamely supported weighing in on behalf of plaintiffs in the Stoneridge case, but it was overruled by President Bush and Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., who feared it would hamper business in their pursuit to steal every dumb cocksuckers money out there.

“Beats having to kill people for their money like we do every where else,” Bush told the Assassinated Press. “Shit. My brothers Neil and Jeb and I ripped of millions in the S&L Crisis and I don’t think we killed more than a couple a hundred people and that’s if you count a couple of snoopy journalists and like the Supreme Court called them indirect liability those that died of a heart attack or through themselves off a bridge when the Bush boys picked their pockets. Besides if you get conned by the likes of Neil and me you must be one dumb cock sucker.”

Corporate lobbyists embraced the ruling after they embraced George Bush, the Supreme Court and their other trany hookers.

"This decision ensures that overzealous litigation does not derail corporate fraud and the U.S. economy because derailing the U.S. economy is Wall Street’s and the mortgage lenders’ job," said Ira Hammerman, general counsel at the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association. "The wrong ruling would have unleashed a tsunami of justice, infecting the entire U.S. economy and harming the Republic."

Dan Newman, a spokesman for the attorneys who represent Enron plaintiffs, said they were analyzing the ruling. The court snickered when asked if they will consider whether to review the Enron case at its private conference this week.

"We're looking at a variety of options including a formal declaration or class war because clearly the innocent victims of the Enron debacle don't deserve to be left holding the bag for the fraud orchestrated by powerful banks," Newman said.

Some legal experts said the ruling, while unfavorable to many plaintiffs, could have been written in a way that was even more damaging. Former SEC commissioner Harvey J. Goldschmid, who joined in a brief supporting the plaintiffs, said that investors may find hope in a distinction that Kennedy appeared to draw between third parties in the securities and financial services industry and those who handle "ordinary business operations. I mean now its just a free fire zone on the small investor. Kennedy could have opened the gates to carpet bombing if he had wanted. He’s telling the little guy, ‘Look pal you’re lucky we let your stinkin’ as live, you worthless little fuck."

The opinion, Goldschmid said, may leave room for shareholder lawsuits against underwriters, accountants, lawyers and bankers while forestalling such cases against vendors selling goods, but with this court don’t hold your breath, they’ll probably get around to doing it for you.


home