In December of 2010, Patrick Burnes accuses Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch of RICO Charges . Then, 3 months later, he amends the charges to include racketeering.
In March of 2011, |Patrick Byrne Amends Suit Against Goldman Sachs To Include Charges of Racketeering.
"Speaking on the Salt TV Network recently, President and CEO of Overstock.com (NASDAQ: OSTK) Patrick Byrne referred to his company as "bold" and revealed that, in November 2010, after four years of fighting, a judge forced Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) to turn over some documents that prompted Overstock to re-file its suit against Goldman as a RICO [Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations] action. The case went before a hearing and it has been approved." Read more here. SfGate.com
May, 2012
The People vs. Goldman Sachs By Matt Taibbi: A Senate committee has laid out the reevidence. Now the Justice Department should bring criminal charges. They weren't murderers or anything; they had merely stolen more money than most people can rationally conceive of, from their own customers, in a few blinks of an eye. But then they went one step further. They came to Washington, took an oath before Congress, and lied about it.
Thanks to an extraordinary investigative effort by a Senate subcommittee that unilaterally decided to take up the burden the criminal justice system has repeatedly refused to shoulder, we now know exactly what Goldman Sachs executives like Lloyd Blankfein and Daniel Sparks lied about. We know exactly how they and other top Goldman executives, including David Viniar and Thomas Montag, defrauded their clients. America has been waiting for a case to bring against Wall Street. Here it is, and the evidence has been gift-wrapped and left at the doorstep of federal prosecutors, evidence that doesn't leave much doubt: Goldman Sachs should stand trial. Read more here.
Is Patrick Byrne Finally Victorious in the Fight Against Naked Short Selling?
Is Patrick Byrne making progress in his fight against what he believes are fundamental flaws in the American financial markets?
According to the The Register, the Overstock.com (NASDAQ: OSTK) CEO might have finally caught a break. The Register cites a piece by The Economist, "America's dodgy financial plumbing," which focuses on the same issues that Byrne has been striving to uncover. (If you missed our previous coverage, Byrne is particularly unhappy with naked short selling, Sith Lords, and turtles.)
The Register quotes an e-mail from Byrne to his friends, in which he says, "Remarkably (to me), no matter how much data I had, no matter what insiders and financial experts I could present to explain how this issue was likely world-historic, the US press would not touch the story, no matter how many binders of data were held under their noses. Now, at last, The Economist has picked up the story, and gotten it exactly right."
Byrne told The Register that he played no direct role in The Economist piece, nor was he involved in a subsequent Financial Times story that was said to be along the same lines.
"But like squeezing a balloon, the problem has simply moved to markets where fails are not penalized," The Economist writes. "They have, for instance, inflated for mortgage-backed securities, to the point where the TMPG has reluctantly proposed penalties similar to those introduced for Treasuries. The biggest worry, though, is exchange-traded funds (ETFs), investment vehicles that trade on stock exchanges and hold assets such as shares, bonds and commodities."
According to The Register, Overstock was a fixture of the SEC's Regulation SHO Threshold List, "which identifies companies whose stock is involved in an unusually high number of fails to deliver," for years. Byrne fought back, saying that traders were using Overstock to feed their fortunes by creating "phantom shares" in the company.
In short, The Register says that with a short sale, investors borrow shares from someone else and immediately sell them off, assuming that the price is about to drop. When the price goes down, investors buy the shares back and return them to the original owner. Technically a naked short sale is supposed to work the same way; the catch is that investors don't really borrow the shares. Thus, when it's time to deliver the shares to the buyer, the naked short seller never actually completes this transaction.
Byrne's argument is that Overstock has been a victim of heavy naked shorting that, according to The Register, was "designed to push down the value of the company's stock and ultimately drive it out of business."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
