Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Box-By-The-Riviera™ who wrote (300384)	1/12/2005 8:33:14 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone	Respond to of 436258

Prosecution Talks of Greed at Fraud Trial By ERIC DASH Published: January 12, 2005 The prosecution's closing argument yesterday in the securities fraud trial of Anthony Elgindy and Jeffrey A. Royer focused on the questions posed at the start: Were Mr. Elgindy, a controversial Internet stock guru, and Mr. Royer, a former F.B.I. agent, crime-fighting crusaders for integrity in the marketplace? Or were they crusaders for personal gain? Seth Levine, an assistant United States attorney, left little doubt about where the government stood. "There was no crusade here," Mr. Levine told the jury. "They were not crime-fighting heroes. They weren't called on the Batphone because the commissioner couldn't handle the crime. They were mercenaries." The conduct of Mr. Elgindy and Mr. Royer is at the center of the high-profile penny-stock fraud case, which has lasted nearly nine weeks in Federal District Court in Brooklyn. Prosecutors contend Mr. Royer provided Mr. Elgindy and his business associates with confidential information about criminal investigations of companies. They in turn are accused of using it to profit by selling the companies' stocks short, betting that they would decline. The defendants acknowledge that they made money, but they maintain they were more interested in exposing corporate fraud. Both men face charges of securities fraud, conspiracy, market manipulation and extortion, as well as separate counts of obstruction of justice for interfering with the case. Mr. Royer is accused of witness tampering as well. Lawyers for each defendant will present closing arguments tomorrow, but prosecutors made it clear yesterday that they felt there was little to dispute. "That man, who sought to portray himself as a crusader in the market, was a thoroughly dishonest opportunist," Mr. Levine said early in his statement, pointing at Mr. Elgindy. He used almost the same words as he motioned toward Mr. Royer, saying he misappropriated the tools of justice and deceived the public from his position of trust. "He wasn't working for the F.B.I.," Mr. Levine said several times during his presentation. "He's working for Elgindy." Both men, Mr. Levine argued, were motivated by greed. Mr. Royer, who was more than $75,000 in debt, was lured by the potential of a lucrative job and the riches of trading, the government said. And Mr. Elgindy wanted to make easy money manipulating the market, eventually reaping thousands of dollars from trading and at least $2.5 million from subscribers to his investment Web sites. Mr. Levine spent most of the morning pointing out examples of Mr. Royer's "fundamental dishonesty" when he testified last week in his own defense. Mr. Levine argued that there was a clear "information pipeline" between Mr. Royer and Mr. Elgindy. "Sources are supposed to provide information to the bureau," Mr. Levine said, challenging the former F.B.I agent's testimony that he was simply cultivating a valuable source. "It's not a two-way street." But he used the bulk of the afternoon to direct the jury's attention to Mr. Elgindy. Mr. Levine accused him of using his Web sites "to release information in a controlled way" and manipulate the price of several thinly traded stocks, often at the expense of his own subscribers. He also played audiotapes to suggest how Mr. Elgindy used the government information to extort stock at deep discounts from some companies. Mr. Elgindy, who was born in Egypt, came to the government's attention when investigators were looking for people with potential ties to terrorism after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, but his lawyers have said there is no evidence to connect him with terrorism. Judge Raymond Dearie severely restricted discussion of that investigation during witness testimony. But in its closing arguments the government made reference to that inquiry. At issue, Mr. Levine said, is whether Mr. Royer and Mr. Elgindy tried to obstruct an investigation into terrorism ties before it evolved into a more general investigation into securities fraud. Barry Berke, a lawyer for Mr. Elgindy, called the references to the terrorist investigations "improper and unnecessarily inflammatory" in one of several objections after the prosecution's argument. The government argued it took "special caution" when addressing the jury, and Judge Dearie denied the motions. Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company nytimes.com