1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,279
Speaker 1: A New York federal judge is demanding the Justice Department

2
00:00:03,320 --> 00:00:07,720
Speaker 1: provide meaningful information about its investigation of an FBI agent

3
00:00:07,880 --> 00:00:10,720
Speaker 1: who has been accused of leaking tips in the investigation

4
00:00:10,760 --> 00:00:14,400
Speaker 1: into insider trading. In a high profile case, Las Vegas

5
00:00:14,480 --> 00:00:17,800
Speaker 1: gambler Billy Walters was convicted in April on charges of

6
00:00:17,840 --> 00:00:21,279
Speaker 1: making forty three million dollars from an insider scheme that

7
00:00:21,400 --> 00:00:26,480
Speaker 1: also entangled pro golfer Phil Mulkison. Phil Mickelson, lawyers for Walters,

8
00:00:26,520 --> 00:00:30,240
Speaker 1: tried unsuccessfully to have the case dismissed before trial, claiming

9
00:00:30,320 --> 00:00:34,080
Speaker 1: FBI agent David Chavez leak details of his stock trading

10
00:00:34,120 --> 00:00:37,239
Speaker 1: to a newspaper in order to breathe life into an

11
00:00:37,280 --> 00:00:40,560
Speaker 1: investigation that was failing. Joining me is Professor Peter Haining,

12
00:00:40,720 --> 00:00:43,400
Speaker 1: Heading of Wayne State University Law School, who was an

13
00:00:43,400 --> 00:00:48,080
Speaker 1: expert on all things insider trading. Peter, this involved leaks

14
00:00:48,120 --> 00:00:52,320
Speaker 1: of grand jury information. Why might that be more important

15
00:00:52,320 --> 00:00:56,000
Speaker 1: to a judge than other things? Well, under the grand

16
00:00:56,000 --> 00:01:01,600
Speaker 1: fury rules um everything related to that investigation must be

17
00:01:01,720 --> 00:01:06,160
Speaker 1: kept confidential, and if there is any leak of information

18
00:01:06,640 --> 00:01:09,080
Speaker 1: from either a prosecutor or here in this case, an

19
00:01:09,120 --> 00:01:13,440
Speaker 1: agent that can subject the person to a contempt of

20
00:01:13,520 --> 00:01:18,959
Speaker 1: court or even a separate criminal prosecution, perhaps for obstruction

21
00:01:19,000 --> 00:01:22,240
Speaker 1: of justice. So grand jury leaks or something judges are

22
00:01:22,319 --> 00:01:25,920
Speaker 1: very concerned about, and in this case especially the Justice

23
00:01:25,959 --> 00:01:29,399
Speaker 1: Department's initial reaction was, hey, there were no leaks from

24
00:01:29,400 --> 00:01:32,160
Speaker 1: our side, and then all of a sudden, now it

25
00:01:32,200 --> 00:01:35,280
Speaker 1: turns out there was an FBI agent leaking to the

26
00:01:35,319 --> 00:01:37,880
Speaker 1: New York Times in the Wall Street Journal. So the

27
00:01:37,959 --> 00:01:41,520
Speaker 1: judge is clearly quite upset about this. Why do the

28
00:01:41,680 --> 00:01:47,560
Speaker 1: FBI agent allegedly leak this, Well, it's not entirely clear that.

29
00:01:48,120 --> 00:01:50,920
Speaker 1: Some of the talk has been that it was to

30
00:01:51,000 --> 00:01:54,800
Speaker 1: put pressure on one or more of the targets, either

31
00:01:54,920 --> 00:01:59,480
Speaker 1: the source of the information, Tom Davis, or perhaps Billy

32
00:01:59,520 --> 00:02:03,040
Speaker 1: Walters himself. The government at the time also had up

33
00:02:03,080 --> 00:02:06,440
Speaker 1: a wire tap, and maybe if the stories appeared in

34
00:02:06,480 --> 00:02:10,560
Speaker 1: the press, they might make incriminating statements. It really isn't

35
00:02:10,680 --> 00:02:13,880
Speaker 1: clear why the agent did it. I mean, clearly it

36
00:02:13,960 --> 00:02:19,080
Speaker 1: was um illegal, uh and impromper. But you know what

37
00:02:19,240 --> 00:02:22,000
Speaker 1: the motivation is and how leaking to the press is

38
00:02:22,040 --> 00:02:25,320
Speaker 1: going to help an investigation. It's not easy to figure out.

39
00:02:26,000 --> 00:02:29,160
Speaker 1: Judge Kevin Castell writes what the court learns is at

40
00:02:29,160 --> 00:02:33,760
Speaker 1: the Section and the Inspector General are quote continuing continuing

41
00:02:33,800 --> 00:02:37,920
Speaker 1: to investigate this matter, and they've obtained records and conducted

42
00:02:38,000 --> 00:02:42,480
Speaker 1: multiple interviews and it's ongoing. That's it. So anyone who's

43
00:02:42,480 --> 00:02:44,840
Speaker 1: been on the receiving end of government reports has to

44
00:02:44,919 --> 00:02:48,280
Speaker 1: love that from a judge. Oh absolutely, I mean this

45
00:02:48,520 --> 00:02:52,520
Speaker 1: is what what the Department of Justice tried to give, uh,

46
00:02:52,720 --> 00:02:56,760
Speaker 1: Judge Castle is. Essentially, it's boiler plate response, Um, we're

47
00:02:56,760 --> 00:03:01,640
Speaker 1: conducting an investigation, don't ask us anymore questions. Um. That

48
00:03:02,280 --> 00:03:05,519
Speaker 1: this case has really gotten under the judge's skin, especially

49
00:03:05,560 --> 00:03:08,760
Speaker 1: given the initial response, which was Judge, there's nothing to

50
00:03:08,760 --> 00:03:11,200
Speaker 1: see here, and now there's actually a lot to see.

51
00:03:11,560 --> 00:03:14,560
Speaker 1: So he is going to hold their feet to the fire. Absolutely.

52
00:03:15,720 --> 00:03:20,280
Speaker 1: Is it more likely that they haven't been investigating this

53
00:03:20,560 --> 00:03:23,440
Speaker 1: preferring to let it drop, or that they don't want

54
00:03:23,440 --> 00:03:26,560
Speaker 1: to reveal what they have because it puts the FBI

55
00:03:26,800 --> 00:03:29,840
Speaker 1: in a bad light. Well, I think the FBI is

56
00:03:29,880 --> 00:03:34,080
Speaker 1: already in a pretty bad light. One, you know, purely

57
00:03:34,120 --> 00:03:38,240
Speaker 1: speculative notion is that perhaps it was more than just

58
00:03:38,440 --> 00:03:41,880
Speaker 1: this case in which the agent might have leaked information,

59
00:03:42,040 --> 00:03:46,120
Speaker 1: So it could be a much wider investigation than we've

60
00:03:46,120 --> 00:03:50,600
Speaker 1: had indicated. But again, that's something that the Justice Department

61
00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:52,760
Speaker 1: is going to have to indicate at least a little

62
00:03:52,760 --> 00:03:56,480
Speaker 1: bit to the judge, rather than, if you will, just

63
00:03:56,560 --> 00:04:00,320
Speaker 1: blowing him off with a hey, judge, we're investigating. We'll

64
00:04:00,320 --> 00:04:03,520
Speaker 1: get back to you later. Um, judge gave him two

65
00:04:03,560 --> 00:04:06,280
Speaker 1: weeks to get back to him. So they're going to

66
00:04:06,400 --> 00:04:08,680
Speaker 1: have to give a little bit more meat than the

67
00:04:08,720 --> 00:04:12,320
Speaker 1: bare bones that they've provided at this point. Peter, the

68
00:04:12,440 --> 00:04:15,880
Speaker 1: judge refused to dismiss the case based on this leak

69
00:04:16,240 --> 00:04:19,440
Speaker 1: or alleged leak, But is it something that Walters could

70
00:04:19,600 --> 00:04:23,080
Speaker 1: use in his appeal. He could try to bring it

71
00:04:23,160 --> 00:04:26,360
Speaker 1: up that the problem is and Judge Castle noticed this

72
00:04:26,600 --> 00:04:30,760
Speaker 1: or discussed this when he rejected the defense motion. He said,

73
00:04:31,080 --> 00:04:34,200
Speaker 1: what's the prejudice, um, And you have to show prejudice

74
00:04:34,640 --> 00:04:39,200
Speaker 1: from a violation by the government prosecutorial misconduct or here

75
00:04:39,240 --> 00:04:43,039
Speaker 1: the FBI agent's misconduct. That it can't just be well,

76
00:04:43,480 --> 00:04:46,719
Speaker 1: maybe they wouldn't have brought the case. Um. They need

77
00:04:46,760 --> 00:04:49,000
Speaker 1: more than that, And so I don't see that as

78
00:04:49,040 --> 00:04:51,240
Speaker 1: a strong argument on appeal. I think they're going to

79
00:04:51,279 --> 00:04:55,400
Speaker 1: focus more on the issues at trial. And certainly questions

80
00:04:55,400 --> 00:04:58,880
Speaker 1: about Tom Davis's credibility that the tipper who was the

81
00:04:58,960 --> 00:05:03,479
Speaker 1: key government with and when he sentenced, how much time

82
00:05:03,760 --> 00:05:08,480
Speaker 1: is Billy Walters facing. Well, government alleged that he made

83
00:05:08,640 --> 00:05:12,320
Speaker 1: over forty million dollars and that will get you in

84
00:05:12,560 --> 00:05:16,320
Speaker 1: range of about a five to seven year sentence, although

85
00:05:16,680 --> 00:05:19,320
Speaker 1: that would be under the federal sentencing guidelines, which are

86
00:05:19,400 --> 00:05:23,520
Speaker 1: only advisory. So I would certainly think though that Walters

87
00:05:23,800 --> 00:05:26,680
Speaker 1: is going to be looking at, say a three to

88
00:05:26,760 --> 00:05:32,120
Speaker 1: five year sentence. That's been about the norm for insider

89
00:05:32,160 --> 00:05:36,880
Speaker 1: trading with that kind of dollar figure. So he's certainly

90
00:05:36,960 --> 00:05:40,640
Speaker 1: looking at jail time, and they may ask for probation.

91
00:05:40,880 --> 00:05:44,320
Speaker 1: Dependants often do, but I think that's very very unlikely.

92
00:05:45,120 --> 00:05:48,159
Speaker 1: So that's the next step, and then the appeal and

93
00:05:48,200 --> 00:05:50,559
Speaker 1: then the appeal. The sentencing will come in the next

94
00:05:50,720 --> 00:05:55,880
Speaker 1: couple of months. Um the appeal will take probably about

95
00:05:55,920 --> 00:05:58,280
Speaker 1: a year. I don't think we'll have any real resolution

96
00:05:58,720 --> 00:06:03,120
Speaker 1: on the Walters convict and until later into eighteen. So

97
00:06:03,839 --> 00:06:06,599
Speaker 1: the wheels of justice moved pretty slowly in this area.

98
00:06:06,800 --> 00:06:10,360
Speaker 1: We certainly know that. Thank you, Peter Henning, Wayne State

99
00:06:10,440 --> 00:06:12,240
Speaker 1: University Law School Professor