Now it's time for our daily Bloomberg Law Brief, exploring legal issues in the news. Today, Bloomberg Law host June Grasso discusses a split verdict in the trial of three former Namera Holdings traders who are accused of conspiring to light to clients about mortgage bond prices. She speaks to John Coffee, a professor at Columbia Law School. Jack, the jury acquitted the traders or deadlocked on everything but the conspiracy charges. They found Michael Grahman's guilty of conspiracy, Tyler
Peter's not guilty, and they deadlocked on conspiracy. As far as Rod Shapiro, what does that show, Well, let's just underlarn how severe defeat this was in reality for the government. There were twenty seven counts. They got a conviction on one of those seven three as you said, Brahm, and twenty three were acquittals. Moreover, this case follows an earlier Connecticut case in January involving Jesse Litteck, who was also arged with ten counts of very similar kind of misconduct.
And they're the jury acquitted on nine convicted on one. So it looks like the government's having a great deal of difficulty convincing the jury that there's something truly culpable here. Uh. And I think the fact that they convicted Michael Gramman's may be explained by his being the only defendant where they had a tape recording of him instructing others on
how to lie to the clients. That evidence really hit the jury, whereas every other case the witnesses testifying for the government were cross examined and they had to admit they had done the same thing and looked equally bad. Oh. That I think left the jury pretty confused. Jack. Does this show that the jury didn't buy the theory that the puffing and lyne by bond traders is fraud or
that the prosecutors just didn't give the jury enough evidence. Well, we'd have to interview the jurors to really answer their But do recall that in the securities fraud case, you have to prove not simply that the defendant broke a legal rule. You have to prove that he wilfully did so, that it was his deliberate intent to violate the law. And that may have looked greater, particularly in the case of the junior employees who look like they were just
taking instructions from their superiors. So the wilfulness problem here it may have been the biggest obstacle because one defendant did look like he'd willfully done this, and they did convict him on at least one count. But it does look like the government has difficulty explaining why this behavior is truly criminal when the defendants keeps saying everybody was
doing it. That's John Coffey, professor at Columbia Law School, speaking to Bloomberg Law host to Gressi and you can listen to Bloomberg Law weekdays at one pm most three time here on Bloomberg Radio and now among the top legal stories from Bloomberg Law. The Supreme Court could say as early as today whether it will take up a
high stakes fight over electoral maps. Democrats and Wisconsin of challenge their republican drawing boundaries for state legislative districts of Federal Court has struck down the districts as unconstitutional, saying they were drawn unfairly to minimize the influence of Democratic voters. Jury selection begins today in the corruption trial of Philadelphia's top prosecutor. District Attorney Seth Williams is accused of taking bribes such as a vacation trip and a sports car
in exchange for legal favors. Williams has denied any wrongdoing. He has decided not to seek a third term as district Attorney, and that is this morning's Bloomberg Law Brief. You can find more legal news at Bloomberg Law dot com and Bloomberg b NA dot com. Attorneys will find exceptional legal research and business development tools there as well. Visit Bloomberg Law dot com and Bloomberg BNA dot com for more information.