British 'Flash Crash' trader may be extradited to US, judge rules

[webfact]

British 'Flash Crash' trader may be extradited to US, judge rules
Kaja Whitehouse

New York: Navinder Sarao, the 36-year-old trader whose allegedly bogus trades contributed to the 2010 "flash crash" can be extradited to the US to stand trial, a British judge has ruled.

Sarao, who allegedly made millions from illegal trading from his parent's house near London's Heathrow Airport, should be sent to the US in the "interests of justice", Judge Quentin Purdy of Britain's Westminster Magistrates' Court said in a 15-page judgement on Wednesday.

Sarao faces federal criminal charges in Chicago for fraud, commodities manipulation and spoofing -- or the practice of placing orders but not executing on them in an effort to manipulate prices.

Full story: http://www.smh.com.au/world/british-flash-crash-trader-may-be-extradited-to-us-judge-rules-20160323-gnpzh9

-- Sydney Morning Herald 2016-03-24

[boomerangutang]

Extradition sounds like a good idea. Now how about the thousands of other day traders, who don't contribute anything to society, who don't provide any products or services, but just run prices up for everyone. Gambling is fine in a casino, but gambling with other peoples' money is out of line and should be punished.

[ukrules]

So US law now applies to the UK ?

[Ulic]

If he really is responsible they should give him a medal for exposing a flaw in the system.

With proper checks and balances this should not be possible. A guy, day trading at home

causes this kind of mayhem. This is a joke. What kind of oversight and regulation is in

place now to prevent this from happening again ?

[bangkapi]

Oh? They finally found a financial crimes crook that isn't "too big to jail"? I'll believe it when I see it.

[geriatrickid]

So US law now applies to the UK ?

No, UK law applies. It would be greatly appreciated if you would take the time to learn about your own country's laws and the treaties it has signed. No one can be extradited from the UK unless a UK judge is satisfied that the activity would have been a criminal offence in the UK. The reason this person is being extradited is because he committed a crime elsewhere. If people could not be extradited, I could steal money from your bank account while sitting here and then send you a thank you note with my contact info, on the basis that I would be untouchable. For reference sake;

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review

The judge must be satisfied that the conduct described in the warrant amounts to an extradition offence (including, in almost all cases, the requirement that the conduct would amount to a criminal offence were it to have occurred in the UK, and minimum levels of severity of punishment), and that none of the statutory bars to extradition apply. These bars are:

• rule against double jeopardy
• the absence of a prosecution decision (whether the prosecution case against the accused is sufficiently advanced)
• extraneous considerations (whether the request for extradition is improperly motivated)
• passage of time
• the requested person’s age
• speciality (the requested person must only be dealt with in the requested state for the offences for which they have been extradited)
• onward extradition (where the requested person has previously been extradited to the UK from a third county, and consent for onward extradition from that country is required but has not been forthcoming)
• forum (whether it would be more appropriate for the requested person to be prosecuted in the UK instead)

The judge must also decide if extradition would be disproportionate or would be incompatible with the requested person’s human rights. If the judge decides it would be both proportionate and compatible, extradition must be ordered.

[alocacoc]

He is only a scapegoat.

Extradition sounds like a good idea. Now how about the thousands of other day traders, who don't contribute anything to society, who don't provide any products or services, but just run prices up for everyone. Gambling is fine in a casino, but gambling with other peoples' money is out of line and should be punished.

This must be ironic.

[ukrules]

So US law now applies to the UK ?

No, UK law applies. It would be greatly appreciated if you would take the time to learn about your own country's laws and the treaties it has signed. No one can be extradited from the UK unless a UK judge is satisfied that the activity would have been a criminal offence in the UK. The reason this person is being extradited is because he committed a crime elsewhere. If people could not be extradited, I could steal money from your bank account while sitting here and then send you a thank you note with my contact info, on the basis that I would be untouchable. For reference sake;

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review

The judge must be satisfied that the conduct described in the warrant amounts to an extradition offence (including, in almost all cases, the requirement that the conduct would amount to a criminal offence were it to have occurred in the UK, and minimum levels of severity of punishment), and that none of the statutory bars to extradition apply. These bars are:

• rule against double jeopardy
• the absence of a prosecution decision (whether the prosecution case against the accused is sufficiently advanced)
• extraneous considerations (whether the request for extradition is improperly motivated)
• passage of time
• the requested person’s age
• speciality (the requested person must only be dealt with in the requested state for the offences for which they have been extradited)
• onward extradition (where the requested person has previously been extradited to the UK from a third county, and consent for onward extradition from that country is required but has not been forthcoming)
• forum (whether it would be more appropriate for the requested person to be prosecuted in the UK instead)

The judge must also decide if extradition would be disproportionate or would be incompatible with the requested person’s human rights. If the judge decides it would be both proportionate and compatible, extradition must be ordered.

All very interesting but it sounds to me like he commited this 'crime' whilst in the UK.

There's a lot of this kind of thing going on in recent years and I'm very familiar with the treaty which was signed by the blind man in secret and without debate.

[lannarebirth]

Extradition sounds like a good idea. Now how about the thousands of other day traders, who don't contribute anything to society, who don't provide any products or services, but just run prices up for everyone. Gambling is fine in a casino, but gambling with other peoples' money is out of line and should be punished.

I take your point that day traders don't add anything to society. I would have said they don't add anything to the economy, but no matter. I would correct your assertion that they use other people's money. Day traders use their own money and trade for their own account. It's banks you're thinking of. Even the banks trading wouldn't be a big deal if not for Clinton I's repeal of the Glass Steagal act which allows for the comingling of funds between investment banks and savings banks.

Finally, this guy is just a scapegoat. "Spoofing" is done by every single institutional trader. One can watch it in real time on any trading screen.

[TheCruncher]

For a minute I thought they were gonna prosecute Jamie Dimon.

[timendres]

Extradition sounds like a good idea. Now how about the thousands of other day traders, who don't contribute anything to society, who don't provide any products or services, but just run prices up for everyone. Gambling is fine in a casino, but gambling with other peoples' money is out of line and should be punished.

I take your point that day traders don't add anything to society. I would have said they don't add anything to the economy, but no matter. I would correct your assertion that they use other people's money. Day traders use their own money and trade for their own account. It's banks you're thinking of. Even the banks trading wouldn't be a big deal if not for Clinton I's repeal of the Glass Steagal act which allows for the comingling of funds between investment banks and savings banks.

Finally, this guy is just a scapegoat. "Spoofing" is done by every single institutional trader. One can watch it in real time on any trading screen.

Presidents do not repeal acts of Congress. Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act, which repealed (critical) parts of Glass-Steagal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%93Leach%E2%80%93Bliley_Act

[NeverSure]

So US law now applies to the UK ?

No, UK law applies. It would be greatly appreciated if you would take the time to learn about your own country's laws and the treaties it has signed. No one can be extradited from the UK unless a UK judge is satisfied that the activity would have been a criminal offence in the UK. The reason this person is being extradited is because he committed a crime elsewhere. If people could not be extradited, I could steal money from your bank account while sitting here and then send you a thank you note with my contact info, on the basis that I would be untouchable. For reference sake;

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review

The judge must be satisfied that the conduct described in the warrant amounts to an extradition offence (including, in almost all cases, the requirement that the conduct would amount to a criminal offence were it to have occurred in the UK, and minimum levels of severity of punishment), and that none of the statutory bars to extradition apply. These bars are:

• rule against double jeopardy
• the absence of a prosecution decision (whether the prosecution case against the accused is sufficiently advanced)
• extraneous considerations (whether the request for extradition is improperly motivated)
• passage of time
• the requested person’s age
• speciality (the requested person must only be dealt with in the requested state for the offences for which they have been extradited)
• onward extradition (where the requested person has previously been extradited to the UK from a third county, and consent for onward extradition from that country is required but has not been forthcoming)
• forum (whether it would be more appropriate for the requested person to be prosecuted in the UK instead)

The judge must also decide if extradition would be disproportionate or would be incompatible with the requested person’s human rights. If the judge decides it would be both proportionate and compatible, extradition must be ordered.

All very interesting but it sounds to me like he commited this 'crime' whilst in the UK.

There's a lot of this kind of thing going on in recent years and I'm very familiar with the treaty which was signed by the blind man in secret and without debate.

The crime was committed in the US and the victims were traders on the Chicago Exchange. The perp may have been in the UK when he did it, but that's a little like standing in Canada and firing a rifle across the international US border and killing an American inside America. It would be America which would extradite, try and then punish the perp for a murder with a victim in America. Canada doesn't have a victim but it does have a law against such things and an treaty to extradite. America would have jurisdiction because the death occurred in America.

Don't read too much into who's laws apply. It's about who's courts have jurisdiction in the case, and whether there's a treaty to cover it.

Cheers.

[ukrules]

So US law now applies to the UK ?

No, UK law applies. It would be greatly appreciated if you would take the time to learn about your own country's laws and the treaties it has signed. No one can be extradited from the UK unless a UK judge is satisfied that the activity would have been a criminal offence in the UK. The reason this person is being extradited is because he committed a crime elsewhere. If people could not be extradited, I could steal money from your bank account while sitting here and then send you a thank you note with my contact info, on the basis that I would be untouchable. For reference sake;

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review

The judge must be satisfied that the conduct described in the warrant amounts to an extradition offence (including, in almost all cases, the requirement that the conduct would amount to a criminal offence were it to have occurred in the UK, and minimum levels of severity of punishment), and that none of the statutory bars to extradition apply. These bars are:

• rule against double jeopardy
• the absence of a prosecution decision (whether the prosecution case against the accused is sufficiently advanced)
• extraneous considerations (whether the request for extradition is improperly motivated)
• passage of time
• the requested person’s age
• speciality (the requested person must only be dealt with in the requested state for the offences for which they have been extradited)
• onward extradition (where the requested person has previously been extradited to the UK from a third county, and consent for onward extradition from that country is required but has not been forthcoming)
• forum (whether it would be more appropriate for the requested person to be prosecuted in the UK instead)

The judge must also decide if extradition would be disproportionate or would be incompatible with the requested person’s human rights. If the judge decides it would be both proportionate and compatible, extradition must be ordered.

All very interesting but it sounds to me like he commited this 'crime' whilst in the UK.

There's a lot of this kind of thing going on in recent years and I'm very familiar with the treaty which was signed by the blind man in secret and without debate.

The crime was committed in the US and the victims were traders on the Chicago Exchange. The perp may have been in the UK when he did it, but that's a little like standing in Canada and firing a rifle across the international US border and killing an American inside America. It would be America which would extradite, try and then punish the perp for a murder with a victim in America. Canada doesn't have a victim but it does have a law against such things and an treaty to extradite. America would have jurisdiction because the death occurred in America.

Don't read too much into who's laws apply. It's about who's courts have jurisdiction in the case, and whether there's a treaty to cover it.

Cheers.

This is my point, the David Blunkett extradition treaty is the issue here, he's said so himself since losing his position.

The US has been 'collecting' treaties like this from countries around the world for a few decades now.

Why would they do this ?

[Credo]

UKrules, so you think it is OK to break a law? Did someone force the UK to sign a treaty? Does the same treaty apply in reverse?

[Khon Kaen Dave]

Before the credits went up,in a movie called 'catch me if you can' It stated that the boy 'Abagnail'(cant remember his first name) after serving time working for the FBI,became America's foremost leading expert on fraudulent cheques,money and scams.He helped them stop,and also arrest may perpetrators of these crimes.I do not and will not condone what this guy has done,but wouldn't he be better employed helping the powers that be find and catch these Aholes.

Btw,Abagnail had fooled the American medical association by posing as a consultant surgeon.The American Flight association by becoming a pilot,and best of all,passing the American bar and becoming a lawyer.

When finally arrested,the FBI agent asked him how he had managed to cheat when taking the bar exam.His answer was "i didnt cheat"