Autonomy Founder Mike Lynch Can Be Extradited To US (bbc.com) 46
The founder of UK software firm Autonomy can be extradited to the US to face charges of conspiracy and fraud, a London court has said. The BBC reports: Mike Lynch sold Autonomy to US computer giant Hewlett Packard (HP) for $11 billion in 2011. He denies allegations that he fraudulently inflated the value of Autonomy before the sale. Dr Lynch has been facing civil charges at the High Court in London, where HP is suing him for damages over the deal. But separately, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) is pursuing criminal charges against him. Judge Michael Snow said he would deliver his ruling in that action without awaiting the civil verdict, saying it was "of limited significance in the case." Dr Lynch was released on bail by the judge in London.
Dr Lynch told BBC Radio 4's Today program that the decision was not unexpected, because of the terms of the extradition treaty the UK has with the US. "We have this imbalance and this default extradition treaty which can be used [in] any dispute that's going on with American companies and their interests." "The insanity of this extradition treaty [is that] it doesn't rely on any facts," he suggested. Dr Lynch added that he felt the extradition treaty was "imbalanced" and that the British public did not realize that the US justice system works entirely differently to the UK's. He said it was "particularly egregious" that the DoJ was not waiting to see the full judgement from the UK High Court, which will be due in nine weeks' time.
He claimed his former chief financial officer Sushovan Hussain, who was jailed for five years in 2019, did not receive a fair trial. Dr Lynch said no defense witnesses turned up to Mr Hussain's trial because they were told they would be arrested if they entered the US. His lawyer Mr Morvillo said:"At the request of the US Department of Justice, the court has ruled that a British citizen who ran a British company listed on the London Stock Exchange should be extradited to America over allegations about his conduct in the UK. "We say this case belongs in the UK. If the home secretary nonetheless decides to order extradition, Dr Lynch intends to appeal."
Dr Lynch told BBC Radio 4's Today program that the decision was not unexpected, because of the terms of the extradition treaty the UK has with the US. "We have this imbalance and this default extradition treaty which can be used [in] any dispute that's going on with American companies and their interests." "The insanity of this extradition treaty [is that] it doesn't rely on any facts," he suggested. Dr Lynch added that he felt the extradition treaty was "imbalanced" and that the British public did not realize that the US justice system works entirely differently to the UK's. He said it was "particularly egregious" that the DoJ was not waiting to see the full judgement from the UK High Court, which will be due in nine weeks' time.
He claimed his former chief financial officer Sushovan Hussain, who was jailed for five years in 2019, did not receive a fair trial. Dr Lynch said no defense witnesses turned up to Mr Hussain's trial because they were told they would be arrested if they entered the US. His lawyer Mr Morvillo said:"At the request of the US Department of Justice, the court has ruled that a British citizen who ran a British company listed on the London Stock Exchange should be extradited to America over allegations about his conduct in the UK. "We say this case belongs in the UK. If the home secretary nonetheless decides to order extradition, Dr Lynch intends to appeal."
He's boned (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
Little old men are just as likely to get swindled. Equal Opportunity Suckerage. Unfortunately my father's Alzheimer's made him fall for a scam, and they never caught the crooks. It's sad to see it happen.
Re: (Score:3)
I've had elderly relatives fall for "nigerian prince" scams back in the day. I think the older folk are just a little too trusting and assume the general rule of "even hardened criminals look down on people who abuse children or the elderly (after all, even monsters love their mothers)" applies online too, and it just doesn't. Dementia just makes it worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Kinda like Bernie Maddoff, who was A-OK defrauding little old ladies for their life savings up until he started taking money from the Wall Street types.
Would love to read something that backs that up. I've read a few forensics on him and nothing like that was ever mentioned.
Send them both to their rooms without supper (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the messiest of cases. Both sides should compromise and settle because they both F'd up. HP forgot to read certain documents before purchase and Autonomy stretched accounting rules and categories to the limit of legality.
Re: (Score:3)
This is the messiest of cases. Both sides should compromise and settle because they both F'd up. HP forgot to read certain documents before purchase and Autonomy stretched accounting rules and categories to the limit of legality.
I forget to lock my door, it's 1/2 my fault if someone comes in a steals money. Thank god the legal system doesn't work like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether Autonomy's accounting was outright illegal or just misleading to purchasers are two different things.
Re:Send them both to their rooms without supper (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, and when we aren't sure if something was illegal, we hold a trial to figure it out.
Re: (Score:3)
Excellent plan. As the lawyer said, a man in the UK did something in the UK regarding a UK company and what it was doing in the UK, so I suggest we hold that trial.. in the UK.
If he broke the law in the UK, prosecute him in the UK.
If he didn't break the law in the UK, there is no case to answer and he doesn't need extraditing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Send them both to their rooms without supper (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not so sure it is truly a matter of a UK citizen and a UK company operating in the UK under UK laws.
From the article:
Before it was bought by HP, it had headquarters in San Francisco and Cambridge in the UK.
In 2010, about 68% of Autonomy's reported revenues came from the US and elsewhere in the Americas.
So they may claim to be a UK company but it looks like they have significant holdings in the US and do the majority of their business there (or at least in the Americas in general). It is kind of like saying that Apple is an Irish company just because they have their headquarters there (purely for financial reasons).
I'm not saying that the extradition is totally warranted just that Autonomy is more than just a UK company.
P.S. Is the US really a "a hostile foreign power" of the UK?
Re: (Score:2)
Has been since they started putting their nukes in our back yards, back in the 70s. Foreign - yes ; conducts operations harmful to our people - yes ; has been considered a dangerous opponent pretty much all of my life. The same goes for significant numbers of MPs.
As for Autonomy's "nationality", it was traded on the London stock exchange, and it's registered office and legal address (as well as locus for paying corporation tax, rather than local s
Re: (Score:3)
I forget to lock my door, it's 1/2 my fault if someone comes in a steals money. Thank god the legal system doesn't work like that.
If you don't lock your gun or your car and someone kills someone with it then you may in fact be held partially liable for the damages, though not for the theft. However, if you leave your keys in your car and it's stolen and your insurance company finds out then at best you're getting investigated for insurance fraud.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't lock your gun or your car and someone kills someone with it then you may in fact be held partially liable for the damages
The perp wouldn't be absolved of the crime because you left the gun unlocked. That's what we're talking about. Whether another law was broken by the victim regarding proper gun storage is a separate issue.
Anyway, you get my point. You must. Negligence by the victim never excuses the crime. Obviously if a justice system worked like that it'd be anarchy with every perp counter suing because the victim didn't take adequate measures to stop them from committing a crime.
Facts (Score:3)
The insanity of this extradition treaty [is that] it doesn't rely on any facts,"
Well, there's the fact that he was indicted in the UK so there seems to be some evidence that he committed a crime. Being extradited to stand trial isn't the same as being declared guilty. He'll stand trial in the US as well.
The British public did not realize that the US justice system works entirely differently to the UK's
I suspect UK citizens understand the justice systems work different in other countries. I hope they do.
Re:Facts (Score:4, Insightful)
Seems to me like Dr Lynch does have his facts straight. The accusations HP is bringing are a UK matter to be resolved in UK courts. The US shouldn't be involved.
And he's pointing out how the existing extradition treaty between UK and US allows easy abuse by US entities.
Re: (Score:2)
The accusations HP is bringing are a UK matter to be resolved in UK courts.
That's the opinion of a man with a vested interest in it being so.
Of course he's trying to draw attention away from his crimes and turn it into some international incident. Unfortunately for him there's nothing unusual about his situation, and what's going to happen to him. The US and UK have extradition treaties with each other, and MANY other nations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Except it's not a US matter, which should make the extradition void.
Re: (Score:2)
Except maybe it is a US matter.
Before it was bought by HP, it had headquarters in San Francisco and Cambridge in the UK.
In 2010, about 68% of Autonomy's reported revenues came from the US and elsewhere in the Americas.
https://www.bbc.com/news/busin... [bbc.com]
Note just in case you weren't aware. San Fransisco is in California and California is a US state.
Re:Facts (Score:4, Informative)
Seems to me like Dr Lynch does have his facts straight. The accusations HP is bringing are a UK matter to be resolved in UK courts. The US shouldn't be involved.
Civil cases and criminal cases have nothing to do with each other. The US is always involved in any investigation of fraud involving the acquisition by a US company. It's like if I sell you a highly volatile chemical that explodes and kills you when you open it, the excuse "well I'm in the UK so the US doesn't have any business bringing a murder charge against me" won't really fly.
And he's pointing out how the existing extradition treaty between UK and US allows easy abuse by US entities.
Nope, he's appealing to the court of public opinion. The UK extradition treaty relies on proving that there's reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed and that this crime is also a crime in the other jurisdiction. I.e. if he'd had sold his business to ARM instead of the HP he'd be facing the UK criminal justice system instead.
Gotta hand it to him, he's won you over.
Re: (Score:2)
The UK extradition treaty relies on proving that there's reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed and that this crime is also a crime in the other jurisdiction.
No, the US doesn't have to demonstrate reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed. The UK also has to assure that the alleged crime would be a crime if committed in the UK.
Of course, on this occasion the alleged crime was committed in the UK, so no, the US has no jurisdiction.
This is a politically motivated prosecution that's seeking to abuse an extradition treaty the UK should never have fucking agreed to in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Does China have extradition treaties with any countries? If not, what does China's opinion matter?
Re: (Score:2)
Was he? Are you sure you're not confusing the civil trial (HP sued him) with criminal charges? One of his arguments against extradition is that if any crimes were committed then they were committed in the UK and he should be tried there.
Re: (Score:2)
Was he?
My mistake in terminology. He was sued in civil court. I believe "indict" is only used for criminal charges.
I was responded to OP's claim of "no facts". There are some facts if HP is able to sue him, in the UK, for basically the same thing the US DOJ wants to charge him with.
Re: (Score:2)
This is one surprising thing about the extradition ruling: the judge had previously said he would wait for the verdict from the civil suit, because if HP lose that there surely is no criminal case to answer.
Re: (Score:1)
I suspect UK citizens understand the justice systems work different in other countries. I hope they do.
I suspect a large number are more familiar with the US system than the current UK system, due to the large number of American police procedurals.
Re: (Score:2)
Being extradited to stand trial isn't the same as being declared guilty. He'll stand trial in the US as well.
Moreover in order to be extradited you need to show reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed and that it is a crime in both countries. The fact he is being extradited is a good indication that if he'd done the same thing to a UK based company he'd likely be facing a criminal court case in the UK as well.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, right. Only in extreme cases does the US allow extradition of its citizens.
If the roles were reversed, US would say exactly what he is saying: wait for the verdict of the court and then we might talk about it. Just don't get your hopes up as see above.
Re: (Score:2)
The US would say absolutely nothing about waiting for a court verdict when two groups sue each other on an unrelated civil matter.
As to how easily the US extradites, that I agree with. They set the bar a little higher for suspected crimes.
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly I think many UK citizens have the same errant belief that many US citizens do, that the US has a justice system.
They just don't hear about the corrupt political prosecutions or the coercion and unjust pressure put on people to falsely plead guilty.
Re:Facts (Score:4, Informative)
There is a problem with the UK-US extradition treaty. Usually for extradition to happen it has to be a crime in the home country and there has to be a trial to establish if the evidence meets a minimum standard. That's not the case with this treaty.
He has a fair point about not getting a fair trial too. By UK standards the US system is not fair, it's too influenced by money (good layers are very expensive) and the ability to select jury members is an issue. Conditions in US prisons often result in human rights violations too.
The inability to call witnesses is a big one. In the UK courts can use video links if the person cannot attend, and often do when people are abroad. In fact it's hard to see why this entire trial could not be conducted via video link with him in the UK on bail.
Re: (Score:2)
In practice, people in England generally aren't aware of that. Which goes from the "man on the Clapham omnibus" up to the Prime Minister. Probably (since her family owns property in Scotland) queen Brenda does know about Scottish law being significantly different to Englandish law, but I wouldn't take it for granted. The Prime Liar has repeatedly demonstrated that h
Re:Facts (Score:4, Interesting)
The UK's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) investigated the deal in 2013, before dropping the case two years later because of "insufficient evidence".
Re: (Score:2)
The UK's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) investigated the deal in 2013, before dropping the case two years later because of "insufficient evidence".
He's currently indicted in civil court in the UK.
Dr Lynch has been facing civil charges at the High Court in London, where HP is suing him for damages over the deal.
https://www.bbc.com/news/busin... [bbc.com]
Re: Extradition to the US (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The British government doesn't have torture going back centuries? They must have been the good type of conquers.
I was under the impression we invented torture. Somewhere in London there will be a small statue memorializing the man that invented torture.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
No, Khan had it torn down and replaced with a statue of a racist murderer who didn't torture people, just had them beheaded.
Hypocrisy (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
She was a government agent, so probably because they don't want the US to cause problems for Mr Bond after all the ruckus he caused.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
She was *not* a government agent, merely the wife of a CIA Operative.
HP failed their "Due Diligence" Mike Lynch is not guilty.
Re: (Score:3)
You forgot that the currency of politics is hypocrisy and that there are *always* two sets of rules when dealing with people who have either money or power (or both).
Let me close with "do as we say, not as we do".
Get it?
Autonomy's accountants punished in UK (Score:3, Informative)
Swapsies (Score:1)