Re: Consistency Is The Hobgoblin Of Small Minds
The UK trial is a civil case by HP against Lynch whereas the case the DoJ wish to bring is a criminal caase. T eDoJ will presumeably ssay that the fact that someone has started a civil case for damages has no significance on their pursuit of a criminal case but it would seem sensible to wait until the outcome of the civl case in the UK. If as at the moment the court decides there was no fraud, that Mike Lynch had no responsibility for fraud it would be a very strong argument in his defence after all a civil case is decided on the balance of probabilities and the threshold for a criminal case shoudl be much higher.
What has been shocking is the weakness of HPs case given that Hussein was convicted in a criminal case for fraud in the US. What it throws into highlight is the iherent injusticcs of the US system of deals with witnesses and plea bargaining. The only really significant evidence against Hussein was the statements of a US employee who admitted fraud he claims at Husseisns direction, Hussein says not. What is interesting is that Hussein claims he was offered a deal in whcih he would not be prosecuted if he testified against Lynch. When he refused because (he says) in order to do so he would need to lie. He was prosecuted. Given the absence of any real evidenc eof significant fraud in the UK trial there is at leats of much evidence for criminal activity by the US proecutors in seeking to pevert the course of justice as there is in any of the Autonomy managers committing fraud.
My takewaway from this is that the UK should not extradite anyone to the US on fraud charges as they are unlikely to receive a fair trial.