Banker arrested on bribery charges (merged)
#1
Posted 05 January 2011 - 17:42
I don't know much about this but didn't see antything on it. Any insight from our Euro posters?
Advertisement
#2
Posted 05 January 2011 - 17:51
Fifty million dollars appears from nowhere…
This one looks like it's worth keeping up with. Could be FOM's 'FIFA moment'.
Edited by Risil, 05 January 2011 - 17:52.
#4
Posted 05 January 2011 - 17:55
Zoe
#5
Posted 05 January 2011 - 18:07
#6
Posted 05 January 2011 - 18:25
This banker's affairs are also intertwined through a very close Ex-friend with the former Austrian finance minister and (ex?-)society darling Grasser, which is involved as his Ex-friend in many a suspecious row himself...
Tutto il monde e' paese, say the Italians. Certainly a lot of money has taken many strange and dark channels.
H2H
Edited by H2H, 05 January 2011 - 18:26.
#7
Posted 05 January 2011 - 18:29
#8
Posted 05 January 2011 - 19:45
http://www.motorspor...e_11010408.html"BERLIN (AP) - A former German bank executive has been arrested for allegedly accepting a $50 million kickback in the 2006 sale of a large stake in the Formula One's rights holding company, German prosecutors said Wednesday"
I don't know much about this but didn't see antything on it. Any insight from our Euro posters?
#9
Posted 05 January 2011 - 19:51
Such shock when I read this title. Such shock.
Yeah, who would have thunk that.... what a surprise.
Zoe (living in a banana republic)
#10
Posted 05 January 2011 - 20:19
Such shock when I read this title. Such shock.
Oh, he'll get his. After the $4T drain from the world economy at the hands of bankers since 2008, exactly 0 have gone to jail.
I'm sure he's get a fine for many thousands of dollars, which is what he currently spends a month on socks.
#11
Posted 05 January 2011 - 21:08
Edited by ForeverF1, 05 January 2011 - 21:32.
Removed what is probably best debated in the PC. "BTW how is US/England reacting to the financial fiaco of past three (or so) years?"
#12
Posted 07 January 2011 - 09:10
http://www.smh.com.a...0106-19ggs.html
Is this an old story in Germany or has it only just broken?
If true ( as yet unproven) it wil not reflect well on CVC, I had to smile that CVC do not only refuse to comment on it they wil not even say who in CVC says " no comment!!
#13
Posted 07 January 2011 - 09:35
#14
Posted 07 January 2011 - 10:03
#15
Posted 07 January 2011 - 10:20
Zoe
#16
Posted 07 January 2011 - 10:27
Oh, he'll get his. After the $4T drain from the world economy at the hands of bankers since 2008, exactly 0 have gone to jail.
I'm sure he's get a fine for many thousands of dollars, which is what he currently spends a month on socks.
I'm guessing you don't have a mortgage, a credit card, or any kind of debt.
Still, this should be a fun thread. The ultimate combination of populist rage against banking and Bernie/CVC/FOM/etc/et al.
#17
Posted 07 January 2011 - 10:50
#18
Posted 07 January 2011 - 11:25
Yeah, who would have thunk that.... what a surprise.
Zoe (living in a banana republic)
Report is as boring as a biscuit recipe says Cheapy living in the country that invented "guanxi". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guanxi
The largest percentage of offenders in Chinese jails is Accountants and other white collar crime, no ****.
#19
Posted 07 January 2011 - 11:32
Report is as boring as a biscuit recipe says Cheapy living in the country that invented "guanxi". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guanxi
The largest percentage of offenders in Chinese jails is Accountants and other white collar crime, no ****.
GOOOOO China!!!
If people knew 10% of what goes on they would rise up with pitchforks.... even the ones who are glad to have facilities like mortgages and credit cards so that they can effectively become share-croppers for financial institutions for their entire lives.
Advertisement
#20
Posted 07 January 2011 - 11:46
Yep this should be good, the (faux) outrage will be omnipresent.Still, this should be a fun thread. The ultimate combination of populist rage against banking and Bernie/CVC/FOM/etc/et al.
Also the combination banker - arrest - bribe - CVC - Bernie will within weeks result in new FACTS for the BBs, as all those words combined surely prove without a doubt that "Bernie bribed the German banker for 50 million to sell his bank's F1 rights to CVC".
You heard it here first
#22
Posted 08 January 2011 - 18:59
Also the combination banker - arrest - bribe - CVC - Bernie will within weeks result in new FACTS for the BBs, as all those words combined surely prove without a doubt that "Bernie bribed the German banker for 50 million to sell his bank's F1 rights to CVC".
You heard it here first ;)
What's the legal status of this BB throwing around criminal allegations? I imagine it's not particularly sensible.
#23
Posted 08 January 2011 - 19:46
What's the legal status of this BB throwing around criminal allegations? I imagine it's not particularly sensible.
Its not clear that Ecclestone was involved with that transaction, anyway.... and other people who ran companies that owned/part owned the rights over the years have got themselves into serious legal trouble (on unrelated matters) so you dont even need to bring Ecclestone into to any speculation to find "a Bernie figure" to demonise.
Anyway, its better not so speculate in specific terms about things that may be illegal on someone else's website - if anyone wants to be so reckless they should publish the speculation on their own website (or check with the owner of the website first)... I have to confess that I've never read this BB's rules and there is probably something there that would be relevant too.. so also read the BB's rules for starters.
#24
Posted 16 January 2011 - 01:01
According to the German report it was very simple for Griebkowski to actually bribe himself with CVC and Bernie Ecclestone having every opportunity to deny knowledge of the transaction. According to the magazine Bernie was interested to keep control over the F1 empire and all he needed for this was the assurance that Gribkowski would sell the shares only to a company that had Ecclestone's approval.
With an amazing coincidence of dates certain things happened at the same time. On 25th November 2005 Griebkowski's Austrian consulting company GGC was founded. It was the same day as the transaction of the F1 sale from Bayrische Landesbank to CVC. Another funny coincidence is the founding date of the company Bridge Holding which transferred the funds to Griebkowski's consulting firm GGC. It was the 21st February 2006. One day later Griebkowski was made single acting director of the Ecclestone company Petara. In his role as Petara director Griebkowski could sign any deal without signature by another person.
The German prosecutors think that Griebkowski was mainly made director of Petara to get access to the $50m which he could transfer to the Bridge Holding company without consent of any other person. That way Bernie Ecclestone or CVC would never even show up in any record of the transaction. It would be 100% deniable. Another suspicious fact is the absence of a record of Griebkowski's directorship from the reports of his employer, Bayrische Landesbank. Under normal circumstances honorable or payed jobs would be listed for Griebkowski so that all transfers of companies that employed him could be screened. The fact that this record was missing is indicative of the shady nature of the Petara business.
I would find it extremely unlikely that nobody gave a thought to some $50m missing from Petara's assets after Gribowski's directorship was terminated and the control went back to Ecclestone or CVC. We are not exactly talking pocket change here. CVC and Bernie can make statements that they have not been involved in the transaction but they must have known about it from the day when they found that $50m were missing. Since they never lost a word about the payments from Petara to Bridge Holdings one assumes that the transfer of funds was intended.
Edited by WhiteBlue, 16 January 2011 - 09:03.
#25
Posted 18 January 2011 - 13:03
http://www.thisislon...rmula-1-team.do
http://www.thisislon...red-by-no-10.do
#26
Posted 18 January 2011 - 13:24
#27
Posted 18 January 2011 - 13:36
Now corrected.You've got your URL and URL descriptions completely backwards.
#28
Posted 18 January 2011 - 13:46
It's giving you a truncated link which gives you the website's index.
#29
Posted 18 January 2011 - 14:03
No
It's giving you a truncated link which gives you the website's index.
http://www.thisislon...ture-charges.do
http://www.thisislon...rmula-1-team.do
Didn't take much searching.
#30
Posted 18 January 2011 - 14:06
#31
Posted 18 January 2011 - 14:14
#32
Posted 18 January 2011 - 18:47
As an interesting aside to this, it appears that Team Lotus is in the vanguard of complaints about this new anti-bribery UK legislation. They believe that the new rules will inhibit their ability to get UK based sponsors because companies will think twice about sponsoring teams for which a main return is corporate hospitality.
http://www.thisislon...rmula-1-team.do
http://www.thisislon...red-by-no-10.do
As much as this seems like bullshit
Team Lotus said supporters could take their money elsewhere amid fears the sport's corporate hospitality culture might fall foul of the Bribery Act.
Its actually a valid fear.
But then look at this ass-forwards way that laws get implemented by bureaucrats ... you couldnt make it up.
http://www.thisislon...e-informants.do
#33
Posted 18 January 2011 - 19:46
I'm wondering how this issue is connected to a case of suspected bribery of a banker employed by a state owned bank. The case is really about FOM supposedly bribing someone to the disadvantage of the Bavarian tax payer in order to hold on their powers. Supposedly $50m in cash have flown to accomplish that. The case has a totally different dimension to a $3,000 sponsorship package for a VIP paddock pass.As an interesting aside to this, it appears that Team Lotus is in the vanguard of complaints about this new anti-bribery UK legislation. They believe that the new rules will inhibit their ability to get UK based sponsors because companies will think twice about sponsoring teams for which a main return is corporate hospitality.
http://www.thisislon...rmula-1-team.do
http://www.thisislon...red-by-no-10.do
Edited by WhiteBlue, 18 January 2011 - 19:47.
#34
Posted 18 January 2011 - 19:46
But you have made it up, so clearly you are wrong. Where in the article is there anything about 'bureaucrats' implementing laws? The UK is still a pretty free country and there is no law against telling people not to co-operate with the police (however much the police might not like it, and however anti-social it might be to seek to confound the forces of law and order)But then look at this ass-forwards way that laws get implemented by bureaucrats ... you couldnt make it up.
http://www.thisislon...e-informants.do
#35
Posted 19 January 2011 - 12:02
But you have made it up, so clearly you are wrong. Where in the article is there anything about 'bureaucrats' implementing laws? The UK is still a pretty free country and there is no law against telling people not to co-operate with the police (however much the police might not like it, and however anti-social it might be to seek to confound the forces of law and order)
This isnt the board to tell you what I really think... except to say that your response gave me a chuckle ...and confirmed my original view.
All I will say for now is that someone needs consider that the pamphlets suddenly appeared shortly after a murder... a general pamphlet expressing anti-police views is one thing. Interfering with a murder investiation (which was obviously the aim of this pamphlet) is another.... I suspect that the real problem for the police was that they did not know for sure who was doing it... or they would have had a chat with them.
[/OT]
#36
Posted 22 January 2011 - 11:26
http://orf.at/stories/2037824/
#37
Posted 22 January 2011 - 12:29
#38
Posted 22 January 2011 - 12:31
#39
Posted 22 January 2011 - 13:07
Former IndyCar and IMSA driver John Paul Jr could tell you - he was sentenced to 5 years jail for it in 1986.What exactly is rackettering? I've never gotten a straight definition ...
Advertisement
#40
Posted 22 January 2011 - 13:18
#41
Posted 22 January 2011 - 13:51
So it's basically a synonym for extortion, but without the connotations of hardcore illegality.Things like illegal lotteries, demanding payment for 'protection', mainly businesses that themselves are considered illegal.
Gee, can you vague that up for me a bit?Former IndyCar and IMSA driver John Paul Jr could tell you - he was sentenced to 5 years jail for it in 1986.
#42
Posted 22 January 2011 - 14:01
#43
Posted 22 January 2011 - 14:23
For a full definition of racketeering try this: http://legal-diction...om/RacketeeringGee, can you vague that up for me a bit?
For John Paul Jr's sorry story (and that of his much nastier father) try this: http://www.autoweek..../free/812319991
If you have the misfortune to meet John Paul Sr and he says he is going to kill you, ask him to shoot you. The FBI informant he shot in the head five times lived to tell the tale...and testified against him in court.
#44
Posted 22 January 2011 - 21:45
I think I'll pass.
#45
Posted 23 January 2011 - 07:30
The additional material from the German FTD publication is quickly told. Prosecutors found written evidence that the agreed amount of $50m was not payed completely and that Griebkowsky's lawyer complained to Bernie Ecclestone's London office in writing about that point. Griebkowsky also complained that the devaluation of the dollar resulted in a much reduced pay out in Euro compared to the 2005 rate and demanded compensation. This is simply further evidence against Ecclestone if this affair goes before a court in the UK or Germany.
I have previously opined that the construct of Griebkowsky bribing himself via his directorship of the Petara company will not protect Ecclestone from being accused of bribery. You do not hand over a company to a managing director with exclusive signing power and take it back some years later with $50m assets or cash missing without some serious questions being asked unless you have prior agreement that the money will go missing.
#46
Posted 23 January 2011 - 10:37
#47
Posted 24 January 2011 - 15:51
#48
Posted 24 January 2011 - 15:59
Concrete evidence' in Ecclestone bribery claims"? If this claim is accurate, Bernie will be in trouble. The German authorities have traced the money. They know which fronts the money was placed in. They know where the money originated. A $50 million consultancy fee for a banker of his standing, with no previous consultancy history or business established is so outside the norm, it leaves little imagination what the payment was really for.
I really don't give a rat's @ss if Bernie gets into trouble as long as it does in no way contaminate F1.
#49
Posted 24 January 2011 - 18:15
I really don't give a rat's @ss if Bernie gets into trouble as long as it does in no way contaminate F1.
Wouldnt want the sport's reputation for the highest standards of integrity sullied ... would we?
#50
Posted 24 January 2011 - 20:17
So it's basically a synonym for extortion, but without the connotations of hardcore illegality.
More like using a legitimate business as a front for illegal activity, which seems to be the nut of the case here.