倫敦鯨事件疑雲未散盡 真相疑雲重重

It was, the British judge said, an odd request. While most traders would be relieved that the UK Financial Conduct Authority had stopped investigating them, here was a trader demanding that it continue.

在一位英國法官看來，這是一個奇怪的請求。大多數交易員都會因英國金融市場行爲監管局（Financial Conduct Authority，簡稱FCA）停止對他們的調查而感到鬆一口氣，有一位交易員卻要求該局繼續調查。

The trader was Julien Grout, formerly of JPMorgan Chase, who had been caught up in the 2012 fiasco that centred on a character known, because of the size of his market bets, as the “London whale”.

這位交易員就是摩根大通(JPMorgan Chase)的前員工朱利安•格勞特(Julien Grout)，他捲入了2012年的那起醜聞中。該醜聞的主角被稱爲“倫敦鯨”，原因是他的市場投機規模巨大。

Mr Justice Males, the judge, last week denied Mr Grout’s application for judicial review of the FCA’s decision to stop pursuing him. The FCA said it saw no point because, among other things, he already faced criminal charges in the US.

法官賈斯蒂斯•馬萊斯(Justice Males)日前駁回了格勞特要求對FCA停止調查他的決定進行司法審查的申請。FCA表示沒什麼可調查的，因爲他已在美國受到了刑事指控。

Mr Grout’s demand that the FCA carry on investigating him is only one of many odd features of the London whale case. To extend the piscine metaphor, the whole thing smells.

格勞特希望FCA繼續調查他的要求只是“倫敦鯨”事件中衆多奇怪現象之一。可以說，整條“鯨魚”都散發着奇怪的氣味。

The case dates back to JPMorgan’s decision in 2006 to begin trading in synthetic credit derivatives. By the beginning of 2012, the bank’s London traders were sitting on huge losses.

這起事件可以追溯到2006年摩根大通決定開始進行合成信貸衍生品交易。到2012年初，該行駐倫敦的交易員已出現鉅額虧損。

Up until then, the traders had been valuing the derivatives at the midpoint of the daily range of prices. As losses spiralled out of control, a US Senate report later said, they began using prices away from the midpoint that hid the scale of the potential damage.

直到那時，他們一直將這些衍生品的估值定在每日價格區間的中間點。美國參議院後來的一份報告稱，隨着虧損擴大至失控，他們開始利用偏離中間點的定價來掩蓋潛在損失的規模。

The report named three London-based traders as being involved: Bruno Iksil (the “London whale”), Javier Martin-Artajo, his superior, and Mr Grout, described by Mr Justice Males as “Mr Iksil’s assistant”.

該報告指出了涉案的三名駐倫敦交易員的姓名：布魯諾•伊克希爾（Bruno Iksil，即“倫敦鯨”）及其上級哈維爾•馬丁-阿塔霍(Javier Martin-Artajo)，還有被馬萊斯稱爲“伊克希爾助理”的格勞特。

Mr Grout’s lawyers say that he acted “in accordance with the bank’s prior practices and the instructions given to him by his superiors”.

格勞特的律師們稱，他是“按照該行的慣例以及上級給他的指示”進行操作的。

When it began questioning Mr Grout in 2013, the FCA, in the words of his lawyers, “compelled [him] to attend upon them and answer questions”.

當格勞特在2013年被FCA質詢時，用他的律師的話說，FCA“強迫（他）隨侍左右並回答問題。”

Had he been questioned by the US authorities, he would have been able to refuse to answer on the grounds that he might incriminate himself.

如果質詢他的是美國當局，他可以以可能自證己罪爲由拒絕回答。

The FCA gave transcripts of his interviews to the US authorities. In 2013, a US grand jury indicted Mr Grout and Mr Martin-Artajo for conspiracy, falsifying books and records and causing false statements to be made in JPMorgan’s Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

FCA將與他的談話記錄交給了美國當局。2013年，一個美國大陪審團指控格勞特和馬丁-阿塔霍串謀、僞造賬簿和記錄，並造成了摩根大通提交給美國證券交易委員會(SEC)的文件中的虛假陳述。

Mr Iksil, the whale, has not been indicted. He has been given immunity from US prosecution in return for giving evidence against Mr Martin-Artajo and Mr Grout.

倫敦鯨伊克希爾一直沒被起訴。他已在美國被免於起訴，以換取他提供指證馬丁-阿塔霍和格勞特的證據。

Mr Grout’s lawyers said the reason he wanted the FCA to continue its investigation was that he wanted the chance to clear his name.

格勞特的律師們表示，他希望FCA繼續調查的原因，是希望有機會洗刷自己的罪名。

But, Mr Justice Males said, he would have the opportunity to do that in the US. “I would expect a United States jury to be alert to the implications of Mr Iksil’s status as a ‘protected witness’ enjoying immunity from prosecution and alive to any unfairness which may result from any sense that the minnow is facing the full weight of the criminal law while the whale has escaped justice,” he said.

但馬萊斯說，格勞特將有機會在美國做到這一點。“我希望美國的陪審團警惕伊克希爾作爲‘受保護證人’享受免於起訴的影響，並注意任何的不公平，任何小魚受到了刑法的嚴懲而巨鯨卻逃過了審判的感覺，都可能帶來這種不公，”他說。

But that is to assume that a US criminal trial is a fair contest in which the prosecution has to persuade the jury of the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

但這要假設美國的刑事審判是一場公平競賽，控方必須以確鑿無疑的證據說服陪審團被告有罪。

That view is a mirage. This is not my description. It is that of Jed Rakoff, a US judge, who wrote an essay in the New York Review of Books entitled “Why Innocent People Plead Guilty”.

這種想法是一種幻覺。這不是我所描述的。這是美國法官傑德•雷科夫(Jed Rakoff)的評價。他在《紐約書評》(New York Review of Books)上撰寫了一篇題爲“爲何無辜之人會認罪”(Why Innocent People Plead Guilty)的文章。

Faced with the prospect of a long prison sentence if they were convicted, 97 per cent of those facing US federal trials agreed to a plea bargain, confessed their guilt and accepted a shorter sentence “effectively dictated by the prosecutor”, Judge Rakoff wrote.

面對自己如果被判有罪將被長期監禁的後果，97%的面臨美國聯邦審判的人同意了認罪辯訴協議，承認自己的罪行並接受“實際上由公訴人決定的”較短刑期，雷科夫法官寫道。

What of JPMorgan? It has been found highly culpable on both sides of the Atlantic. The FCA fined the bank £137.6m. In the US, the authorities have imposed penalties on JPMorgan over the whale affair totalling $700m.

摩根大通的情況如何？英國和美國都認定應對它予以嚴厲處罰。FCA罰了該行1.376億英鎊。在美國，當局因整個“倫敦鯨”事件已對摩根大通進行了共計7億美元的處罰。

The US Senate report said JPMorgan’s response had been “incomplete, contained numerous inaccuracies, and misinformed investors, regulators and the public”. No top JPMorgan executive has been charged over the affair or the statements to regulators and investors.

美國參議院的報告稱，摩根大通的迴應“不全面、包含許多不確切的地方而且誤導了投資者、監管機構和公衆”。沒有任何摩根大通的高管因這一事件、或者對監管機構和投資者提交的報告而受到指控。

Mr Martin-Artajo is in Spain, where he is resisting extradition. If Mr Grout were in the UK, he would be doing the same. Judging by the fate of others the US has demanded, he would eventually be put on a plane to America in handcuffs.

馬丁-阿塔霍目前在西班牙，正在抵制引渡。如果格勞特在英國的話，他也會這樣做。據其他美國所要之人的命運判斷，他最終將被戴上手銬並押上飛往美國的飛機。

But Mr Grout is French and he has gone home. His country does not extradite its citizens to the US. All I can say, in this case at least, is vive la France.

但格勞特是法國人，而且已經回國。法國不向美國引渡自己的公民。至少在這件事上，我不得不歡呼：法蘭西萬歲！