Lawyers plead guilty to fraud in U.S. trading case

Court Alerts

[##_1L|1308349605.jpg|width="130" height="90" alt=""|_##]A former Morgan Stanley <MS.N> lawyer and her attorney husband pleaded guilty on Thursday to conspiracy and securities fraud in what U.S. authorities have called the most pervasive insider trading ring since the 1980s that netted more than $15 million in illegal profits. Randi Collotta, 30, and Christopher Collotta, 34, admitted to Judge Victor Marrero in Manhattan Federal Court that they made $9,000 through one of the schemes in the Wall Street insider trading case that netted hundreds of thousands of dollars to various parties between September 2004 and August 2005.

Randi Collotta, who worked for Morgan Stanley's compliance division in New York, admitted to giving information about upcoming mergers and acquisitions to her husband, who is in private practice.

Christopher Collotta told the court he shared some of the insider information with Florida broker Marc Jurman, who agreed to share part of his profits with the Collottas and also passed the information along to others.

The couple sat at opposite ends of a long table at the hearing, flanked by their lawyers and occasionally glancing at each other. Randi Collotta wept softly as she read a statement admitting her guilt.

"Randi Collotta accepted responsibility for what she did, and today she took a significant step in putting this behind her," her lawyer Kenneth Breen said after the hearing.

The Bayport, New York couple were among 13 people charged criminally in March with participating in the scheme. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed separate, civil charges against 11 people, including the Collottas.

Six of the 13 defendants, including Jurman, have pleaded guilty.

Christopher Collotta's lawyers released a statement after the hearing saying, "Mr. Collotta recognizes that these are serious offenses, deeply regrets his actions in participating in these offenses, and realizes that he will have to live with the consequences of his actions for the rest of his life."

Both defendants agreed to forfeit $9,000 in profits they made through the scheme. Randi Collotta agreed not to appeal a sentence of 18 months or less in prison, while her husband agreed not to appeal a sentence of 16 months or less, Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Fish said. Both face a maximum 25 year prison term.

The couple were released until sentencing, scheduled for Sept. 7. They have been free on $250,000 bond each.

Related listings

  • Ex-treasurer pleads guilty in Nigerian investment scam

    Ex-treasurer pleads guilty in Nigerian investment scam

    Court Alerts 05/09/2007

    [##_1L|1317394418.jpg|width="130" height="90" alt=""|_##]Even his attorney finds it baffling that former Alcona County treasurer Thomas Katona would have dumped as much as $1.2 million in public funds into fraudulent Nigerian investments. "It's the m...

  • Man faces court over veteran's beheading

    Man faces court over veteran's beheading

    Court Alerts 05/09/2007

    [##_1L|1230965326.jpg|width="120" height="101" alt=""|_##]A 41-year-old mental health patient has faced a northern New South Wales court charged with the decapitation murder of 82-year-old Armidale war veteran Mark Hutchinson. Mr Hutchinson's body wa...

  • Frank Schilt pleads guilty to murder of wife

    Frank Schilt pleads guilty to murder of wife

    Court Alerts 05/08/2007

    [##_1L|1091592986.jpg|width="130" height="90" alt=""|_##]A man accused of killing his wife and dumping her body in a landfill pleaded guilty on Monday. In September, a judge ordered Frank Schilt to stand trial for the murder of his wife, Terri, altho...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

St Peters, MO Professional License Attorney Attorney John Lynch has been the go-to choice for many professionals facing administrative sanction. >> read