A French tribunal ruled IMF Chief Christine Lagarde Guilty of Negligence, but withheld punishment.
Christine Lagarde was found guilty of negligence in public office by a special Paris court on Monday in a case that has cast a cloud over her position as managing director of the International Monetary Fund.
A French tribunal decided not to hand down any sentence to the former French finance minister. Ms Lagarde’s lawyer said the verdict would not enter into her judicial record and claimed the verdict as a “half victory”.
The court, dedicated to judging ministers, said Ms Lagarde failed to prevent a fraudulent €403m payout the French state made to flamboyant entrepreneur Bernard Tapie when she was finance minister.
It said that Ms Lagarde should have appealed the payout, which occurred in 2008.
The conviction is an unwelcome stain on the IMF managing director’s stint at the fund but it may not be enough to see her toppled as its head.
The IMF’s board had also been preparing for a possible conviction, with people close to major shareholders saying that in the absence of a prison term — and with continuing support from the French government — Ms Lagarde would probably be able to stay in her position.
After the judgment, the French government said it maintained “all its confidence” in Ms Lagarde’s ability to carry out her responsibilities at the fund.
The prosecutor argued throughout the trial that the case against Ms Lagarde was “very weak”. In summing up, he said that she was merely following the reasonable advice of her advisers, which was an error only with hindsight.
Legal cases in France are drawn up by magistrates, who then hand them on to prosecutors, who are free to take a different line in court.
- It seems quite peculiar for “prosecutors” to publicly proclaim they have a weak case.
- This is the second, high-profile “Guilty, No Punishment” case in Europe this month.
- If the case was weak, why was she guilty?
- If she was guilty, why was there no punishment?
Another Wilders’ Moment
On December 9, in the Netherlands, a Dutch tribunal ruled Geert Wilders Guilty Without Penalty for inciting discrimination and insulting Moroccans, deemed to be an “ethnic group”.
In that case, the court ruled that conviction alone was sufficient penalty.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
Lagarde wrote a E270 million check to a convicted felon who was a friend of Sarkozy…but the Elites protect each other…
The UK Telegraph suggests that Lagarde may be dropped by the IMF as she is damaged goods. I very much doubt that will happen.
If she is dropped it should be for a none French candidate and someone without bias to the Euro.
She is definitely a high-ranking member of “The Big Club”.
You and I are not in “The Big Club”.
Ms. Legarde got a better type of justice than you or I would in similar circumstances.
But she is one of the protected, so no surprise.
James Greenberg said:
You know why sharks don’t eat politicians?
Sounds like a safely averted nepotistic suicide mission of intergenerational proportions.
All sorts of **** going on today.
Wilders vs. Lagarde – we let an innocent off so we have to let a guilty off to keep the balance.
Peter C said:
More, I think, a case of two politically motivated prosecutions that intended to bring about different conclusions. With Wilders it was an attempt to blacken his reputation and was far too weak an accusation to actually attempt to impose a penalty. With LaGarde it was an attempt to save her reputation by watering down the verdict when the evidence was too strong to be denied altogether. Well the gambit was a complete failure with Wilders, let’s hope the same applies with LaGarde
Cannot fail with Lagarde as she has no popularity to win or lose.
As much as I’d like to see the public elect their way out of bad government, and it’s little sister, economic policies, it just won’t happen. These guys protect their own with a slew of red tape and interpretations of laws to suit them. The only way these guys are going to be ousted from their positions is with the French Revolution, 2.0, but instead of just France, it’ll include a good portion of the EU.
Just wait for it. When the fuse gets lit by some random bad event, the public will go absolutely nuts and fight back. At this point, between immigration issues, youth unemployment, and the rule of law need not apply to the elites, yep, it’s just a matter of time for those with nothing to lose to finally decide enough is enough.
“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered…. I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies…. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
“Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks United States are Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man’s throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.”
Congressman Louis T. McFadden – served as Chairman of the United States House Committee on Banking and Currency during the Sixty-sixth through Seventy-first Congresses, or 1920-1931
Don’t hold out much hope for Europeans having enough sense to see what’s going on.
Google “The Rotten Heart of Europe” and have a read.
Someone so pro-Euro as Lagarde will be well looked after by the project just in case she’s replaced by someone that isn’t so in love with it.
Lagarde guilty, no French punishment.
Britsh innocent, French want to punish.
There is a clear double standard. A cashier was fired after about 20 years’ service for something involving a few cents and a recycling bonus.
If the case was so “weak”, it’s not a prosecutor’s job to give interviews and interfere with the process. WTH is going on?!?
Stuki Moi said:
The connected looking out for each other. And not even necessarily with ill intent. They just “know” that Lagarde is really edumecated, has a lot of the “right” credentials, is famous, say the “right” things on TV, stand up for progressive claptrap, dresses fashionably, belongs to a PC sex etc., etc. She is basically all that the dimbulbs have been told their whole lives that one should aspire to be.
So, it would be really dangerous to taint her too much. As that could lead to someone like Trump gaining power. Or LePen. Or, should we be so lucky, a bunch of Somalis with guns. Which “everyone” just, again, “knows” is really baaad. And irresponsible. And populist. And racist and sexist. Etc., etc. blah blah…..
What’s much sadder than the elites themselves pushing this world view for all it’s worth, is that huge populations of designated underlings doing the same thing. Now, that’s testament to the effectiveness of Prussian pervasive publicly funded public indoctrination.
This is another in a long, long list of crimes that have been committed by the powerful and politically connected that have resulted in absolutely no real punishment.
If a hungry homeless bum steals three pizzas on three separate days, he can be sent to jail for life under the “three strikes and you’re out” law.
If a banker steals or “misplaces” a billion dollars, he won’t be arrested, and might not even lose his yearly bonus. Google “new jersey governor billion dollar theft” and Jon Corzine’s name pops up.
It’s a return to the medieval double standard of High Justice for the nobility and Low Justice for the serfs.
It’s a return to Chicago, Mob Style, Al Capone in charge
Fred Rogers said:
EU law: One set of rules for the taxpayers, a different set of rules for the criminal political class. Illegal immigration is encouraged, native taxpayers must suffer.
Gee, I wonder why this corrupt system is failing?
Stuki Moi said:
You’ll lose nothing in accuracy by removing the EU part.
Law, at least those of the human written kind, is always a more beneficial construct for those who write, interpret and enforce it, than for those on the other end of the stick. The latter will always be better off simply picking one of the divine ones, and working around it’s occasional quirks.
People are individually very flexible. Something baked in, institutionalized asymmetries in power, will never be.