Thursday, April 14, 2011

Government Re-Indicts Former GlaxoSmithKline Corporate Counsel

It is interesting to see that the government has issued a press release announcing that it has re-indicted the former pharmaceutical (GlaxoSmithKline) company lawyer with charges of obstruction and making false statements. It is common for the  government to use"short-cut" offenses in white collar cases. (see here).

But shouldn't they have also issued a press release weeks ago when the government's indictment was tossed by a judge (see here).  Why is it that the press releases only tell half the story?  Shouldn't a minister of justice tell both the dismissals and the re-indictments?

More importantly, is this a case that the government should be spending our precious resources for government prosecution. Even if there is a discovery violation here, and I am not convinced that there has been one - does this matter belong in criminal court?    Or, if this conduct did occur, would this better be suited for an administrative or disciplinary matter?   

See also Sue Reisinger, Corporate Counsel, Feds Re-Indict Former Glaxo In-House Lawyer

(esp)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/whitecollarcrime_blog/2011/04/government-re-indicts-former-glaxosmithkline-corporate-counsel.html

Civil Enforcement, Obstruction, Prosecutors | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef014e60f02b6d970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Government Re-Indicts Former GlaxoSmithKline Corporate Counsel:

Comments

Post a comment