Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Jury Finds Against Film Producers In Bribery Case
A pair of Beverly Hills film producers have been found guilty of conspiring to bribe a former Thai government official to obtain contracts that provided for, among other things, control of the annual Bangkok International Film Festival, the Justice Department said. A jury in California found Gerald Green, 77, and Patricia Green, 52, guilty of money laundering and conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). A jury also found substantive violations under the FCPA, a higher evidentiary hurdle than proving the conspiracy charge.
The Greens are scheduled for sentencing Dec. 17 before Judge George Wu of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Trial in the closely watched federal court case lasted nearly three weeks. FCPA trials are rare, and this case is one of the first against the movie industry.
“As these convictions demonstrate, the Department of Justice will not waiver in its fight against corruption, whether perpetrated within our borders or abroad,” said Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer in a statement.
A superceding indictment in March charged the Greens with paying $1.8 million in bribes between 2002 and 2007 to Juthamas Siriwan, the former governor of the Tourism Authority of Thailand, in exchange for receiving contracts, including one to manage and operate the Bangkok International Film Festival. Businesses owned by the Greens, according to Justice, earned $13.5 million from the contracts.
Justice officials said the kickbacks were paid through banks in Singapore and the United Kingdom in the name of the former governor's daughter and a friend of the governor. Prosecutors said the Greens used different business names ' some with fake addresses and telephone numbers ' to hide the money they were making on the contracts.
The conspiracy and other FCPA charges carry a maximum penalty of five years each in prison. The money laundering counts carry a maximum penalty of up to 20 years each in prison.
Jerome Mooney, a partner at Los Angeles-based Weston, Garrou, Walters & Mooney, who represents Gerald Green, says: “This case fires a shot across the bow of Hollywood. Unfortunately that shot landed in my client's boat.” Mooney calls the Greens “fundamentally good people. A prison sentence of any length for these people in this case would be obscene.”
Senior trial attorney Jonathan Lopez of the Fraud Section of the Justice Department's Criminal Division prosecuted the case with Assistant U.S. Attorney Bruce Searby of the Central District of California.
Mike ScarcellaThe Legal TimesEntertainment Law & Finance
A pair of Beverly Hills film producers have been found guilty of conspiring to bribe a former Thai government official to obtain contracts that provided for, among other things, control of the annual Bangkok International Film Festival, the Justice Department said. A jury in California found Gerald Green, 77, and Patricia Green, 52, guilty of money laundering and conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). A jury also found substantive violations under the FCPA, a higher evidentiary hurdle than proving the conspiracy charge.
The Greens are scheduled for sentencing Dec. 17 before Judge George Wu of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Trial in the closely watched federal court case lasted nearly three weeks. FCPA trials are rare, and this case is one of the first against the movie industry.
“As these convictions demonstrate, the Department of Justice will not waiver in its fight against corruption, whether perpetrated within our borders or abroad,” said Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer in a statement.
A superceding indictment in March charged the Greens with paying $1.8 million in bribes between 2002 and 2007 to Juthamas Siriwan, the former governor of the Tourism Authority of Thailand, in exchange for receiving contracts, including one to manage and operate the Bangkok International Film Festival. Businesses owned by the Greens, according to Justice, earned $13.5 million from the contracts.
Justice officials said the kickbacks were paid through banks in Singapore and the United Kingdom in the name of the former governor's daughter and a friend of the governor. Prosecutors said the Greens used different business names ' some with fake addresses and telephone numbers ' to hide the money they were making on the contracts.
The conspiracy and other FCPA charges carry a maximum penalty of five years each in prison. The money laundering counts carry a maximum penalty of up to 20 years each in prison.
Jerome Mooney, a partner at Los Angeles-based Weston, Garrou, Walters & Mooney, who represents Gerald Green, says: “This case fires a shot across the bow of Hollywood. Unfortunately that shot landed in my client's boat.” Mooney calls the Greens “fundamentally good people. A prison sentence of any length for these people in this case would be obscene.”
Senior trial attorney Jonathan Lopez of the Fraud Section of the Justice Department's Criminal Division prosecuted the case with Assistant U.S. Attorney Bruce Searby of the Central District of California.
Mike ScarcellaThe Legal TimesEntertainment Law & Finance
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?