On March 6 through 8, 2013, Marc Raspanti, Joseph Mancano, James Kraus, and Douglas Rosenblum of Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti attended the 2013 ABA National Institute on White Collar Crime. One of the most well attended seminars was entitled “Dos and Don’ts of Internal Corporate Inquiry.” The panel, moderated by Michael A. Collora, highlighted the importance of carefully planned and executed internal investigations. A unique perspective was offered by panel member Douglas Lankler, Executive Vice President and Chief Compliance and Risk Officer of Pfizer, Inc. Mr. Lankler shared experiences of internal investigations spawned by internally identified issues, as well as those instituted following receipt of subpoenas.
Regardless of why an internal investigation is commenced, cost and timing are crucial considerations for counsel and the client. There are many methods by which to conduct investigations, but it is a best practice to have a written policy in place. This will avoid the inevitable questions by the government at a later time regarding why certain steps were taken or not. It is equally as important to be mindful of the audience. Will a report of the investigation be disclosed to the government? Should a written report even be created? As government enforcement of criminal fraud statutes continues to increase, it is a wise client who chooses counsel that is well versed in these topics.
Posted On Friday, March 8, 2013
By:
David Rainey, BP’s former vice president of Gulf of Mexico Exploration, has moved to dismiss the charge that he misled Congress about the rate at which oil flowed from the blown out Macondo well into the Gulf of Mexico during the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
According to Rainey, under federal law, obstruction of a congressional investigation is limited to “a duly authorized inquiry and investigation by a committee or House of Congress.” Rainey alleges that the government’s charge that he obstructed a congressional investigation fails as a matter of law because the allegedly false and misleading statements that he provided were in response to a request for information by Representative Ed Markey, who was acting in his individual capacity as a Member of Congress when he sent his letter request to BP.
Rainey also claims that the charge should be dismissed because it has not been alleged that he knew of the pending investigation by a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee; the federal law he is being prosecuted under does not apply to subcommittee investigations; and the charge is “unconstitutionally vague.”
Rainey was indicted on November 14, 2012 on two counts: obstruction of a congressional investigation (18 U.S.C § 1505), and making a false statement to a law enforcement official (18 U.S.C. § 1001).
In a related matter, the civil trial against BP continues in New Orleans. On Wednesday, Randy Ezell, a Transocean employee who survived the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion, provided key testimony about the misinterpretation of tests that could have provided warning of the potential for a blowout. He also testified abut his experience living through the disaster that killed 11 people. According to the Huffington Post, Ezell said BP’s well site leaders on the rig ultimately were responsible for deciding how the tests were performed and interpreting the results. As reported previously on White-Collared, if found to have been grossly negligent, BP could be held liable for as much as $21 billion under the Clean Water Act.
