Ex-UBS Trader Tom Hayes Manipulated Libor to Boost Profit, SFO Says

Ex- UBS Group AG star trader, Tom Hayes, agreed to manipulate and rig Libor to dishonestly boost profits, prosecution lawyers said asking the UK's top court to reject attempts to overturn his conviction.
The Supreme Court appeal over the conviction of Hayes and ex-Barclays Plc trader Carlo Palombo for rigging Libor and Euribor will come to an end on Thursday. The judges will have to weigh whether the Britain's first and most high profile criminal trial over rate rigging was unfair.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

an hour ago

• Yahoo

Supreme Court takes up religious claim by Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were cut by prison officials

WASHINGTON — Taking up a new religious rights case, the Supreme Court on Monday agreed to weigh a claim for damages brought by a devout Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were cut by Louisiana prison officials against his wishes. At the time of the incident in 2020, Damon Landor had kept a religious vow not to cut his hair for almost 20 years. Landor had served all but three weeks of his five-month sentence imposed for a drug-related criminal conviction in Louisiana when he was transferred to the Raymond Laborde Correction Center. He was holding a copy of a court ruling that made it clear that practicing Rastafarians should be given a religious accommodation allowing them to keep their dreadlocks. But a prison officer dismissed his concerns and Landor was handcuffed to a chair while two officers shaved his head. Upon his release, Landor filed a lawsuit raising various claims, including the one at issue at the Supreme Court, which he brought under a federal law called the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. At issue is whether people who sue under that statute can win money damages. Louisiana Attorney General Elizabeth Murrill said in court papers that the state does not contest that Landor was mistreated and noted that the prison system has already changed its grooming policy to ensure that other Rastafarian prisoners do not face similar situations. But she contests whether Landor can get get money damages for his claim. A federal judge and the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals both ruled in favor of the state, saying that money damages are not available. Landor's lawyer point to a 2020 Supreme Court ruling that allowed such damages in claims arising under a similar law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The laws have "identical language," they said in court papers. The court will hear oral arguments and issue a ruling in the case in its next term, which starts in October and ends in June 2026. This article was originally published on

The Hill

3 hours ago

• The Hill

Supreme Court turns away Virginia's appeal in felon voting ban lawsuit

The Supreme Court turned away Virginia's appeal on Monday that sought to quash a challenge to the state's lifetime felon voting ban, allowing the lawsuit to move ahead toward trial. Two disenfranchised voters claim the ban violates the Virginia Readmission Act, a federal law that set conditions for Virginia to regain congressional representation following the Civil War. Lower courts allowed the suit to move forward, saying courts can enforce the Readmission Act and the state doesn't have 11th Amendment immunity. But Virginia's Republican-controlled attorney general's office argued to the justices that would open the 'floodgates' and mark a 'radical change in the law.' 'The Fourth Circuit's ruling that the Readmission Acts are judicially enforceable invites courts to wade into the political decisions that restored the rebel States to federal representation more than 150 years ago, calling into question Congress's continuing determination that the States have republican governments and are entitled to representation,' the state wrote in its petition. In a brief order, the Supreme Court declined to take up the case. A federal district judge is set to hold a bench trial in October in the case. It was filed in 2023 by two convicted felons who are ineligible to vote under the Virginia Constitution's lifetime voting ban for felons. Tati Abu King was originally convicted of robbery in 1988 before the governor restored her voting rights. She later lost them again after being convicted of felony drug possession. Toni Heath Johnson has various felony convictions dating back to the 1980s, including forgery, credit card theft and bigamy. Her voting rights, too, were restored, but she was subsequently convicted of drug possession and child endangerment. Their suit points to the Virginia Readmission Act, which was signed in 1870 following the Civil War and allowed the state to regain congressional representation. But it was conditioned on the state never changing its constitution to disenfranchise voters except for those convicted of 'such crimes as are now felonies at common law.' The two Virginians, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and law firm Wilmer Hale, argue that exception only covers a handful of long-recognized felonies like murder, arson and rape. But they say their convictions weren't recognized at common law in 1870, so they should be able to vote. They urged the Supreme Court to turn away Virginia's appeal so the case can move forward. 'The Act's purpose was to prevent Virginia from manipulating statutory criminal law to disenfranchise Black voters—specifically, from convicting and disenfranchising newly freed Black residents based on statutory crimes that were not felonies at the time Virginia entered the Union,' their attorneys wrote.

CNN

3 hours ago

• CNN

Supreme Court rebuffs effort by R. Kelly to overturn conviction

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal from the recording artist R. Kelly, who claimed prosecutors 'stretched' the law in securing racketeering and sex trafficking convictions against him. Robert Sylvester Kelly is serving a 30-year sentence for those convictions. Kelly, a Grammy-winning R&B songwriter, was convicted under the 1970 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, often associated with efforts to take down the Mafia but that can also give prosecutors the ability to seek higher sentences in different types of cases. Kelly's defense attorneys told the Supreme Court that prosectors 'stretched' the use of the act in how they defined the term 'enterprise.' An enterprise for the purposes of RICO, Kelly told the high court, only exists if its members share a common purpose to engage in illegal conduct. 'To hold otherwise would mean that any rogue bad actor operating within a legal organization could be prosecuted under RICO as occurred here,' Kelly's lawyer argued. 'This scenario stretches the RICO statute beyond and contrary to its purpose.' The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan ruled against Kelly in February and he appealed to the Supreme Court in May. Federal prosectors declined to respond. As is its usual practice, the Supreme Court did not explain its decision to deny the appeal. The justices turned away another appeal from Kelly in the fall. In that case, Kelly had argued that he was wrongly retroactively prosecuted under a federal law that passed in 2003 and made the statute of limitations indefinite for sex crimes with minors.