JPMorgan Chase & Co. employees could be arrested
American authorities investigating the $6.2 billion “London Whale” trading losses at JPMorgan Chase & Co. are considering making arrests, the latest twist in a case that created a scandal for the largest American bank, according to two people familiar with the situation.
The main target of the investigation is Javier Martin-Artajo, the sources said. They did not want to be identified because the investigation is ongoing. Martin-Artajo worked in London as the direct supervisor of Bruno Iksil, the trader who became known as “the London Whale” because of outsized bets in a thinly traded derivatives market.
The United States is also looking at Julien Grout, Iksil's junior trader, according to one of the sources. Grout, who stayed on at JPMorgan after Iksil, Martin-Artajo and another employee were fired from the bank, is the most junior person under investigation by authorities.
The timing of the possible arrests was not clear.
Martin-Artajo's lawyer, Lista Cannon, and Iksil's attorney, Jonathan Barr, did not respond to requests for comment, nor did Grout's lawyer in Paris.
A spokesman for JPMorgan Chase declined to comment.
The investigation is focusing on whether anyone responsible for the trades tried to deliberately mismark them by inflating the value at which they were recorded on JPMorgan's books at the height of the scandal, which took place during the first half of 2012.
Reuters reported on Thursday that Iksil is cooperating with the government and will not face any charges. His cooperation is essential to any arrest, the sources said.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.