Ex-Goldman Trader Tourre Fights S.E.C. Penalties in Fraud Case

Photo
Fabrice Tourre in August, when he was found liable for civil securities fraud. He is seeking leniency in more than $1 million in fines against him.Credit Stan Honda/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Fabrice Tourre’s Wall Street career is over.

But now that he faces an unusually stiff financial penalty for his role in creating a soured mortgage deal at Goldman Sachs, Mr. Tourre is fighting back.

In a court filing on Tuesday, Mr. Tourre’s lawyers attacked the Securities and Exchange Commission’s pursuit of more than $1 million in penalties, calling it “unwarranted and unjust” and “unreasonably severe.” The lawyers are proposing a smaller sum: $65,000 or less.

Mr. Tourre’s bid for leniency comes nearly six months after a federal jury found him liable for defrauding investors in the mortgage deal, a verdict that handed the S.E.C. its first major legal victory in a case arising from the financial crisis. Until the case made Mr. Tourre a symbol of the crisis, such courtroom triumphs remained elusive.

The legal filing on Tuesday opened a window into Mr. Tourre’s life since the trial, saying he had resumed his routine as an economics doctoral student and teaching assistant at the University of Chicago. The push for leniency, coming from Mr. Tourre’s lawyers at Allen & Overy, also raised the stakes in the contentious back-and-forth over the punishment.

Related Links

When delivering the opening salvo last month, the S.E.C. claimed that Mr. Tourre, a 35-year-old Frenchman, “has exhibited no contrition or appreciation of his misconduct.” And when the agency sought to block Mr. Tourre from lending nearly $500,000 to a family member for an apartment purchase, fearing he was squirreling away money outside the government’s reach, Mr. Tourre’s lawyers fired back at the S.E.C.’s “cynical misinterpretation.”

For all the squabbling, the final say on the payouts rests with the judge overseeing the case, Katherine B. Forrest of Federal District Court in Manhattan. It is expected that Judge Forrest, who recently declined to order a new trial for Mr. Tourre, will decide in the coming weeks.

The S.E.C.’s case centered on a mortgage investment known as Abacus 2007-AC1, a deal that Goldman created with the help of a hedge fund, Paulson & Company. Mr. Tourre and Goldman, the S.E.C. argued, failed to disclose to investors that the hedge fund was betting the deal would fail.

The S.E.C. provided a grim portrayal of Wall Street greed, denouncing Mr. Tourre during the trial as living in a “Goldman Sachs land of make-believe” where deceiving investors is not fraud.

The S.E.C. also cited reams of embarrassing, if somewhat irrelevant, emails from Mr. Tourre. In one infamous message, Mr. Tourre refers to a friend nicknaming him the Fabulous Fab.

In turn, Mr. Tourre’s lawyers portrayed their client as something of a scapegoat. While the S.E.C. never charged a top executive at a giant Wall Street bank with fraud stemming from the crisis, it took a hard line with Mr. Tourre, one of thousands of midlevel vice presidents at Goldman.

In the filing on Tuesday, the lawyers described Mr. Tourre’s status at the time of the mortgage deal as a “28-year-old newly promoted vice president working in an essentially unregulated area of the financial sector.” The S.E.C., the lawyers wrote, “has failed to take enforcement action against any of the other people whom the S.E.C. has tactically labeled co-schemers.”

At the heart of the filing was an attempt to undermine the S.E.C.’s requested penalties, which include $910,000 in fines; $62,858 in interest; and the forfeiture of $175,463, a portion of his 2007 bonus that the agency describes as in ill-gotten gains. While Goldman paid for Mr. Tourre’s defense, the S.E.C. is requesting that the penalties come out of Mr. Tourre’s own pocket.

Mr. Tourre’s lawyers say he “has every intention” of paying the penalties himself. But they called the S.E.C.’s request lacking “any legal or factual basis.”

And to bolster Mr. Tourre’s bid for leniency, the lawyers argued that the S.E.C. took an overly broad interpretation of the jury’s verdict. Another mitigating factor, they said, was that Mr. Tourre’s conduct was not “recurrent.”

“His otherwise immaculate nine-year career at Goldman and his efforts to rebuild his life and to start a new career over the last four years demonstrate the isolated nature of AC1,” they said.

The lawyers are also resisting the S.E.C.’s demand for disgorgement of Mr. Tourre’s 2007 bonus, calling it “impermissible double-counting.” When the S.E.C. settled with Goldman in 2010, the lawyers argued, the agency extracted such disgorgement from the bank.

Mr. Tourre provided Judge Forrest with a declaration from Daniel Sparks, the former head of Goldman’s mortgage department, explaining that he did not recall a “specific mathematic relationship between Mr. Tourre’s compensation” and his trading desk’s profitability.

As a plan B for deflecting some punishment, the lawyers argued that Mr. Tourre had suffered enough. Not only has the case ended his career on Wall Street, they said, but it will probably undermine any shot he has at finding work “at anything close to his prior compensation level.”

“The publicity that has attended this case has, to a large extent, served as a self-executing punishment for Mr. Tourre already,” the lawyers wrote. “Mr. Tourre has lived for several years under a media spotlight as a result of the manner in which this case was filed and pursued, a fact that warrants compassion, not additional punishment.”

Correction: January 22, 2014
An earlier version of the caption in this article mischaracterized the legal judgment against Fabrice Tourre. He was found liable for securities fraud. He was not convicted on fraud charges.