Legal News

Spotlighting the Men Who Want to Put Rajaratnam Away

By Ashby Jones

After a rather anti-climactic first day, the Rajaratnam trial could shift gears on Wednesday, especially if Judge Richard Holwell seats a jury and opening-statements begin.

If that happens, we’ll likely see John Dowd take the podium for the defense. Thanks partly to this story, we know what to expect from Dowd — an experienced and steady hand who isn’t afraid to mix it up.

But what about the prosecution? In Wednesday’s WSJ, Susan Pulliam and Chad Bray provide a bit more about the lawyers who will largely lead the show: Jonathan Streeter (pictured, in a 2009 court sketch), Reed Brodsky, and Andrew Michaelson.

For starters, this isn’t the lawyers’ first rodeo. Streeter and Brodsky have won convictions in the three insider-trading cases that have gone to trial in recent years in Manhattan.

Streeter, a 43-year-old avid water-skier who will deliver the opening statement in the case, is “unflappable,” said former prosecutor Marc Mukasey, who worked with him at the U.S. attorney’s office until 2005. Streeter joined the office in 2000.

Brodsky, 41, a former Wilmer Hale lawyer who colleagues describe as more demonstrative, will deliver the closing arguments. He joined the office in 2004.

Michaelson, who is on loan from the Securities and Exchange Commission as a “special assistant” U.S. attorney, has been involved in the case since 2007 and will join Brodsky and Streeter on the trial team. Michaelson, a 35-year-old senior SEC counsel, will assist in interviewing and cross-examining witnesses, people close to the situation say.

Prosecutors have been successful in recent years in insider-trading trials held in Manhattan federal court. Streeter, deputy chief of the criminal division, won a conviction in a 2009 insider-trading case, in which the government’s success hinged on the testimony of a cooperating witness whose credibility was under attack by the defense.

The case involved insider-trading charges against former Ernst & Young lawyer James Gansman, who the government said had tipped a Pennsylvania broker, with whom he had had a romantic relationship, on pending corporate takeovers.

Gansman’s lawyer, Barry Bohrer, questioned the credibility of the witness, who he said had offered “several versions of the truth by the time she pulled onto the witness stand.” Streeter convinced the jury that the witness finally was telling the truth, Bohrer said, telling them that the witness wouldn’t let everything go up in smoke by telling a false story here.

“He had a good rapport with the jury,” Bohrer said.

For more on the Raj case, check out this nicely done video compiled by the folks at the WSJ.

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on March 09, 2011 (boomark / email).