Hedge fund manager Raj Rajaratnam was found guilty on 9 counts of securities fraud and five counts of conspiracy.
The jury delivered a unanimous verdict on its 12th day of deliberations after a two-month-long trial.
BILL SINGER, SECURITIES LAWYER WITH GUSRAE, KAPLAN, BRUNO & NUSBAUM
It's an historic verdict. It's a dramatic verdict. And it will likely set the stage for a dramatic change not only in the way that the Wall Street insider-trader activities are investigated and prosecuted, but most likely this will have a chilling effect on individuals and companies that trade on Wall Street.
Very few lawyers that do this for a living would we have expected a clean sweep.
It will justify Preet Bharara to call for more wire taps that will then be issued by the courts quicker. Wall Street has in essence been put on notice that prosecutors are going to be baiting more hooks, trying to pull more fish out of the water and have more success doing that.
This was a case that the prosecution really needed to win to retain its credibility.
In Rajaratnam, we have individuals in board rooms of publicly traded companies. As such, the public is put on warning that the securities markets are fixed and rigged.
JON NAJARIAN, FOUNDER OF WEB INFORMATION SITE OPTIONMONSTER.COM, CHICAGO
I think it was an appropriate verdict. I guess through some high-profile cases, not in securities but mainly in other criminal activities, like for instance, the OJ trial, people have thought that obvious guilt will be overlooked by some juries. This was not the case this time. The jury did a good job. I haven't seen any move in volatility and the market. Had it not come out this way, then given how obvious it seemed to most of us that the guy was guilty, there could have been extreme negative reaction in the market.
MATT MCCORMICK, PORTFOLIO MANAGER AT BAHL & GAYNOR INVESTMENT COUNSEL IN CINCINNATI, WHICH HAS ABOUT $3.6 BILLION OF ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT
Most people anticipated this. It looks like it was a pretty clear-cut decision. If they've got wiretaps on you, they've got you. Look at the implications of this: expert networking and other grey areas of research will be called into question. People will be much more careful.
There is such a thing as doing real gumshoe work and using the mosaic theory, and then there's information-gathering that's more nefarious. This verdict will force people to take that extra step to make sure they are in the clear.
FRED DICKSON, CHIEF MARKET STRATEGIST, THE DAVIDSON COS., LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON:
The jury appears to have found him guilty. I think that probably will be viewed positively by the public at large and the investing public. People that have tried to take and capitalize on insider trading, which is illegal, should be punished. The only surprise to me was that it took 12 days.
I don't think there's going to be any market reaction. It may be a minor confidence boost on the part of the investing public that the enforcement and regulatory authorities are monitoring... It should be a modest boost to investor confidence. It's hard to draw anything else out of it.
DAN SEIVER, PROFESSOR OF FINANCE, SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY, SAN DIEGO
I think there is no doubt he should have been found guilty. This could be the tip of the iceberg. This gives prosecutors the green light to pursue other cases.
The honest hedge fund managers should breathe a sigh of relief. This will make the competition fairer. We need to have a leveled playing field even though the perception is that it's not. Ordinary investors would have a better chance now because these big fish who cheat could no longer do so. Because when they cheat and make money, the other side of these trades are hammered because they don't have the insider information.
That's why we need these laws and cases to level the playing field. That's why it's good that's he was nailed.
MICHAEL KOBLENZ, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, WHITE-COLLAR DEFENSE LAWYER AT MOUND COTTON WOLLAN & GREENGRASS
When that many people pleaded guilty in advance, I'm surprised it went to trial. I'm surprised they didn't try to work out a deal. But if you've got the money and you want to take a shot, maybe it was worth it to him.
I'm sure his lawyer said, 'You can spend this much on a defense and see what happens, and if you don't win, then maybe you'll win on appeal.' Maybe they'll get a reversal, but I have no idea.
Millions of dollars were spent on this case, no question about it. But I guess he took a shot. It will be interesting to see what the sentencing will be.
JEFF IFRAH OF LAW FIRM IFRAH LAW IN WASHINGTON
This case represents another case where a very wealthy defendant had some credible defenses and lost when confronted with the government machine.
I don't think there's anything precedent-setting about this.
I think it's very difficult for the jury to properly assess the evidence in an insider-trading case, because what constitutes non-public information is very complicated. I don't think juries can understand what's truly inside information, and whether the defendant had the intent to trade on that information, which is also a very complicated factual question.
He's easily looking at 20 years or more. I think the judge has the discretion to do anything he wants in this case. If we see a harsh sentence here, I think that reflects what the judge believes he saw of the evidence.
DAN RICHMAN, PROFESSOR AT COLUMBIA LAW SCHOOL
The combination of this conviction with the numerous guilty pleas in the case suggest ... the seriousness with which the government will be pursuing insider trading.
Where you have tapes and extensive testimony of the sort you had in this trial, a responsible jury will review them.
(Reporting by Terry Baynes, Richard Leong, Angela Moon, Dan Wilchins, Caroline Valetkevitch, Lauren LaCapra, Carlyn Kolker and Nick Brown)