Prosecutors have discussed allowing Grout to describe his version of events in a so-called proffer session, according to the people. Such an interview, also known as a “Queen for a Day” agreement, typically lets someone under investigation explain what happened, with the understanding that those statements won’t be used against them in court. No such session has been set yet for Grout, the people said.
Prosecutors wouldn’t be conceding they made a mistake in their deal with Iksil if they meet with Grout, said Samuel Buell, a former federal prosecutor who teaches at Duke University Law School.
“The government gives up almost nothing,” by having such a meeting, Buell said. As for the notion that prosecutors had overlooked or missed exculpatory evidence, Buell said he was skeptical, because JPMorgan would have made all relevant documents and e-mails available to investigators.
Jim Margolin, a spokesman for Bharara, declined to comment on whether the office may meet with Grout for a proffer session. A spokesman for the FBI and attorneys for Grout, Martin-Artajo and Iksil also said they couldn’t comment.
JPMorgan’s losses prompted government probes on two continents, U.S. congressional hearings and an internal review that led to a 50 percent pay cut for Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon, 57, who the board said bore some responsibility for lapses. Regulators in the U.K. and U.S. are preparing to impose fines on the bank as soon as this month, a person with direct knowledge of the matter said in August.
Grout and Martin-Artajo, 49, mismarked investments to “conceal hundreds of millions of dollars” in losses from derivatives trades, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said in a parallel lawsuit last month. Grout was 35 years old when the suit was filed.