Talk:Eric Pulier
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Removal of dismissed charges per WP:BLPCRIME
[edit]All charges were dismissed with prejudice in 2018.[1][2] All references to charges dismissed should be removed from article per WP:BLPCRIME. Please take extra caution when editing Biographies of Living Persons - see WP:BLP for more information. EricPfromTustin (talk) 18:49, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ Duke, Jennifer. "US Court drops bribery charges against former CBA executive". The Sydney Morning Herald. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 27 December 2018.
- ^ Pearce, Rohan. "US criminal charges against former CBA IT executive dropped". ComputerWorld. ComputerWorld. Retrieved 27 December 2018.
Whilst all charges in the criminal case by the US Department of Justice were dismissed, it appears that the concurrent civil action Securities and Exchange Commission v. Eric Pulier went to final judgement, which was summarised as: "JUDGMENT 209 by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant is liable for disgorgement of $3,900,000, representing net profits gained as a result of the conduct alleged in the Complaint, together with prejudgment interest thereon in the amount of $649,976.48, and/or a civil penalty in the amount of $260,000 pursuant to Section 20(d) of the Securities Act and Section 21(d) of the Exchange Act. Defendant shall satisfy this obligation by paying $4,809,976.48 to the Securities and Exchange Commission within 30 days after entry of this Final Judgment." Justia, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Eric Pulier, Filing 210. Gdt (talk) 03:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Semi-reversion of previous rollback, bribery and SEC verdicts
[edit]For a balanced perspective, it's important to consider Jon Waldron's recent conviction for accepting AUD$3M in bribes from Pulier[1] [2] [3]. As the old saying goes, it's hard to have a bribee without a briber.
If EricPfromTustin (now deleted) is indeed Eric Pulier - as the username and location imply - this could represent a conflict of interest, which is against Wikipedia's guidelines and could warrant reversion of the edits.
As EricPFromTustin themselves mentioned, the WP:BLPCRIME page strongly suggests that dismissed charges should not be discussed. However, the same page also states:
"If different judicial proceedings result in seemingly contradictory outcomes that do not overrule each other, include sufficient explanatory information."
providing an example of a criminal acquittal, such as O.J. Simpson's murders, but a successful civil trial against him for the same.
In light of the discussion by Gdt regarding a civil action resulting in over $4M in penalties against Pulier to the SEC, the original reversion by EricPfromTustin appear to downplay these significant events. It seems necessary to re-add this information (though perhaps phrased more precisely than originally stated, and including legal verdicts).
- ^ "NSW District Court's verdict against Jon Waldron". NSW District Court.
- ^ Mills, Kelly (14 May 2024). "Former CBA IT manager found guilty of bribery scam". Australian Computing Society. Retrieved 18 June 2024.
Pulier himself made the payments to the two CBA IT execs through ACE Inc, a corporation registered by him.
- ^ Rogers, Ian (14 May 2024). "CBA IT corruption exposed". Retrieved 18 June 2024.
Eric Pulier was the principal shareholder in ServiceMesh and Pulier, the judgement explains, was the instigator of the bribes paid to Jon Waldron.