Jump to content

Talk:Honest services fraud

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHonest services fraud has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 5, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 4, 2009.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that United States courts of appeals agree that private individuals can be prosecuted for honest services fraud but disagree on the criteria for determining guilt?

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Honest services fraud/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


Second Review

I will offer a second opinion here since: 1)The original review was not properly conducted (left on GAN, review open, little serious attempt made). 2) The original reviewer called for a second opinion. 3) Nominator confirmed that the review was unhelpful.

It should take a day or two, but I'll post things here as I notice them.

1. Lead section too short. It does not summarise the article.

 Fixed I've expanded the lead. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2. The list of recent notable prosecutions does not fully conform to MOS, embedded lists. Each case should be explained briefly in proper prose and a short introduction to the section made. Each should also be cited.

 Fixed I've converted the section to prose and referenced it. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

3. Necessity, or lack thereof, of state law violations

This section is clear enough, but, as in all sub-sections, it might be better to directly state the legal principle clearly first.

E.g. "The Court of Appeal for the Fifth Circuit held in US Vs Brumley (1997) that, to be convicted of Honest Services Fraud, an official must have breached the state statutes which define the services he owes to his employer."

 Question: Sorry, I'm not sure how you want this to be changed. The current version reads, "In 1997, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decided in United States v. Brumley that in order for a state official to have committed honest services fraud, they must have violated the state statute defining the services which they owed to their employer (the state)." You don't think that's clear enough? A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should also be clarified what happens as a result of the two different interpretations. Is the law different in different circuits? Will this be at issue in Mr Weurauch's appeal to the Supreme Court appeal?

I don't think this needs clarification; the fundamental issue is that the courts have differing interpretations and decide which precedent to follow on a case-by-case basis. In other words, the law isn't different in different circuits, it's interpreted differently by different courts in different cases. The Supreme Court cases are expected to consider the entire honest services law and set a binding precedent on these issues. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

4. Intent to defraud and personal benefit

Again state the rule before giving the case history.

"The Court held that there must be some intent to defraud or seek personal gain for the offence to constitue HSF". The case illustrates the princple well though.

The first few and last line of that paragraph also need to be cited.

 Fixed Both issues should be resolved now. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 19:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--Ktlynch (talk) 23:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking over this review, Ktlynch! I'll address your concerns over the next few days. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 02:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Replied to all of the above after working on the article. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think the article's in pretty good shape now. I would appreciate responses/clarifications to the above, of course, so we can proceed. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 19:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Honest services fraud. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:06, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Honest services fraud. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:18, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Succinct opening

[edit]

Could someone please write a definition of what an "honest services fraud" is on the first or second paragraph? 82.81.85.98 (talk) 07:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Honest_services_fraud&oldid=1200025798"