Unlock Editor's Digest Lock for Free
FT editor Roula Khalaf will select your favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
The former CEO of Barclays Jess Staley claims that when he wrote a letter to regulators describing the relationship as “not closing” in Monday's landmark trial, the bank claims it has a “clear understanding” of the scope of its relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
Staley is trying to overturn the lifetime ban by clearing the name from a senior role in the financial services industry imposed by the UK's Financial Conduct in 2023. Staley did not draft the letter, but the FCA ruled that he “recklessly approved it.”
In his opening statement seen in the Financial Times, Staley said, “In conversations with senior Barclays executives and the board of directors, he explained sufficient details of his relationship with Epstein.” . . It has been extended over the years to clearly understand that he has a close professional relationship with Mr. Epstein. ”
“This was also one of the factors that helped Barclays maintain his trust in Mr Staley. [the FCA] We began our investigation and continued our investigation. ” FCA began probes in 2019.
Staley attempts to disprove allegations made by the FCA in the opening argument that he presented a “pattern of behavior” that repeatedly misrepresented his relationship with Epstein to avoid damaging his career.
The former Bulkrais boss “recognized the reputation he had with Epstein and the risks he had brought to his career,” WatchDog said in the discussion.
The FCA said it must have been “recognized” the risk that the October 2019 letter to Watchdog could be misleading.
The FCA had been sent a cache of emails from JP Morgan Chase, former employer of Staley, whom the regulator believed otherwise. This ultimately led Staley to launch an investigation that was fined £1.8 million and was given a lifetime ban.
“He was reckless about the risk of allowing authority to make misleading statements in a situation where he was the only person in Barclays who actually knew the intimacy of his relationship with Mr. Epstein and the latest in his contact with him,” the FCA said in his opening discussion.
Staley tried to frame his relationship with Epstein, who passed away in 2019.
“Mr. Epstein had a network of contacts that are most notable,” Staley said in his opening statement. “The extent of his contacts and influence is not only surprising, but perhaps unprecedented.”
Staley also argued that there was a contradiction between what Barclays wanted to convey in the letter, that is, that Staley had no knowledge or participation in Epstein's crimes, and how the FCA interpreted it.
“The letter was not intended to define the nature and history of Staley's relationship with Mr. Epstein when it was drafted and approved,” his opening statement said. “If that was the purpose, it would have been drafted and approved in very different terms.”
The FCA said he was “not embarrassing” Staley and did not “sue a lawsuit to speculate on Mr. Epstein's involvement or knowledge in wrongdoing.”
It added that it must depend on the truthfulness and integrity of the expressions made on it, and that it should be able to rely on openness in the disclosure of the matter that is reasonably expected when a notification is given.
“This is an important case. … about the behavior of individuals who played a senior role in the sector and set an example for staff at their company,” he said.
The two-week trial will derive figures from major cities, including Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey and former colleagues of Barclays.
