1. Criminal Defense Specialist in New York – Case Background & Initial Risks
The client, a mid-level employee at a biotechnology company, bought several hundred thousand dollars’ worth of shares based on what later appeared to be favorable market conditions rather than corporate inside knowledge.
When the company publicly disclosed a major licensing deal approximately one year later, the stock price rose significantly, generating notable profit.
Because the trades preceded a major announcement, investigators presumed the client had used “material non-public information.”
A criminal defense specialist was required to address the severity of potential charges under New York and federal securities laws.
Early investigative pressure & agency inquiry
State regulators and federal investigators contacted the employer, reviewed internal communications, and requested electronic files.
The client learned that the matter might be escalated to prosecutors, making the involvement of a criminal defense specialist crucial.
Investigators relied heavily on timing—an unreliable indicator that our defense team immediately challenged.
We focused on proving that the client had no access to deal-related information, no involvement in negotiations, and no role in corporate decision making.
By reframing the early narrative, the criminal defense specialistteam prevented investigators from drawing unsupported conclusions.
2. Criminal Defense Specialist in New York – Establishing No Access to Inside Information
To counter allegations, our defense required a detailed analysis of the client’s actual job responsibilities.
A criminal defense specialistmust demonstrate that “material non-public information” was neither received nor reasonably accessible to the accused employee.
Demonstrating lack of job-related access
The client was employed in a technical division focused on stability testing and quality-control processes for biological materials.
This department had no involvement in high-level licensing negotiations, strategic planning, or financial forecasting.
Our criminal defense specialist team proved that although the client held an employee title, the position did not grant visibility into future corporate contracts.
This severed the assumed link between the client’s employment and the information at issue.
Evidence of public predictability
We also emphasized that five months prior to the client’s trades, the company had publicly disclosed a similar early-stage agreement, making later developments foreseeable to any ordinary investor.
Under New York’s interpretation of insider-trading principles, information is not “material and non-public” when market participants can reasonably anticipate it based on existing disclosures.
The criminal defense specialist successfully argued that the alleged information did not meet the legal definition required for prosecution.
3. Criminal Defense Specialist in New York – Proving Legitimate Investment Motives
Because prosecutors often view profitable timing as suspicious, our criminal defense specialist built an independent narrative showing that the client’s investment was financially rational, long-term, and unrelated to insider knowledge.
We gathered financial statements revealing that the investment funds originated from liquid assets inherited from a parent’s estate.
The client redeemed a savings-type insurance product to make the stock purchase, demonstrating stability and transparency.
A criminal defense specialist uses such documentation to counter the idea of rushed, opportunistic insider trading, showing instead a planned and lawful investment strategy.
Evidence of substantial existing assets
Ownership of real estate valued in the millions further supported the argument that the trades were part of broader, routine asset management rather than an attempt to exploit secret corporate information.
Our criminal defense specialist presented property records and contracts, reinforcing the client’s financial credibility and normal investment behavior.
4. Criminal Defense Specialist in New York – Final Review & Non-Prosecution Decision
After reviewing comprehensive evidence, prosecutors concluded that no reliable proof established that the client received or used material non-public information.
The criminal defense specialist successfully dismantled assumptions tied solely to timing and stock gains.
The investigation closed with a no-charge outcome, protecting the client from criminal penalties, SEC referrals, and employment consequences.
21 Nov, 2025
