Madoff and his court apology – an exercise in show Dave Gordon - Monday, 29 June, 2009 (8106 views, Comment on this article)

 Bernard Madoff tried to apologize to his victims before being sentenced for 150 years in prison for his elaborate decades-long Ponzi Scheme, that bilked untold numbers of victims of $50 billion – the largest rip off scam in US history.

An apology forced-by-court or by being caught requires that the specificity and reparations are more emphasized. There is no “expeditious” because he did not offer any remorse when his guilt compelled him; rather, he waited until he had to apologize. Here is my take on Madoff’s court speech.

“I cannot offer you an excuse for my behavior. How do you excuse betraying thousands of investors who entrusted me with their life savings? How do you excuse deceiving 200 employees who have spent most of their working life working for me? How do you excuse lying to your brother and two sons who spent their whole adult life helping to build a successful and respectful business? How do you excuse lying and deceiving a wife who stood by you for 50 years, and still stands by you? And how do you excuse deceiving an industry that you spent a better part of your life trying to improve?

There is no excuse for that, and I don’t ask any forgiveness.”

I think this covers the specifics about what he did wrong. The rest of the apology, however, is wanting.

“Although I may not have intended any harm, I did a great deal of harm.”

It’s really tough to believe Madoff. A man in his position surely could have foreseen the consequences of his actions, understanding that harm would befall others eventually. Back in March, he said this to the judge, “I knew what I was doing was wrong, indeed criminal.” Most usually, criminal acts done willfully cause harm!

My advice for those apologizing is to stay clear of the “I didn’t intend any harm” gambit, unless it’s provable. Especially here, where Madoff uses the qualifier “may” as in “I may not have intended any harm.” Few people do bad things with bad intentions. Most people who have done bad things think they're doing "not bad" things, easily justifiable. The fact that something emanates from good intentions does not mean it is good.

“I am responsible for a great deal of suffering and pain. I understand that. I live in a tormented state now knowing of all the pain and suffering that I have created. I have left a legacy of shame, as some of my victims have pointed out, to my family and my grandchildren. That’s something I will live with for the rest of my life.”

Although speaking of one’s own guilt is nice gravy to an apology, Madoff lays it on a bit thick. In an apology, we’re more interested in knowing the specific damages done to others, those who have been wronged and hurt.

Talking about oneself in an apology gives the impression it’s all about the person who did the wrongs. It should be about the hurt caused, and the person who was hurt.

In Madoff’s case, most are loath to believe that he feels “shame.” Few are willing to just take his word for it.

 “People have accused me of being silent and not being sympathetic. That is not true. They have accused my wife of being silent and not being sympathetic. Nothing could be further from the truth. She cries herself to sleep every night knowing of all the pain and suffering I have caused, and I am tormented by that as well.”

 Madoff is incorrect – it is in fact true he was silent and unsympathetic. His 200-word court statement of remorse in March notwithstanding, I have not found another instance of where he has spoken contrite about what he has done.

As for his wife, I would submit that few truly care whether she lost sleep over what he’s done. True sympathy comes in the form of actions and words towards those who have been harmed.

“She was advised not to speak publicly until after my sentencing by our attorneys, and she complied with that.”

In the last paragraph he insists that his wife wasn’t silent at all, yet in this paragraph he admits she was instructed to do so by her legal counsel.

“Nothing I can say will correct the things I have done. I feel terrible that an industry I spent my life trying to improve is being criticized terribly now, that regulators who I helped work with over the years are being criticized by what I have done. That is a horrible guilt to live with.”

              It is true that his crimes can never be repented for completely. He has caused a great deal of harm to far too many people, who will suffer for many years. I wished in this paragraph he began to speak of the havoc he wreaked on others, instead of focusing on his own “guilt.”

Saying “I feel guilty” holds about as much weight as “I am sorry,” insofar as words only being words.

 Four months ago, he said much the same thing. In March, his court statement read thus:

“Your Honor, for many years up until my arrest on December 11, 2008, I operated a Ponnzi scheme through the investment advisory side of my business, Bernard L. Madoff Securities LLC, which was located here in Manhattan, New York at 885 Third Avenue.

I am actually grateful for this first opportunity to publicly speak about my crimes, for which I am so deeply sorry and ashamed. As I engaged in my fraud, I knew what I was doing was wrong, indeed criminal. When I began the Ponzi scheme I believed it would end shortly and I would be able to extricate myself and my clients from the scheme. However, this proved difficult, and ultimately impossible, and as the years went by I realized that my arrest and this day would inevitably come.

I am painfully aware that I have deeply hurt many, many people, including the members of my family, my closest friends, business associates and the thousands of clients who gave me their money. I cannot adequately express how sorry I am for what I have done. I am here today to accept responsibility for my crimes by pleading guilty and, with this plea allocution, explain the means by which I carried out and concealed my fraud.”

 While he accepted responsibility, and expressed remorse, more valuable would have been how he could offer to auction off his assets to bring some of the money back to those who invested in him and lost.

What he should have said was this: “Regrettably, I do not have the ability to pay back everything I have stolen. But of what is mine, my wife’s and my company’s, will be sold in short order to compensate those who have lost money from my wrongdoing.”

Though he could never promise through words and actions never to repeat it – the law certainly looked after that for us – such a large crime is irreparable. He could never hope to repair the damages.

Sometimes, indeed, as good as an apology might be, the crucial, last element of a kosher apology will forever be missing. Can an apology, then, be kosher if only two of the three parts exist? I would say no.

Instead, I would call it “a statement of remorse.” Even if it does not complete the entire criteria, a statement of remorse gives the one apologizing a chance to open up to his victims, and give his victims a chance to hear how the criminal recognizes what they’ve done.