Tabernula insider trading case: Jury told a taped conversation was not a confession

A London jury was told that a taped phone call between two defendants in Britain's biggest insider trading trial isn't a confession.

According to a report in the Financial Times, defendant Ben Anderson said the call, made in October 2008, showed only that he was worried that associates of his were using insider trading to place bets with him.

The conversation between Anderson and Iraj Parvizi, a business partner and co-defendant in the so-called Tabernula trial, took place in October 2008 and concerned Andrew Hind, an accountant.

The Financial Conduct Authority accused Anderson making financial spread bets on behalf of business associates using inside information from Andrew Hind, an accountant, derived from former Deutsche Bank managing director Martin Dodgson.

According to transcripts of the call reported by the FT, Anderson said: "Equally so, if I was pulled in, 'Do you know this guy?' No, no idea who he is officer, never seen him, never met him … I'd say that anyway, but I mean, if you can say that with your hand on your heart . . ."

The case - code named Tabernula, which is Latin for "little tavern" - has five defendants accused of conspiring to trade securities with inside information between 2006 and 2010.

The other defendant in the case is Grant Harrison, a former managing director at Altium Capital.

They're accused of making more than £7 million in profit, the most ever in a case like this, from trades using inside information and all have pleaded not guilty.

Richard Baldwin, a jeweller, had also been named as a defendant but was ruled too ill to stand trial last year.

The case had a dramatic start. In March 2010, more than 100 police and regulators were deployed across 16 locations to arrest seven people.

The financial crisis were still fresh in City traders' memories and the raids came as the Eurozone sovereign debt crisis was beginning to get traction. The raids, co-coordinated by the now-defunct Financial Services Authority, stunned a City, which was used to a regulator with a "light touch."

Now the trial, which was delayed after cuts to legal aid saw some defendants lose access to their lawyers, comes as the Financial Conduct Authority faces criticism for reverting to the same light touch approach on the City as its predecessor.

The case is ongoing at Southwark Crown Court in London.