Boiler room movie

Boiler Room movie In the previous assignment, the movie “ Broiler Room was analyzed from an ethical perspective. This paper analyzes the movie from a legal perspective. In summary, the video is about a college drop-out Seth Davis who has a passion for his father’s approval and making money. Though he was unsuccessful in his education, he begins an illegal casino in his apartment and he is opposed by his father who is a respected judge. He abandons his casino for the successful and reputable J. T. Marlin firm. However, what turns out as a new beginning ends into a quagmire of legal dilemmas. In winning one has to play unfairly. When J. T Marlin activities are revealed, as a result of selling stock to non-existing companies, legal actions are to be taken to provide justice for those who have been manipulated.
Different claims in the movie can be understood basing on the legal principles. This refers to some recognizable facts that can determine the outcome of a case. J. T Marlin Company is to be charged with a plan of defrauding. This charge is normally made under the common law. In the movie, the company had this plan as revealed by Smith. Its plan was to make money by selling stocks to non-exiting companies. At the end, an investor remains with worthless shares that he cannot sell in nay stock market. In proving such an offense, the defendant is expected to have with reasonable evidence that cannot be doubted about the participant plan to acquire money dishonestly (Mary Monson n. p.). This issue is portrayed as the FBI agents convince Seth to provide evidence against J. T Marlin.
J. T Marlin can also be judged by violating the principle of distributive justice. With this principle, a person is expected not take an action that is likely to harm those that are least fortunate (Hochschild 45). In the movie, the company uses Seth to take advantage of Harry Reynard who owned a food company. This company was less privileged when compared to others that were also a prey to the firm. Although Harry revealed how he and his family were desperate at the moment, the company continues to persuade him falsely promising good returns on his investments. This action results in Harry being abandoned by the family and he loses the house they were determined to purchase. Precisely, J. T Marlin Company knew what its action would do but continued to pursue it.
The bridge finance legal principle is violated in the movie. Ideally, bridge financing is allowed when no connection is made between an investor and firm (Corsi and Akhunov 34). This form of financing applies to rising companies that want to use investors to raise capital. However, Seth realizes that firms used in bridging have a connection with J. T Marlin. Although this is wrong, the movie portrays this action as acceptable and it is admired in the process fulfilling the passion for money.
To sum up, Boiler Room movie has some legal principles that can be used in violating the legal claims. First, J. T Marlin Company can be charged with a plan for defrauding because it had conspired to sell worthless shares with an aim of making money. This is chargeable under the common law. Second, the company made profits from the less fortunate. Finally, the company violated the principle of bridging finance due to its connection with the participating firm.
Works Cited
Boiler Room. Dir. Ben Younger. New Line Cinema, 2000. Film.
Corsi, Carlo and Akhunov, Ali. Innovation and Market Globalization: The Position of SME’s. IOS Press, 2000. Print.
Hochschild, Jennifer L. (1986). What’s fair: American Beliefs about Distributive Justice? Harvard University Press, 1986. Print.
Monson, Mary. Boiler Room Fraud, Market Abuse (Including Insider dealing) and other SFO/FSA related cases. n. d. Web. 19th April 2014. < http://www. marymonson. co. uk/fraud-solicitors/share-market-offences-boiler-room-fraud/>