Talk:Mark Whitacre/Archive 1

April 28, 2007 Article completely rewritten
The article has been completely rewritten (April 28, 2007) in order to include all of the suggestions below. It is a complete rewrite from start to finish from what it was in February, 2007. The suggestion below (February 8, 2007) was used as the main objective of the rewrite. It stated that, "Whitacre helped the government with a major investigation and contemporaneously committed a number of serious crimes. This is the reason he is noteworthy, so both of these facts should be recorded prominently in any short biography". Images were also added in order to meet Wikipedia "Good Article" standards.ReadQ 13:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC) During April 27 and 28, I could not get my password to work for ReadQ even though I was using the correct password. I made several attempts before creating a new account (as recommended by the "Help" section) and changed my user name to ReadQT. ReadQ and ReadQT are the same person. See both ReadQ contributions and ReadQT contributions. ReadQT 02:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Washington Post interview with a former ADM Chairman
Lawyer and author, James Lieber, reported in his book, Rats in the Grain, that the FBI had much information indicating that ADM former Chairman Dwayne Andreas and former President James Randall knew about crimes going on throughout the company. Yet, the FBI was not allowed to question them – ADM's former highest ranking executives. Lieber especially pointed out, and Kurt Eichenwald [award-winning author of The Informant] appeared to either miss or ignore, that in 1996, “Mr. Dwayne Andreas told the Washington Post, during an interview, that he (a former ADM Chairman) had known about Whitacre's frauds for three years. However, Whitacre was only fired and turned into the federal authorities after ADM learned that he had been working as a mole for the FBI. If he knew about it for three years, why didn't he fire Whitacre immediately, asked Lieber? Lieber concluded that fraud was an accepted practice at ADM during the 1990s. Lieber also reported in his book, Rats in the Grain, that other ADM executives that committed frauds [i.e., financial fraud by a former treasurer and technology thefts by other executives] were supported by ADM during the 1990s as they did not work for the FBI as Whitacre did. ADM has been under new management for several years.

I was there
I worked at ADM prior to my retirement and worked in the Decatur, Illinois headquarters on the same floor with Mark Whitacre. I am not impartial to ADM or Mark Whitacre as I was in a different division and was unaffected by the scandal. It is true that Mark Whitacre was an extremely smart and energetic workaholic at ADM and that he would have likely continued to produce positive results for the company. His discussions were only about work. One could not discuss anything else with him. I recall many people wanting to work for Mark Whitacre and his division. However, his work became his life’s only focus and he lost his moral compass along the way. Whitacre lost his balance and his character was laced with mental illness. Looking back, I could see that more and more the longer that Whitacre worked at ADM. He told stories of being an orphan, in which he wasn’t, although he did adopt two children. He got scammed by the Nigerians in a way that no stable executive would have done. The Nigerian scam is the oldest trick in the book. Whitacre reported to the ADM Chairman that the Japanese sabotaged one of his division’s manufacturing plants because the plant was not running well and the Chairman was considering closing it down. Whitacre lied to buy himself more time to get the plant running properly. This falsehood is what triggered the FBI to become involved in the first place. All of these things happened before Whitacre worked for the FBI. Therefore, he most likely had some mental illness, reported to be manic depression, prior to his experiences with the FBI. It simply got worse as he worked for the FBI. In the end, I cannot help but feel sorry for Mark Whitacre and his family as I feel that his harsh sentence was driven more by his self-destructive nature and by mental illness than by the magnitude of his crimes. He was his own worst enemy. I am adding the above comments to the article.

References added throughout February 27, 2007
Note:*** Numerous references and links to actual business articles were added February 26 and 27,2007 throughout the "rewrite" of ReadQ.

Wiki article completely rewritten from start to finish February 24, 2007
Feb. 24, 2007: The entire first section of the Wiki article is a complete rewrite from start to finish. It discusses in three short paragraphs why Whitacre was historical. His career, education, and other background information are not mentioned in this historical abstract. An interested reader can easily go to the Table of Contents to view background information about Whitacre and the ADM case.

More editing was done
Response: Editing of the Wiki article was performed on 2/23/07. Some of the intro was deleted, and the intro and the 2nd section were combined into one section. The format and the flow of the article were improved by this editing. One of the references that was reported in the comments below was incorported into the text.

Comments that article needs to be rewritten February 23, 2007 and Book Reviews
This is one of the worst articles I've seen on Wikipedia (neutrality, poorly written, poorly formatted, links to Amazon affiliates before I dropped by). I have no authority on the subject and little interest personally in its cleanup, but I do hope the upcoming film brings enough attention to the subject that someone who does care cleans this mess up. I do expect this comment will get buried. 65.96.190.159 19:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Book reviews of "Rats in the Grain" and "The Informant": The author of "The Informant" won numerous awards for his book and it is a fun read. It appears that one of the FBI agents that worked with Mark Whitacre, based on published quotes from the agent, disagreed with some of the accuracy of "The Informant". The agent, for example, stated that he was misquoted with using profanity in "The Informant". Other accuracy issues were also challenged in "The Informant", but it is written in an easy-to-read, novel-like, John Grisham-style. "Rats in the Grain" is written more like a documentary and it reads like a textbook for an MBA or law school setting, and I found it to be boring. "Rats" appears to be well researched and it is written by an attorney. The author placed much of the emphasis about the fact that the government was greatly influenced by ADM to focus on Marc Whitacre. ADM was able to get the heat away from them. The author of "Informant" concentrated on Whitacre's gradual meltdown to the point where Whitacre did not know who he was after working for ADM and the FBI simultaneously. The Marc Whitacre Wikipedia article summarizes both books and discusses the conclusions of each. The following are examples of published reviews for both books:  

Further editing was done on February 9, 2007
On Feb. 9, 2007, a new section titled "The Mark Whitacre Story" was added directly at the beginning of the Wiki article, and it is currently the longest section of the article. The idea for this new addition and what its content should include came from the earlier comments/suggestions shown below by Anon. Therefore, one can read "The Mark Whitacre Story" at the beginning of the article and learn why Whitacre was vaulted into the public's eye to begin with. I would think that this new section meets the objectives and excellent suggestion that Anon discussed below as it describes why Whitacre was vaulted into the national eye to begin with, and it is fair & balanced. It summarizes the price-fixing case, how significant and large that it was, Whitacre's crimes that were done while he was undercover, the major conclusions of Eichenwald's and Lieber's books, and also includes a short piece of more recent information [January, 2007] regarding former FBI Supervisor of ADM case, Dean Paisley, pushing for a Pardon for Whitacre. Having this at the beginning of the article allows the reader to know why Whitacre became a public figure in the first place. And then the reader can go to other facts in the article, if they have interest to go further, regarding Whitacre's education, career, Pardon support, upcoming movie, etc. A "table of contents" is included for the reader to go to those sections easily if they have further interest.

February 8, 2007 Response to comments
''ReadQ. Response to Anon.''--You appear to be very adamant about this position for someone that heard about ADM only a couple of times and read for the first time [last week] Eichenwald's book. You also mentioned that Eichenwald's book was the ONLY thing that you have read on the ADM case. You have had several excellent suggestions over the past week and many have been incorporated into the article. The updated article includes numerous comments from Eichenwald's book, and includes Eichenwald's conclusion about Whitacre and his frauds [added today 2/8/2007]. The External Links section also has a direct link to the web site about Eichenwald's book and to Eichenwald's NPR interview that occurred Sept., 2000. The update also includes numerous comments from Lieber's book. A direct External Link to Amazon.com for further information about his book is also included. You appear to gloss over the fact that Paisley [former FBI] and Lieber [lawyer and author] both feel that Whitacre's contributions [his valuable and unprecedented cooperation] were much more significant than Whitacre's frauds. Paisley feels that Whitacre's case was a complete miscarriage of justice, and for that reason he is attempting to obtain a Presidential Pardon for Whitacre [not a reduced sentence that he and others were attempting over the past few years]. Paisley is an expert on the ADM case; he was there. Eichenwald only wrote about it. The Wiki article should include [and it does] information from many different sources such as Eichenwald's book, Lieber's book [who had many different views than Eichenwald], and more current information [January, 2007] from Paisley's Pardon support letters that were sent to the White House.

February 8, 2007 comments where article needs more balance and to be rewritten
''Anon. Response to ReadQ'' -- We are not going to agree on this. Clearly you have a significant emotional investment in this case, and as long as you continue to edit Whitacre's page, it is going to continue to feature this weird imbalance.

But here's my thinking, in case somebody else wants to take this up: Whitacre helped the government with a major investigation and contemporaneously committed a number of serious crimes. This is the reason he is noteworthy, so both of these facts should be recorded prominently in any short biography. Far less attention should to be given to the minutae of his educational background and to efforts by members of law enforcement to get his sentence reduced. These things are relevant and certainly ought to be noted in passing, but they are of secondary importance compared to the events that vaulted Whitacre into the national eye to begin with.

The imbalance in this article is so systematic that it would require a complete rewrite. From start to finish, this article buries references to Whitacre's crimes amidst irrelevant biographical information, long exculpatory statements regarding his mental health, and needlessly detailed discussions of efforts on his behalf by law enforcement officials. One needs a sense of perspective to write an encyclopedia entry, and anybody who thinks it's appropriate to include four times as much information about Whitacre's educational background as about his theft of $9 million from ADM clearly lacks that perspective. In short, as long as ReadQ edits this page, it will remain a piece of advocacy on behalf of Whitacre rather than an encyclopedia entry.

ReadQ, I'm not going to continue to fight this, because it's a waste of time. But if you delete my comments again, I'll come back and reinsert them.

Response to comments
ReadQ Response The person that wrote the comments below mentions that he/she has only heard of ADM a couple of times, and read Eichenwald's book for the first time last week. Eichenwald's book is only one source on the ADM case. And the book is 7 years old, as mentioned before. The Wiki article on Whitacre uses much info from Eichenwald's book and also more recent information that was written over the past 2-3 years and some as recent as last month (i.e., Whitacre's clemency file that has numerous letters from the FBI and other DOJ officials). Some agents and one former prosecutor participated in the Clemency filing. The most active person involved with Whitacre's Pardon petition is Mr. Dean Paisley (the former FBI Supervisor responsible for the ADM case and he was 25 years with the FBI before he retired). Who would be considered an expert on Whitacre's case? Eichenwald [author of a seven-year old book] or Dean Paisley [FBI supervisor responsible for the ADM PF case]? Paisley and other agents were there in the trenches working with Whitacre on a regular basis and Eichenwald was not. I would consider Mr. Paisley to be very emotionally involved with Whitacre's situation because he feels that the whole case against Whitacre was a complete miscarriage of justice. Because of these feelings by Paisley, he maintained regular contact with Whitacre and his family throughout Whitacre's 8 and 1/2 years incarceration. He wants Whitacre to be rewarded in some fashion for his sacrifices on the ADM case and I believe that Paisley will not stop until he accomplishes this objective. He used to be years ago in the FBI headquarters involved with evaluating candidates that were applying for Pardons. Therefore, he knows the process well-and the merits that are required. Paisley (and other agents and a former prosecutor) would not be making presentations [neither written nor oral] to the President of the United States [through the White House Counsel's office] if they agreed with the comments written below. Furthermore, Paisley has recently [as of January, 2007] presented [both in writing and via phone conference] to the White House Counsel's office his most recent arguments to support a full Pardon [and not just clemency or reduced sentence that he and others were attempting over the past few years]. If he did agree with the comments directly below this paragraph, he (and others) would not be wasting their time talking to the White House on such a serious matter. Presidential Pardons are serious undertakings and not to be taken lightly. Pardons are not for career criminals [the way that you describe the case in the comments below]. Paisley has spent a considerable amount of his retirement time on Whitacre's Pardon. Furthermore, he traveled out-of-state and visited Whitacre during Whitacre's incarceration in order to thank him for his substantial assistance to the US Government. Paisley would not have traveled to visit Whitacre on the east coast if he agreed with the comments below. Other agents have also stayed in close contact with Whitacre and have been very supportive of him. Eichenwald did not capture any of this "flavor" in his book. Lieber did catch some of this flavor in his newer paperback version. Furthermore, the person that commented below mentioned that Eichenwald's book is all that he/she read. Why not read the book by the lawyer, James Lieber titled, "Rats in the Grain"? It was also published during the same year as Eichenwald's seven years ago (2000). Lieber had different references, sources, and explanations than Eichenwald had on several issues. There are many other interesting facts in the Lieber book. I would think that Lieber would also be willing talk to you after you read his book. Lieber has written several very supportive letters to the Dept. of Justice and to the White House in support of a Whitacre Pardon and most certainly would not agree with your comments below. He researched the case in as much detail as Eichenwald did. It should be noted that Eichenwald also wrote, toward the end of his book, that most of Whitacre's crimes and erratic behavior occurred during the three years that Whitacre worked undercover. Eichenwald discussed that much of Whitacre's sentence resulted from "erratic behavior and meltdown" as compared to criminal activity. Furthermore, he stated that Whitacre received a many-fold greater sentence [almost four-fold] on a $9 million crime than the king-pins of the price fixing conspiracy that Whitacre exposed [crimes in the hundreds of millions of dollars] because of Whitacre's "erratic" behavior. Eichenwald was quite clear in his book that he disagreed with Whitacre's lengthy sentence when one takes into account Whitacre's valuable and unprecedented cooperation. By the way, the statement that you mentioned below, "Perhaps the daily pressures of having a family [wife and 3 children], a high-level, high-stress position at ADM, combined with working for the FBI and wearing a wire every day, and having to meet FBI agents during late hours in different hotels throughout Decatur, Illinois several nights per week [to go over the tapes] could help explain this bizarre behavior during Whitacre's case" was a statement from one of Paisley's Pardon support letters from 2007. It was not pulled out of thin air. How much more recent-than last month-can one get than that? Both Lieber and Paisley also noted in some of their Pardon support letters sent to the White House that over 95% of Whitacre's fraud amount occurred during the same years that Whitacre was working for the FBI. This important statement from a lawyer [and author of a book about the ADM case] and from the FBI is obviously in direct conflict with the arguments presented below from a reader of a book that he/she read only a week ago. Lieber has researched the case for over 10 years [starting in 1997] and Paisley has been involved with Whitacre's case for over 14 years as Whitacre started in Nov., 1992 working with Paisley.

February 7, 2007 Article suggestions/More balance needed
Anon Response -- I'm adding this from another IP address, but I am the person who responded twice below ("N.B." and "Response"). I am certainly not Eichenwald; given that he's a New York Times reporter, I'm sure he has better things to do than edit Mark Whitacre's Wikipedia entry. The reason Eichenwald's book is the only source that I cite is very simple: Outside of a variety of news reports (all of which are consistent with Eichenwald's account), Eichenwald's book is the only comprehensive and authoritative thing I've read about this case.

Now, as for Mark Whitacre: Stealing vast amounts of money via fraud over a long period of time requires a degree of intelligence, calculation, and premeditation. I do not believe that a mental breakdown alone could inspire one to spend years committing white collar crimes. A "lapse of judgment" is one or two mistakes -- not broad-reaching, systematic fraud. Either way, Whitacre committed a number of very serious crimes, and this fact is still buried in this article. "ReadQ" seems to want to put a huge emphasis on Whitacre's mental state (going so far as to provide small vignettes including erratic behavior), and very little emphasis on the fact that Whitacre stole $9 million.

In short, this piece still reads like an extended defense of Mark Whitacre. Every "criticism" is followed by a long series of exculpatory statements -- BUT Whitacre was suffering a mental breakdown, BUT various FBI agents want Whitacre's sentence reduced, etc. The whole thing reads like it was written by either Whitacre himself or somebody with a serious emotional investment in minimizing his moral culpability. Take this highly speculative comment, for example: "Perhaps the daily pressures of having a family [wife and three children], a high-level, high-stress position at ADM, combined with working for the FBI and wearing a wire every day, and having to meet the FBI agents during late hours in different hotels throughout Decatur, Illinois several nights per week [to go over the tapes] could help explain this bizarre behavior." When ReadQ writes that "[s]ome reporters from the media were especially critical of Whitacre, and rightfully so, for not telling the FBI of his own dirty dealings while he was working for them on the massive price fixing case," one wonders who, exactly, is adding the editorial aside ("and rightfully so").

For the record, I have zero personal connection to this case. In fact, I'd only heard of ADM a couple times before I picked up The Informant last week. When I finished the book, I Googled "Mark Whitacre," and discovered this bizare and blatantly biased Wikipedia entry, which appeared to have been authored by somebody with a personal relationship to Whitacre.

Response to comments
ReadQ response: I can only assume that the comments located directly below this paragraph were written by Kurt Eichenwald because the comments focused only on Eichenwald's book and no other source. However, with that said, I do agree with the comments no matter who wrote them--especially with the suggestion that Whitacre's crimes should not be overlooked no matter if the crimes were a result of garden-variety greed or a result of a mental breakdown- and laspe of judgement-that occurred during his 2 & 1/2 years undercover work for the FBI. The fact that he defrauded $9 million from ADM is indisputable. Even though he exposed much bigger crimes, Whitacre still committed felonies himself. These facts have been added to the Wiki article along with the fact that Whitacre lied extensively to the FBI and therefore, made the investigation much more difficult. I have also added some excerpts from Eichenwald's book that discuss Whitacre's behaviorial changes as he continued to work longer for the FBI in the early and mid-90s. For example, Whitacre was reported of using a gas leaf blower during a rain storm in his driveway after midnight in 1994, which was about two years into his undercover role. He became over-compulsive at times and at other times very depressed during and shortly after him working for the FBI, according to Eichenwald's book. He exhibited signs of manic depression, he obviously cracked under pressure, and exhibited some strange and bizarre behavior during that time period. I have also added several comments from James Lieber's book, "Rats in the Grain".

The entire deleted comments and discussion between ReadQ and 160.39.212.71 have been reinserted below:

February 7, 2007 Comments to improve article
Response -- Given the intense, rambling, and personal nature of the response, I can only assume this editing is being done by Mark Whitacre or the Lamet Vov. I am not a "supporter of ADM." All I know about this case is what was reported in Kurt Eichenwald's book, which is impartial and received superlative reviews in major papers. Eichenwald's book is indeed seven years old, and obviously there's nothing wrong with including new information about Whitacre in this article. Nor is there anything wrong with discussing FBI support for a Whitacre presidential pardon. But in hiding and minimizing Whitacre's extensive crimes, this article is totally misleading. Nothing in the seven years since Eichenwald's book was published changes the fact that Whitacre stole $9 million from the shareholders of ADM. It's wonderful that Whitacre exposed other serious crimes at ADM, but a balanced portrait should also make note of his serious criminal behavior and extensive dishonesty. Whomever wrote the response below notes that Whitacre was suffering a breakdown at the time he was cooperating with the FBI. This is true, but (1) doesn't exonorate him from his crimes, and (2) isn't docmented well in the Wikipedia article. I agree that Whitacre's sentence was excessive in light of his valuable cooperation and manic depression, but this does not mean that Whitacre's massive embezzlement should be hidden from sight. As a result, I am putting the "POV" tag back on the article.

Response to comments
Response for the comments below---One should interview some of the current and former FBI agents that Whitacre worked with in order to get an up-to-date overview about Whitacre and his role during the ADM case. This Wiki article utilizes this type of current information in addition to the information from seven-year old books. The FBI agents had to separate themselves from Whitacre during the case, but some of them have more recently come forward to support a Presidential Pardon [not just clemency or reduced sentence as before] for Whitacre by detailing more information about the pressures that the agents placed on Whitacre during the early and mid-90s when he was a cooperating witness [CW] for the FBI. They also discuss in this current information the mental state that Whitacre was in as a result of these pressures. This information has been presented to the White House [during January, 2007] in support of a full Presidential Pardon for Whitacre. Mr. Dean Paisley (formerly 25 years with the FBI and the former Springfield, Illinois FBI Supervisor of the ADM case) presented the information in support of Whitacre by letter and by conference call to one of the Asst. White House Counsels that is responsible for evaluating Pardon petitions. Mr. Paisley was-at one time in his extensive FBI career-also involved with evaluating Pardons for the Dept. of Justice in order to make recommendations to the President. Therefore, he has first-hand knowledge on the type of Pardon applications that have the most merit. Mr. Paisley agrees that Whitacre's petition has the necessary merits for a Pardon. The discussion directly below this paragraph appears to be more of a promotion for a book as that paragraph mentioned only one seven-year old book from a former New York Times reporter. However, the Wiki article written about Whitacre uses much more current information than that book [i.e., Clemency file where many former and current DOJ officials wrote about their support for Whitacre]. The Wiki article also uses information from the experts on the case-the FBI agents that worked with Whitacre. Furthermore, the updated Wiki article includes how the Class Action lawyers-that won hundreds of millions of dollars from ADM in settlements-looked out for Whitacre's family during his incarceration. The Class Action lawyers have also written to the White House in support of a Pardon for Whitacre. The FBI agents such as Mr. Paisley and the Class Action lawyers would not have done any of the above if they agreed with the comments written below about Whitacre. It should be noted that the book by a former New York Times reporter, Kurt Eichenwald, described that many of Whitacre's mistakes happened during an "emotional meltdown" that Whitacre encountered during his almost three-year undercover stint for the FBI. Eichenwald outlines this emotional breakdown very well and describes the extreme pressure that Whitacre was under. It should also be noted that Kurt Eichenwald states in his book "The Informant" that Whitacre's sentence was unjust when one takes into account his substantial assistance to the US government. It is interesting to note that these "more positive" type of comments from Eichenwald's book were not mentioned below. Eichenwald described this injustice even better in his interviews with National Public Radio (NPR) and NBC Dateline during the year 2000 than he did in his book. No one is disputing the crimes and mistakes that Whitacre made. There is no doubt about Whitacre making many mistakes, and in return for these mistakes, Whitacre paid a huge price for them in doing over eight years in federal prison. There is another book on Whitacre's case [surprisingly not even mentioned in the comments below] by an Ivy League attorney, James Lieber, called "Rats in the Grain". This book discusses many of the items mentioned below as a smear campaign against Whitacre by ADM in order to keep the spotlight off ADM and towards Whitacre during the late 90s when the case was high profile. For example, Lieber outlines the facts about the "Northwestern MBA" story in much more detail than Eichenwald did. It was only a sentence or two in Eichenwald's book. Lieber states that it was ADM that circulated the embellished resumes of their executives during speaking functions. Lieber discussed in his book where ADM circulated embellished resumes of Michael Andreas (former Vice Chairman) as having a Business degree from Northwestern. In reality, it was in communications. According to Lieber, ADM also circulated resumes of Jerry Weigel (a former technical service rep at ADM) of being a veterinarian sometimes and at other times being a Ph.D. in science. In reality, Weigel held a Master's degree. No one at ADM had as an extensive education as Whitacre. For example, ADM had tens of thousands of employees and Whitacre was the ONLY Ivy League Ph.D. at the company. Therefore, Whitacre had no reason to state (in the mid-90s) that he held an MBA from Northwestern instead of an MBA from a correspondence college. Whitacre already held a Ph.D. from Cornell University (1983) and B.S. and Master's degrees (1979) from the Ohio State University. The Ph.D. is a higher academic degree than the MBA. Both Cornell and Ohio State are excellent universities. Therefore, Whitacre did not need Northwestern on his resume. Lieber's book also outlines in much more detail on how much political clout ADM had and the millions of dollars that ADM donated to both political parties. Lieber's conclusion was that Whitacre should not have been charged for any case in return for his substantial assistance to the FBI. Dean Paisley agrees, according to his Pardon support letters, that Whitacre should not have been charged on the ADM case. It should be noted that both of the above books are seven years old. For more recent information, one should talk to the experts on the case. The FBI agents that worked with Whitacre are the true experts and not the authors mentioned above. The FBI agents were there, but the authors of the books were not. For example, Mr. Dean Paisley, other FBI agents, former and current DOJ officials, and Mr. Chuck Colson [former Special White House Counsel under President Nixon] have been attempting for years already to obtain clemency (a reduced sentence) for Whitacre. Why would they do this if they agreed with the comments by ADM or its supporters mentioned below? Furthermore, Mr. Paisley has spent a considerable amount of his time since his retirement on Whitacre's case. Paisley felt that is was a complete "injustice". Mr. Paisley [as of January, 2007] has redirected his energy from obtaining clemency (a reduced sentence) for Whitacre to obtaining a full Presidential pardon for him. The FBI is not trying to do this for any other executive at ADM. They are only pushing hard to obtain a Pardon for Whitacre. The agents are looking past the smear campaign of Whitacre by ADM, and are only looking at the facts. The Pardon support letters by Mr. Paisley stated that he attributes much of Whitacre's strange behavior during the case to the pressures that Whitacre was under during his three-year undercover role. Yes, the comments below by ADM supporters are true when they said Whitacre is a convicted felon. However, this is exactly what Paisley and others are trying to change by supporting a Pardon for Whitacre.

February 6, 2007 Balance needed and Eichenwald's book needs to be added to article
N.B. -- This article is wildly biased in favor of Mark Whitacre, who, whatever his personal virtues, stole $9 million dollars from a publicly-traded company. Although Whitacre's cooperation with the FBI was essential to uncovering substantial antitrust violations at ADM, he is a convicted felon and was (is?) a pathological liar who made up significant stories about his personal and educational background (e.g., that he was an orphan, and that he held an MBA degree from Northwestern). Horrifyingly, Whitacre falsely implicated honorable FBI agents in order to minimize his own wrongdoing. I don't have time to rewrite this whole article, but it's a complete whitewash; I suspect it was authored by Whitacre's friends, his family, or Whitacre himself -- a suspicion heightened by the extensive and detailed account of Whitacre's education, which includes several amusingly gratuitous references to Cornell's affiliation with the Ivy League. My source is Kurt Eichenwald's authoritative and widely acclaimed book "The Informant," which chronicles both Whitacre's unprecedented cooperation in the ADM investigation, and his own very serious, very extensive, greed-induced crimes. ("The Informant" was ranked as one of the best books of 2000 by the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Business Week.)

General comments
Our family member is incarcerated at the same facility where Mark was located. Over the past four years, our families were able to became aquainted and we are happy to report that Mark was a positive influence on our family member. We are happy to know that Mark and his family are reunited once again and we wish much success and happiness to the Whitacre family they turn a new page on their lives together.

Mark Whitacre is doing very well. He will be released late 2006.

Comments about Whitacre's fraud
According to The Legal, Ethical, & International Environment of Business (sixth edition) by Bohlman and Dundas, Whitacre conducted tax fraud/money laundering on $9 million during his cooperation with the FBI. The article here on Wiki seems sympathetic towards Whitacre, but doesn't even describe the severity of his crime. Whitacre conducted a $9 million crime WHILE acting as an FBI informant. This is a particularly heinous white collar crime.

The Wiki article's new "Critics" section has added Whitacre's crimes to the article and currently describe the above crimes. However, it should be noted that the book mentioned above discussed Whitacre on one page. The book, "Rats in the Grain" discusses Whitacre on hundreds of pages [386 pages to be exact]. According to this very accurate and detailed book, by Ivy League lawyer, James Lieber, Whitacre should not have been charged on any criminal case in return for his substantial assistance to the U.S. Government. Some of the FBI agents [i.e., Dean Paisley], that worked with Whitacre, have stated the same conclusion. They are the experts on this case. Lieber also details ADM's tremendous political clout. This book concludes that the Government will never get another high level whistleblower AFTER what they did to Whitacre.

General comment
Whitacre's case was peanuts [$9 million] as compared to the [billion dollar] price fixing fraud that Whitacre assisted the FBI with.

Pardon support
For more recent information about Whitacre's case, one should read the pardon letters that were filed to the White House Counsel from the DOJ officials that prosecuted Whitacre. They state that Whitacre's crimes occurred because of mental stress-that caused a lapse in judgement-that resulted from wearing a wire for almost three years undercover. The pressure had to be tremendous on him as Whitacre was a business executive, and not a trained undercover FBI agent. The pardon letters by the FBI and other DOJ officials were filed to support Whitacre for the above reasons. Mr. Dean Pailsey of the FBI states, in his pardon support letters, that Dr. Whitacre's case was minuscule as compared to the ADM cases that Whitacre cooperated with, and that Whitacre should have NEVER been indicted on the ADM price fixing case.

Doctorate degrees
Dr. Whitacre's extensive college education that includes nine college degrees-six of which are Doctorate level-and an MBA.
 * Is that accurate? According to the Doctorate article, "a doctorate is an academic degree of the highest level" — in other words, a terminal degree. Neither the Juris Doctor nor the Master of Laws that Whitacre earned at NCU qualify for this definition. (Contrast those degrees with Doctor of Laws, which would qualify.) Discounting those, I count three doctorate-level degrees: one PhD from Cornell and two PhDs from an unidentified university "via correspondence." Please clarify or correct the article's count. Thanks. Cribcage 20:43, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure how it is defined between Ph.D. and J.D. You may be correct in your calculation. That sentence came from a book written about Whitacre, "Rats in the Grain". However, that specific sentence was rewritten in the article to be safe: "James Lieber's book, "Rats in the Grain", described Whitacre's extensive college education that includes several college degrees-some of which are Doctorate level-and an MBA". Using the word "some" instead of a specific number of doctorate degrees is the safest way to write this, in my opinion.
 * Yes, I think you're right. The current revision ("several" and "some") solves the problem. By the way, you can sign your posts by typing four tildes (~) after your comments on Talk pages. It makes conversations easier to follow, especially as threads grow longer with more users' participation. Thanks! Cribcage 21:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)