Convicted Libor rigger Tom Hayes plans to submit a fresh appeal to overturn his UK conviction after a US court dropped charges against him.

US prosecutors who filed charges against Hayes were asked to dismiss their case on 27 October after a US appeals court overturned the convictions of two former Deutsche Bank traders for similar offences, court documents show.

Hayes’ battle to overturn his UK conviction has taken more than five years. In 2021, he was denied an opportunity to appeal his conviction after waiting nearly five years for a review.

READ Convicted Libor rigger Tom Hayes has US indictment quashed as UK appeal continues

A provisional decision to not refer Hayes’ case to the Court of Appeal was taken by the UK’s Criminal Cases Review Commission, which investigates criminal matters where people believe they were wrongly convicted.

But that could now change following the latest US developments.

“I have new witness statements and new documentary evidence,” Hayes told Financial News on his plans to make new submissions to the CCRC.

A CCRC spokesperson said Hayes’ case “remains under review”.

“We are aware of the US decisions and have invited submissions from Hayes’s legal representatives on that point,” the CCRC spokesperson said.

READ Tom Hayes vows to ‘fight’ after convicted Libor rigger denied right to appeal

The former UBS and Citi trader maintains his innocence, even after he was convicted in the UK in 2015 on the charge of conspiring to fix the Libor rate.

He was initially sentenced to 14 years, reduced to 11 years on appeal. He was released from prison in January 2021, having spent five and a half years in high-security institutions.

“My best outcome would be for my family and myself to have health and happiness, and as part of that healing process, some redress and exoneration really,” he told FN.

Hayes said his motivation was primarily to clear his name.

“Any monetary aspect of having my conviction overturned… that’s not the main motivation. That’s not why I’m fighting. I could have plead guilty and done what they wanted me to do, and I would’ve been much richer. I’d have barely been away from my family.

“But I would’ve had to lie about my co-defendants. And I wasn’t going to do that. I wasn’t going to be that person.”

To contact the author of this story with feedback or news, email Penny Sukhraj

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *