Refco's former chairman and chief executive, Phillip R. Bennett, pleaded guilty to fraud, conspiracy and money laundering, among other charges, in a scheme that cost investors at least $2.4 billion.

Bennett's plea yesterday came a month before he was scheduled to go on trial in New York on charges of deceiving banks, auditors and investors, including the buyout firm Thomas H. Lee Partners, during an eight-year accounting fraud.

Two colleagues, former Refco finance chief Robert C. Trosten and former president Tone Grant, still face a March 17 trial.

Under federal sentencing guidelines, Bennett faces life imprisonment with a maximum penalty of 315 years covering all 20 counts as well as forfeiture of $2.4 billion, prosecutors said.

Bennett, whose lawyer said he has $20 million in assets, is scheduled to be sentenced May 20.

After increasing bail, the judge rejected a request by prosecutors to take Bennett into custody immediately.

"I take full responsibility for my conduct," Bennett, 59, told U.S. District Judge Naomi R. Buchwald in Manhattan federal court. "I wish to publicly apologize to my family and to all those I've harmed."

Refco, once the biggest independent U.S. futures trader, collapsed in October 2005, two months after its initial public offering.

The New York firm, which also provided brokerage services, filed for bankruptcy protection days after disclosing that a Bennett-controlled firm owed hundreds of millions of dollars to Refco.

The roots of the case stretch back to 1997, when Refco began hiding massive losses sustained by clients in the Asian debt crisis.

According to the indictment, the company hid the scam from Thomas H. Lee, which paid $507 million for a 57 percent stake in Refco in 2004; from banks and debt holders that extended more than $1.4 billion in financing in 2004; and from investors who paid $583 million for shares when Refco went public.

Walter rejected Lerach's request to spend part of his sentence in home detention and rebuked Lerach for his criminal conduct, saying he had “corrupted the law firm and corrupted it in the most evil way.”

Walter said he would have imposed a stiffer sentence on his own and considered rejecting the plea arrangement because of the gravity of Lerach's offense.

The secret kickbacks paid by Lerach's former firm, Milberg Weiss, made it easier for the firm to be named lead counsel and to command a bigger share of settlement fees in its lawsuits against major corporations.

Lerach pleaded guilty last year to a single count of conspiracy and admitted to participating in the scheme, which sought clients with large stock portfolios and asked them to serve as ready plaintiffs when negative information surfaced about a company. In return, Milberg Weiss paid these clients a percentage of the firm's legal fees.

Under law, the lead plaintiff in a class-action shareholder suit must serve as a representative of the class and cannot have a special interest or hidden inducement beyond other shareholders in the case.
“In the court's view, Mr. Lerach's conduct is one of the most serious crimes to come before this court,” Walter said. “The scope and duration of this conspiracy was breathtaking.”

Lerach, 61, who wore a dark suit, sat quietly with his fingers interlaced on the table in front of him. As the judge delivered his sentence, Lerach kept his eyes fixed on the table, his face flushed with color.

Earlier in the hearing, Lerach addressed the judge and a courtroom packed with his supporters, apologizing for “embarrassing” his family and law firm for conduct that was “completely unacceptable in a lawyer.”

“I pleaded guilty in this case because I was guilty,” Lerach said, his voice quavering. “I knew what I was doing was wrong, I just did not have the strength of will or the strength of character to not join in on what was going on in our bar.”

Lerach is likely to be disbarred as a result of the conviction.

After joining the Milberg Weiss law firm and moving to San Diego in 1976, Lerach became a nationwide pioneer in developing new legal strategies for shareholder litigation. His smashmouth tactics made him a pariah in corporate boardrooms, but a force to be reckoned with nonetheless.

He may be known most recently as the lawyer who helped recover $7.2 billion for investors in Enron Corp.

Yet Lerach also devised the strategy used to recover $240 million for investors who were bilked in the 1989 collapse of the Lincoln Savings & Loan in Irvine.

He became a key strategist in similar battles waged over public bond meltdowns throughout California and Washington state, and in the sprawling case against junk bond king Michael Milken and the defunct investment firm Drexel, Burnham and Lambert.

Some 160 people wrote letters of support for Lerach, including U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and consumer advocate Ralph Nader.

“Some of the things he did were brilliant and really advanced the cause of shareholders,” said Sean Coffey, a lawyer with New York-based Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman, who often battled Lerach for the lead position in lawsuits. “On the other hand, he's a confessed criminal who really bruised, rightly or wrongly, the rest of the bar.”

Lerach's attorney, John Keker, argued during yesterday's hearing that his client had stopped participating in the conspiracy in 1999. Keker said Lerach was “shocked” to learn that colleagues in New York had secretly paid a client as late as 2003 – at least two years after the government began investigating the firm.

The judge rejoined that Lerach had benefited for years after he stopped actively recruiting clients to the conspiracy by collecting millions of dollars in fees from tainted cases.

Walter also berated prosecutors for agreeing to a sentencing range that he felt was not severe enough, saying he had considered rejecting Lerach's plea deal and forcing the case to go to trial.

“The conduct to me just goes to the core of the judicial system,” Walter said. “This whole conspiracy corrupted the law firm and corrupted it in the most evil way. He has to be punished for what he did. It comes down to retribution.”

Walter noted that Lerach had not sought to lighten his sentence by agreeing to cooperate in the government's ongoing investigation of Milberg Weiss and co-founder Melvyn Weiss.

Amid mounting pressure from the federal investigation, Lerach led a breakaway from Milberg Weiss and founded the San Diego law firm now known as Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins. He resigned from that firm in August.

In addition to the prison term, Lerach agreed to forfeit $7.75 million in unlawful gains, pay a $250,000 fine and serve two years of probation. He is set to report to federal prison in California on April 21.

Lerach, who somberly shook hands with supporters outside the courtroom, had no comment on the sentence.

New York-based Milberg Weiss and Melvyn Weiss have been indicted as part of the same conspiracy, and have pleaded not guilty. Trial is set for August. Two former Milberg attorneys and three clients have pleaded guilty in the case.

The justices decided unanimously to overturn two lower court rulings tossing out the legal challenge. The lower courts had sided with grocers, who said such labeling disputes should be resolved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and not through lawsuits.

But the Supreme Court ordered the deceptive marketing lawsuit reinstated, ruling that private citizens can file such challenges because of an identical state law requiring labeling.

"Congress appears to have made a conscious choice not to preclude such actions," Justice Carlos Moreno wrote.

The lawsuit was filed by 11 consumers and backed by California Attorney General Jerry Brown. The suit names some of the state's largest grocers, including Albertson's Inc., Safeway Inc., The Kroger Co., Trader Joe's, Costco Wholesale Corp., Whole Foods Market Inc., Bristol Farms Inc. and Ocean Beauty Seafoods Inc.

The consumers allege that farmed salmon are naturally grayer than wild-caught fish. But fish farmers feed the salmon two chemicals that make their flesh redder and nearly identical looking to wild salmon.

The British defense group since June has been the subject of a criminal investigation in the United States of possible anti-corruption law violations related to its activities in Saudi Arabia.

Britain's Serious Fraud Office announced in 2006 that it was halting an investigation into claims that BAE Systems set up a slush fund for some members of the Saudi royal family during the giant 1980s Al-Yamamah deal. Press reports said BAE paid two billion dollars in bribes to the prince with staggered payments, a furnished Airbus A340 and a honeymoon for his daughter.

BAE has not denied the payments and in September US shareholders saying they had been injured filed suit against BAE executives and Prince Bandar.

Plaintiffs, after learning Bandar might sell some of his US properties, asked authorities to ensure that profits from any such sales were not allowed to leave the country.

In a decision announced Tuesday Judge Rosemary Collyer, who is handling the case in a Washington federal court, granted their request. The prince can sell his properties as he likes but the product of any sale would remain in a US account in his name, she ordered.