It has come to our attention that a typographical error may have given a false impression that employees at the world's five largest banks are facing trial as a result of constant acts of multi-billion pound robbery. Of course, no such charges would ever be brought, and we would like apologise unreservedly for suggesting that banking executives had lost their traditional immunity from prosecution.
The omission of the word ‘not’ was clearly an oversight and in no way was influenced by the fact the banks have been found guilty (again) of criminality on a global scale. We would like to thank our various readers, who all seem to be working for law firms paid for by Barclays, for pointing out our mistake. By drawing our attention to this factual inaccuracy, we hope to draw a line under the matter and would politely ask JPMorgan not to repossess our house.
Obviously the £3.6bn fine – which represents a tiny fraction of the money stolen – should in no way be seen as an admission of guilt. One editor explained: ‘If anything, we urge our readers to compensate those bankers who’ve given up their valuable time rigging benchmark interest rates. Perhaps with some more austerity cuts? Or maybe it would be best if we all just gave Citigroup a blank cheque made out to CASH?’.
In separate news a young drug addict was gaoled for 14 years for an act of domestic burglary, amounting to £400 of stolen goods. As he passed sentence, the Judge said: ‘You are a habitual criminal, who uses his ill-gotten gains to fund a lifestyle that is beyond your means. Your parasitic behaviour wrecks lives and yet you expect society to bail you out. Oh, sorry…excuse me – I thought we were talking about the Royal Bank of Scotland’.