The attached document was sent to be by a friend who got it from a friend…
It seems to be an internal SocGen document on the problems encountered, and puts the chronology of events well from the Bank’s point of view. It closely mirrors the BBC’s version of events, but contradicts Kerviel’s, who insists the bank must have known he was trading outside limits long ago.
There are a few bits it does add, including (again, from the Bank’s perspective) how he got around the internal controls.
Personally, at least some of this does not wash. The margining of those (cash flows resulting from) positions over the period he had them should have been noticed, with the cash flows always needing to be much larger than his apparent position. I suppose it will all come out in the wash – it is just as well it was a larger bank with more capital than