Throughout the week over at Securities Docket I highlight the most interesting columns and blog posts from around the web on the subjects of SEC enforcement and securities litigation. Here is a digest of my picks for the week ending November 11.

Yes, Defendants Should Fess Up in Some SEC Settlements
Deal Journal | Ronald Barusch | Nov 11, 2011
The SEC and the courts may need an additional tool for a limited number of these high-profile cases: a two-stage settlement.The first stage would be the same as the current no admission settlement. Such a settlement would be conditioned on the defendant preparing an additional report that would make admissions and describe precisely how the breach of law occurred, set forth how the law applied to its conduct and admit culpability.... To make this work, there would need to be a statute that said the report would not be admissible in private litigation.

SEC Uses “Because I Said So” Tactic With Judge Rakoff
Dealbreaker | Matt Levine | Nov 11, 2011
... On the one hand, [the SEC] wants the judge to agree that what Citi did was a Bad Thing and needs to be punished severely, to the tune of $285mm (or $95mm, whatever*). On the other hand, it can't make things sound so bad that the judge says “screw this settlement, we're going to trial and taking them for everything they're worth” – because the SEC doesn't seem all that confident that it would win a trial. As a further complication, the SEC needs to look like it has some idea of what it's doing, to preserve some credibility for the next case.

Why There Aren't Any Investor Lawsuits Yet Over the Olympus Accounting Scandal
D&O Diary | Kevin LaCroix | Nov 10, 2011
For those of you who like me have been watching in disbelief as the accounting scandal engulfing Olympus Corp. has slowly unfolded like a slow-motion train wreck, I am sure you have many questions, but one that occurs to me in particular to ask is – why haven't there been any lawsuits yet? After all, the company has lost over 70% of its market capitalization value (representing more than $6.4 billion) since the scandal first came to light in mid-October.

‘Vexatious' Geologist Makes Class-Action Fights His Business
Business Week | David Glovin | Nov 10, 2011
James J. Hayes agreed to use $300,000 he was paid in a lawsuit settlement in 2008 to start a foundation to create “a more harmonious working relationship between shareholders and their advocates. ”It hasn't worked out that way, according to subsequent legal opponents. Hayes is using the money to finance objections to settlements in class-action lawsuits involving companies whose shares he owns. Because a class action can't be settled without a judge's approval, his aim is to block a deal that he says isn't fair until lawyers change the accord's terms -- and pay him a fee.

In S.E.C. Fraud Cases, Banks Make Promises Again and Again
New York Times | Edward Wyatt | Nov 8, 2011
When Citigroup agreed last month to pay $285 million to settle civil charges that it had defrauded customers during the housing bubble, the Securities and Exchange Commission wrested a typical pledge from the company: Citigroup would never violate one of the main antifraud provisions of the nation's securities laws. To an outsider, the vow may seem unusual. Citigroup, after all, was merely promising not to do something that the law already forbids. But that is the way the commission usually does business. It also was not the first time the firm was making that promise.