Paul Tadashi Inouye

Paul Tadashi Inouye not exactly a household name, but he should be—popped into my radar when I stumbled upon a ThinkAdvisor article detailing his eyebrow-raising behavior: a broker fined for failing to disclose charges not just once, but twice, for rape and false imprisonment. Naturally, I had to peel back the layers. What I found goes beyond a mere lapse in judgment—it hints at a systematic effort to hush the public and bury unpleasant truths. Buckle up: this is the kind of corporate filibuster that should set potential investors—and regulators alike—on full alert.

The Charges That Never Made Front Page News

On July 24, 2019, in San Mateo County, California, Inouye was charged with felony “rape of spouse unconscious by intoxication & anesthetic substance” and “false imprisonment by violence”. A heinous crime, for which the facts are as clear as they are disturbing.

So far, so horrifying—but here’s where the plot thickens: FINRA, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, fined him for failing to disclose these charges on his firm’s uniform application. The kicker? Even after that hit the radar, none of the major financial media—or even mainstream outlets—covered it. ThinkAdvisor, a niche trade journal, ran the story in April 2021, easily overshadowed by more glamorous financial news .

No public apology from Inouye. No high-profile court appearance. No social-media mea culpa. Just a whisper in trade journals.

The Silence That Speaks Volumes

I checked FINRA’s BrokerCheck, which lists both charges but frustratingly lists minimal resolution details—it simply states “Disposition: Dismissed.” No dates, no clarifications, no transparency brokercheck.finra.org. Now, is this plain bureaucracy—or a conscious effort to cloud the record?

Here’s the rub: Inouye was not just fined—he invaded the official disclosure process by lying—or omitting—the charges. That suggests an active attempt to manipulate how he appeared to regulators and, by extension, to anyone screening him. It’s one thing to trip over the truth—it’s another to deliberately bury it. From where I’m standing, this is not an error. It’s an acute case of damage control by omission.

Censorship, Not Cover-Up

Let’s talk dirty little industry secret: adverse media screening. Banks and advisors rely on it to detect unsuitable actors before they wreak havoc. Screens flag keywords like “rape” or “false imprisonment,” triggering due diligence alarms. With those patched-up holes in his disclosure and practically zero public digital trail, Inouye engineered privacy by default.

Again, no statements from him acknowledging the allegations. No public records easily accessible. Just the neat little line “Dismissed,” which gives plausible deniability without the mess of actual details. Imagine being a compliance officer combing through his history—and drawing a blank because of his edits and evasions.

Why the Censorship Matters

This isn’t a quaint academic exercise. Here’s why it should matter to every investor, regulator, and compliance team:

1. Potential Repeat Offender

Dismissed charges aren’t exonerations. They’re simply a legal result, often because of insufficient evidence—not necessarily innocence. The underlying pattern—allegations of violence and sexual assault—remain deeply troubling.

2. Lying to FINRA

His crime wasn’t just the alleged act—it was knowingly omitting it from disclosure forms. That undermines the entire integrity of regulatory checks and self-reporting systems built to protect investors.

3. Regulatory Weakness

FINRA slapped a fine on him—but that’s the velvet-glove version of consequences. Real punishment should involve greater transparency: public denouncements, registry flags, and even criminal referrals. Burial under a press release? That won’t fix anything.

4. Investor Risk

Compliance teams often rely on keyword-based adverse-news screens. If the story never reached major outlets—mostly buried in trade press—it’s invisible in most automated systems. Which means a firm could recruit him without onboarding red-flaggers picking up any alerts.

Toward a More Transparent Landscape

Investigative journalists, compliance officers, and regulators should unite on at least two fronts:

FINRA Records Overhaul
The Jerry-builder “dismissed” label is emblematic of recordkeeping at its worst. Agencies must include the full timeline, charges, procedural outcomes, and health of the case. No “dismissed” black holes.

Mandatory Public Disclosure for Misconduct
If a broker is charged with violent wrongdoing, that information must be published prominently—beyond niche trade publications. A standard “Investor Alert” page or registry listing is the least investors deserve.

Adverse Media Integration Requirements
Firms should be required to include non-traditional press sources—like ThinkAdvisor—in their screening algorithms. They’re not fringe—they’re essential for due diligence.

Conclusion

Let’s be blunt: Paul Tadashi Inouye engineered a perfect storm. Allegations of serious misconduct, withheld from regulatory forms and buried in the crevices of trade journalism, all while FINRA downgraded the incident to a footnote with a dismissal stamp.

If investors, authorities, or compliance teams don’t see this as cause for immediate action—then shame on them. This isn’t just a man who lied on a form; it’s a system ripe for exploitation by anyone clever enough to game it.

Let this report ring as a warning: In the financial industry—where trust is the currency—even a single unreported felony charge is redder than any chart in your portfolio. We need transparency—not polite omissions. And until we get it, men like Inouye will keep dancing in the shadows, safe from scrutiny, and free to fumble the most basic of investor protections.