????紐約南區(qū)聯(lián)邦檢察官普里特?巴拉拉，現(xiàn)年42歲。1987年，巴拉拉還是哈佛大學（Harvard）二年級的學生，當時他定期在學生廣播電臺95.3 WHRV擔任新聞節(jié)目主播。10月19日上午，在主持節(jié)目時，美國道瓊斯工業(yè)平均指數(shù)（Dow Jones industrial average）從股市開盤便大幅跳水，之后又出現(xiàn)暴跌，收盤時下跌了22.6%。這一天后來被稱為“黑色星期一”，造成此次股災的原因有很多，但最主要的原因是在垃圾債券驅動下出現(xiàn)的惡意收購和猖獗的內幕交易，由此滋生長達數(shù)年的瘋狂投機和對財富的貪欲。巴拉拉和他的聯(lián)合制作人起初對這些事情并不在意，也不清楚這一事件的意義。此外，他們都未持有股票，也沒有投資股市。所以，他們并未選擇這條新聞作為頭條播出。

????股市下跌的勢頭仍在繼續(xù)，巴拉拉始終在密切關注著行情的變化，他最終得出的結論是，肯定發(fā)生了非常嚴重的事情。今年六月初，巴拉拉在接受金融記者采訪時解釋道，這兩個學生最后終于“回過神來”，并決定全天跟蹤報道股市歷史上單日最大的跌幅。盡管他從事新聞工作的時間非常短暫，最終也是選擇了法學院，但他開玩笑道：“那時候，我天生一副做主持人的相貌。”他告訴記者們，就在那一天，他突然開了竅，明白了市場的興衰沉浮和維護市場公正的重要性，而這件事的意義在于，他從此確定了自己的職業(yè)道路，并在華爾街最有權勢的職位上聲名鵲起。

????在接受采訪的當天晚上，巴拉拉剛剛取得宣誓就職23個月以來最大的一場勝利——5月11日，斯里蘭卡裔的億萬富翁、對沖基金經(jīng)理拉賈?拉賈拉特南被判全部14項內幕交易罪成立。當時的巴拉拉興奮不已，感覺志得意滿，甚至有些自我膨脹。他再次用他弟弟維尼特自我調侃。他說自己的弟弟才是巴拉拉家族最成功的一員，因為他已辭去律師的工作，在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)上開辦了一家出售尿不濕的公司。巴拉拉回憶道，去年，維尼特把自己的公司Quidsi（該公司擁有Diapers.com域名）以5.4億美元的價格賣給了亞馬遜公司（Amazon），當時對于哪個兒子更令自己自豪的問題，兩兄弟的移民父母拒絕回答。但巴拉拉對記者說道：“我只知道，我弟弟得知亞馬遜要以5億多美元的價格收購他的公司那天，也只有那一天，我的印度裔媽媽給桑賈伊?古普塔博士的媽媽打過電話，當時她說：‘你就羨慕去吧！’”

????宣判那天晚上巴拉拉心情大好。因為經(jīng)過接近兩年的緊張調查之后，難得能有休息的時間。此次針對內部交易的打擊行動是他就職以來涉案級別最高的一次。事實上，他的法眼監(jiān)控著整個刑事司法系統(tǒng)的各個方面。他對記者解釋道，確實，從拉賈拉特南被逮捕之后，他所在的部門已經(jīng)指控49名被告犯內幕交易罪，并且，贏得了有罪抗辯，幾乎所有人都被判有罪。同時，他還花了幾分鐘時間列舉了幾場與華爾街無關的勝利，包括對時代廣場爆炸案嫌疑人費薩爾?哈扎德和紐約多位腐敗政客的判決，以及對非法軍火走私商威克特?布特的指控，和對幾家在線博彩公司的起訴等等，不一而足。他有條理地、詳細地列出了幾十項成就，而以前，他極少在公共場合這么做。

????其實即便沒有其他原因，當天晚上也不同尋常，因為極少在公眾面前露面的巴拉拉竟然搞起了自我推銷。巴拉拉與他的前任們在許多方面都存在差異，但最顯著的一點或許是，他始終堅持低調行事。幾乎每一次與他的對話都是非正式的。他在參加媒體發(fā)布會的時候，也是嚴格依照腳本，并且盡量簡潔。為了保證最妥當?shù)拇朕o或情感，以及發(fā)言效果的最大化，他的每次講話都要經(jīng)過反復斟酌。如果在與巴拉拉本人或他的副手博伊德?約翰遜進行非正式談話時偶爾冒出一些關于這位檢察官的趣聞或啟發(fā)性的軼事，必須得從別的人那里尋找出處和確認。巴拉拉一向回避拿他本人大做文章；如果實在躲不過，他就極力將重點轉移到自己手下大約200名檢察官所取得的彪炳戰(zhàn)績，以及自己為培養(yǎng)他們所付出的努力。（頗具諷刺意味的是，密切關注紐約南區(qū)的記者或許會注意到，在對金融記者們的講話中，巴拉拉把檢察官和記者進行了對比，他表示盡管“這兩個職業(yè)都被社會所詬病，”但他們又都“深切關注正義與真理。”）

????不過，盡管巴拉拉煞費苦心，仍然很難以抑制人們對他的追捧。在拉賈拉特南被定罪之后，巴拉拉贏得了廣泛的贊譽。CNN將他評為 “最有魅力的人”。《華盛頓郵報》（Washington Post）稱他是“華爾街的新任治安官”。《赫芬頓郵報》（Huffington Post）把他稱為“華爾街的噩夢”——當然是出于贊揚。《紐約時報》（The New York Times）表示，判決證明紐約南區(qū)“獲得了新生”，并將絕大部分功勞算在了巴拉拉名下。報紙中寫道：“巴拉拉先生魅力十足，他在鏡頭前鎮(zhèn)定自若，語氣堅定，而且總是能巧妙地面對采訪。”

自幼便形成了是非觀

????巴拉拉廣受歡迎的原因顯而易見。他那霍雷肖?阿爾杰式的故事（霍雷肖?阿爾杰是美國作家，阿爾杰式神話是指只要努力，就能白手起家——譯注）極具吸引力。普里特得勒?S?巴拉拉出生于印度旁遮普邦北部的菲羅茲布爾。父親是錫克教教徒，而母親則是印度教徒。1947年印巴分治之后，他們最初居住的地區(qū)被劃歸巴基斯坦；之后，他們搬到了印度所屬的地區(qū)。（巴拉拉的岳母是猶太人，岳父是穆斯林，所以，他經(jīng)常開玩笑：“四個不同的家庭，四種不同的信仰——半個世紀前，都曾因為宗教信仰而被迫漂泊。當我妻子在為猶太贖罪日齋戒時，我岳父卻在為伊斯蘭教的齋月齋戒，而我一整天都得吃咖喱餃。”）

????巴拉拉的父親曾在沒有馬桶和下水道的房子里住過一段時間。在巴拉拉兩歲時，為了擺脫貧困，他們全家搬到了美國新澤西州的孟莫斯郡。他說，他們“拋棄了一切，兩手空空來到美國，一切都得從頭開始。”他父親是一名醫(yī)生，在艾斯柏瑞公園市開了一家小診所。這里也是傳奇歌手布魯斯?斯普林斯汀的成名之地。而巴拉拉一直是他的鐵桿粉絲。在巴拉拉的辦公室里有一張斯普林斯汀與他媽媽的合影，每次工作到很晚的時候，他都會聽斯普林斯汀的歌曲。（他與搭檔約翰遜只要有時間就會去看斯普林斯汀的演唱會。）12歲時，巴拉拉正式加入美國國籍。

????巴拉拉最敬重的高中老師回憶起2009年，她突然接到的一個電話：他說道：“您好，T夫人，我是普里特。我希望您能參加我的宣誓就職儀式。”

????四年級時，巴拉拉的父親終于攢到了足夠的錢，把他的大兒子送到一所與眾不同的、甚至有些怪異的學校——位于新澤西州廷頓弗斯的蘭尼學校（Ranney School，著名演員克爾斯滕?鄧斯特也曾在這里就讀）。學校的創(chuàng)始人拉塞爾?G?蘭尼是二戰(zhàn)老兵，也是一位備受尊敬的教育家，他個性十足，經(jīng)常穿一身淡紫色西裝，開一輛藍綠色的奔馳車。不過，他采用的是鐵腕治學。他要求學生必須穿藍色運動上衣和灰色法蘭絨褲子。正是在蘭尼學校，巴拉拉閱讀了《殺死一只知更鳥》（To Kill a Mockingbird）和《風的傳人》（Inherit the Wind），從而決心成為一名律師。那時，他對美國夢深信不疑。

????他最喜歡的一位老師是芭芭拉?湯姆林森，她在學校教授美國歷史和美國文學。巴拉拉在校報做編輯時，她也是校報的顧問。在她的影響下，巴拉拉閱讀了庫爾特?馮內古特的作品——《第五號屠宰場》（Slaughterhouse Five），這本書至今依然是他的最喜歡的著作。她還讓巴拉拉明白了清晰、簡潔的寫作風格以及自我校對的重要性。

????湯姆林森同樣讓巴拉拉明白了社會的不公正，這一課他至今依然銘記在心。在高中畢業(yè)之前，當時巴拉拉已經(jīng)被哈佛大學錄取，但他發(fā)現(xiàn)校長竟然解雇了湯姆林森，起因是蘭尼計劃給學校的老師加薪，但要求他們延長工作時間，而湯姆林森強烈反對，因為她認為這并不是真正的加薪。巴拉拉聽說她被解雇的事情后，他去拜訪了她并發(fā)誓要采取行動。據(jù)湯姆林森回憶，他當時對她說：“這太糟糕了。你是學校最優(yōu)秀的老師之一——我們必須得做點什么。我會去召集學生。我們要聯(lián)合起來提出抗議。”

????湯姆林森試圖說服巴拉拉放棄。因為巴拉拉當時剛剛被哈佛大學錄取，她提醒他，學校的創(chuàng)辦人蘭尼可能會寫信給哈佛大學，給他扣上刺頭的帽子。她希望巴拉拉不要為了無所謂的事情，拿自己的未來冒險，因為當時她已經(jīng)丟掉了飯碗。但巴拉拉不為所動，還召集了一群學生，一起去蘭尼的辦公室找他理論。湯姆林森在接受《財富》雜志（Fortune）采訪時表示：“當時他就象是去面見上帝，但無所畏懼。”

????不過，他們的行動最終還是于事無補——湯姆林森后來在另外一家學校找到了一份新工作，而巴拉拉也去了哈佛大學。但他對湯姆林森被辭退的不公正遭遇依然念念不忘。幾年后，大約2009年8月份，湯姆林森突然接到巴拉拉母親打來的電話，她先問她是不是在蘭尼小學教過她兒子普里特的那位芭芭拉?湯姆林森。然后巴拉拉接過電話：“夫人，您好，我是普里特。我剛剛被任命為紐約南區(qū)的聯(lián)邦檢察官。我希望您能來參加我的宣誓就職儀式。”湯姆林森被完全驚呆了。她說：“想他這樣身居高位的人，有幾個人還能想起高中的老師，然后還跟她說：‘我希望您能到場。’他能那么做，真是讓我自愧不如。”

????去年，巴拉拉到蘭尼學校為56位畢業(yè)生發(fā)表畢業(yè)典禮演說，其中包括他的兩個堂兄妹和布魯斯?斯普林斯汀的女兒杰西?斯普林斯汀。他在演講中下足了功夫，因為他以為“老大”（布魯斯?斯普林斯汀的綽號——譯注）也會參加。他在演說中引用了已故美國最高法院法官奧利弗?溫德爾?霍爾姆斯的話，還引用了鮑比?肯尼迪的話。他對蘭尼的畢業(yè)生們說道：“我認為，圓滿的人生并不只是追求物質財富或深奧的知識；圓滿的人生也應該包括為他人利益而努力。”（可惜，斯普林斯汀并沒有出席；他的女兒當時則正在參加馬術比賽。）

????即便在哈佛大學，巴拉拉依然不改其直言不諱的個性。在第一天上課時，他遇到了韋亞特?丁恩。后者后來在小布什執(zhí)政時期擔任副檢察長，并被認為是《愛國者法案》（Patriot Act）之父【他還是新聞集團（News Corp.）的董事】。兩人在政府研究課上首次碰面，之后兩人花了整整一天一夜的時間——直到第二天上午9點鐘——辯論美國的國父們到底是相信人性本善還是人性本惡。（只有哈佛才會發(fā)生這種事。）丁恩說，他支持的應該是人性本惡的說法，而巴拉拉則持相反的觀點——在接受《財富》雜志采訪時，丁恩稱：“我們一直是最好的朋友，但我們一直爭論不休。”這次辯論，讓他對這位有思想的新朋友印象深刻。丁恩說：“他主動提出問題，并且努力想要找到正確的答案，而不是相反。比如問他是誰，然后從中推導出答案。他對自己非常了解。他知道自己的工作有哪些要求，而且他從不拐彎抹角。他就像筆直的內華達公路一樣坦率。”

進入紐約南區(qū)的跳板

????從哈佛大學畢業(yè)后，巴拉拉又就讀了哥倫比亞大學法學院（Columbia Law School），并于1993年畢業(yè)。之后，他在馬克?格林的競選活動中擔任暑期志愿者，當時馬克?格林正在競選紐約市的公共議政員。最后，格林贏得了競選，而巴拉拉也去了美國格信律師事務所（Gibson Dunn & Crutcher），擔任訴訟助理。三年后，他跳槽到另外一家律師事務所Swidler Berlin Shereff Friedman。2000年，巴拉拉成為紐約南區(qū)的一名檢察官。頭五年里，他主要負責起訴有組織犯罪、毒品犯罪和證券欺詐等。

????很快，改變巴拉拉命運的時刻來臨了。而改變他命運的人便是現(xiàn)任紐約州州長安德魯?庫默的幕僚長本?勞斯基。勞斯基是巴拉拉的朋友，當時也在紐約南區(qū)擔任檢察官。他曾擔任過紐約州參議員查爾斯?舒默的首席法律顧問。后來由杰夫?伯曼接任。當時，杰夫?伯曼希望能去私人事務所工作，因此聯(lián)系到勞斯基。舒默的首席法律顧問有一個慣例，即需要在離任前找到自己的繼任者（而且，之后幾個月，還要應付舒默的電話，聽他訴說不舍之情。）伯曼希望勞斯基能從紐約南區(qū)的年輕檢察官中，推薦一位對擔任舒默的首席法律顧問感興趣的人。勞斯基對伯曼說道：“在整棟大樓里，我只能想起一個家伙來。”然后，巴拉拉從2005年2月起開始為舒默工作。

????巴拉拉的朋友們認為，他會成為一位偉大的首席檢察官或最高法院法官。但他們也說，巴拉拉同樣希望自己能在物質財富上有所收獲。

????舒曼是參議院司法委員會（the Senate Judiciary Committee）的主要成員。作為他的首席法律顧問，巴拉拉負責調查了8位美國聯(lián)邦檢察官被解職的事件，最終致使美國司法部部長阿爾伯特?岡薩雷斯辭職。在此次備受爭議的事件中，巴拉拉憑借不偏不倚、不帶黨派傾向、從容不迫的行事方式贏得了普遍的贊揚。勞斯基表示，他相信正是巴拉拉的幽默和隨和的性格，使他在此次艱巨的任務中取得成功。勞斯基表示：“他能力全面。他是非常聰明的律師，優(yōu)秀的檢察官，但在司法委員會，你必須能夠看到事情的兩個方面，并與各方的人員有效合作。而普里特恰好便是這種人，他能夠與任何人友好地相處。”

????奧巴馬當選美國總統(tǒng)后不久，由小布什任命的紐約南區(qū)聯(lián)邦檢察官邁克爾?加西亞宣布辭職。2009年2月，舒默向奧巴馬總統(tǒng)推薦他的得力干將巴拉拉擔任該職位。《紐約時報》（The New York Times）以“舒默助手確認出任聯(lián)邦檢察官”為標題報道了這則消息。當時舒默表示：“我相信普里特?巴拉拉將成為紐約南區(qū)，甚至全美國最優(yōu)秀的聯(lián)邦檢察官。”

華爾街的新任治安官

????一路走來，巴拉拉贏得了自己的同事和上司的信任，他們都不遺余力地為他推薦各種職位，而且職位的權利和影響力也越來越大。巴拉拉的好友布萊恩?本茲考斯基表示：“他給我的印象始終是非常體貼。他了解政治，但他卻不是政客。在我看來，他對政治并不敏感。他更關注的是做應該做的事。”布萊恩曾經(jīng)擔任過美國前司法部部長邁克爾?穆凱西的幕僚長，目前是華盛頓凱易律師事務所（Kirkland & Ellis）一名律師。

????巴拉拉對紐約南區(qū)檢察機構的管理也得到了很高的評價。比爾?伯克表示：“這個部門現(xiàn)在生氣勃勃。”比爾?伯克曾在小布什執(zhí)政期間擔任白宮副法律顧問。他與巴拉拉相識約有十年時間，他認為巴拉拉給部門帶來了“活力和領導能力。”他說：“對于聯(lián)邦助理檢察官來說，最重要的是清楚自己背后有上司的支持。普里特信任他們，對他們也充滿了信心。這為整個部門帶來了實實在在的推動力。”

????在拉賈拉特南案件中，檢察院有效使用了竊聽裝置，這是巴拉拉接管檢察院之前做出的決定，并且他以合理的理由獲得了法院的批準。這讓華爾街各個階層的經(jīng)紀人都惶惶不可終日，因為他們根本無法確定執(zhí)法人員何時，或者是否會進行竊聽。巴拉拉在宣布拉賈拉特南被逮捕的消息時，曾著重強調了這一點。巴拉拉在準備的講話中表示：“本案應該是首次針對華爾街的重大內幕交易犯罪使用經(jīng)法院授權的竊聽手段。我們今天指控的所有被告人，都是通過電話竊聽才得以認定他們的罪行。此次對竊聽手段的積極應用意義重大：這種強大的調查工具在對有組織犯罪和販毒集團的調查過程中非常有效，現(xiàn)在，我們正式將這種手法運用到針對白領階層的內幕交易所進行的調查。”

????尼爾?巴羅夫斯基也曾在紐約南區(qū)擔任檢察官，目前，剛從問題資產(chǎn)資助計劃（TARP）特別監(jiān)察長的位子上退下來。他認為，巴拉拉改變了華爾街的游戲規(guī)則。他說：“華爾街被嚇壞了。現(xiàn)在他們在進行交易之前，必須再三考慮，因為他們可能因為各種原因而被逮捕。手機并不安全，短信也不例外。（他）傳遞了這樣一個信息：‘我們會抓到你，一切罪證都逃不過我們眼睛。’普里特充分利用這一絕佳機會，通過使用這些裝置深刻地影響了華爾街的工作方式。”

????對拉賈拉特南的判決能否改變華爾街的行為模式？有些人卻半信半疑。理查德?希夫是費城Montgomery McCracken律師事務所主席，曾在克林頓政府擔任財政部長秘書，負責法律執(zhí)行事務。盡管他也承認檢察機構給華爾街敲響了“警鐘”，并且代表著“加強執(zhí)法新時代的來臨”，但他認為判決的實際影響可能會小于預期。他表示：“從我的經(jīng)驗來看，人們都認為自己不會被抓住。橫財當前，貪欲會控制人們的行為。”

????而對于巴拉拉最大的批評在于，針對那些導致或加劇金融危機的銀行家們，這位華爾街的新任治安官并沒有對他們提起刑事或民事訴訟。巴拉拉或許需要拿出對策解決這個問題，才能再次獲得晉升，因為批評者認為這種結果讓人無法接受。前紐約州州長兼紐約州司法部部長艾略特?斯皮策在接受CNN采訪時表示：“【針對華爾街】迫切需要提起民事指控。但到目前卻依然未采取行動，確實讓人吃驚。”斯皮策表達出了美國普通大眾和華爾街以外人士的心聲【電影《監(jiān)守自盜》（Inside Job）的導演查爾斯?弗格森在發(fā)表奧斯卡金像獎獲獎感言時，也表達了同樣的想法。】

????但紐約南區(qū)斷然駁斥了這一批評。他們稱，盡管沒有提出指控，但并不能因此抹煞檢方的努力工作。他們調查了堆積如山的證據(jù)，以明確是否應該提出指控，以及確定哪些是確鑿的證據(jù)。而且，更復雜的是，大陪審團調查要求保密，因此檢察官無法公開證據(jù)，解釋檢方為何沒有提出指控。其中，巴羅夫斯基對這種說法非常贊同。他在接受《財富》雜志采訪時表示：“未能看到有更高級別的人落馬，我同樣也感到非常憤慨。但作為一名前檢察官，在沒有見到他們掌握的證據(jù)之前，就貿(mào)然對他們做出評判，這是不公平的。”

未來，路在何方

????那么，巴拉拉未來應該怎么做？成為紐約南區(qū)聯(lián)邦檢察官一直是他的夢想，他不會把它作為往上爬的墊腳石。拉賈拉特南被判有罪之后，普里特的資深媒體顧問艾倫?戴維斯代表他對媒體表示：“普里特熱愛他的工作，不論是現(xiàn)在還是將來，他都沒有競選國家公職的打算。”不過，他的朋友們都認為他會成為一位偉大的首席檢察官或聯(lián)邦法官，甚至是最高法院法官。他們對他的交際能力贊不絕口，并且認為他有能力通過選舉獲得任何職位，盡管他表示自己對于競選活動沒有絲毫興趣。他們還談到他一直有一個愿望，那就是有一天能多賺些錢。畢竟，他有三個孩子，而且希望他們像他那樣接受教育。在過去幾年，他在各種公共部門的工作中每年可以拿到150，000美元的收入，但他們認為，即便如此，如果有人邀請他合作開辦私人律師事務所，面臨這種誘惑，他絕對無法抵抗。畢竟，達到巴拉拉這種級別的人每年賺幾百萬美元，絕對是輕而易舉。

????于此同時，巴拉拉知道自己正在努力地匡扶正義，并且毫不畏懼，這讓他充滿了力量，同時他還保留了自己的幽默感。本?勞斯基記得在2004年，當時，他與巴拉拉負責的黑手黨的案子到了緊要關頭。僅一天早上便逮捕了三十位黑手黨成員；勞斯基和巴拉拉必須要商談30份保釋協(xié)議。隨著逮捕接近尾聲，首席檢察官巴拉拉給罪犯的代理律師打電話。秘書接聽后，他提出要跟相關律師通電話。

????他說：“我們是普里特?巴拉拉和本?勞斯基。”

????助理問道：“皮特？”

????巴拉拉回答道：“普里特！”

????助理疑惑不解地問他：“彼得？普利特爾？普里普？”

????勞斯基說他們就這樣來回繞不清楚。最后，他說：“在打第五通電話的時候，對方接起電話，這時（巴拉拉）苦笑著看了我一眼，然后笑著說：‘某某某在嗎？’對方說：‘是的，他在。請問您是哪位？’然后他朝我眨了眨眼，說道：‘我是本?勞斯基。’”

????了解巴拉拉的人都很熟悉他妙語連珠的一面。但詼諧的表象下面潛藏著的是巴拉拉根除華爾街內外所有不公的強烈抱負和執(zhí)著信念。不論未來是競選公職或到私營行業(yè)就職，巴拉拉家的“另外”一個兒子已經(jīng)名垂青史。

????——威廉姆?D?科安，《財富》雜志撰稿人，并著有一部關于高盛投資公司（Goldman Sachs）的新書《金錢與權力》（Money and Power ）

????（翻譯 劉進龍）

????When Preet Bharara, the 42-year-old U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, was a sophomore at Harvard in 1987, he had a regular gig as a news anchor at the student radio station, 95.3 WHRV. The morning of Oct. 19, he was on the news desk as the Dow Jones industrial average plunged from the opening bell and then collapsed, ending up down 22.6%. Black Monday, as the day became known, was a result of many factors, not least of which were years of wild speculation and greed brought on by a wave of junk-bond-fueled hostile takeovers and rampant insider trading. Bharara and his co-producer were oblivious to those facts and, at first, were also clueless about the import of what was going on. Neither of them owned any stock or had invested in the stock market. Some other story led their news broadcast.

????But Bharara kept his eye on the ticker as the market continued to fall and eventually came to the conclusion that something big was happening. Finally, the two students "came to our senses," Bharara explained in a speech to a group of financial journalists in early June, and decided to lead the news for the rest of the day with the fact that the market had suffered its biggest one-day percentage drop in history. Although his foray into journalism was brief and he ended up in law school -- "Even back then, I had a face for radio," he joked -- something clicked for him that day, he told the crowd, about the vicissitudes of the markets and the importance of maintaining their integrity -- something, the implication was, that would set him on the career path that today has him making a name for himself in one of the most powerful seats on Wall Street.

????The night of the speech, Bharara was fresh off his biggest victory in the nearly 23 months since he'd been sworn in -- the May 11 conviction of Raj Rajaratnam, the Sri Lankan--born billionaire hedge fund manager, on all 14 counts of insider trading on which he was charged -- and he was feeling confident and expansive, even cocky. He recycled one of his favorite self-deprecating jokes about how his younger brother, Vinit, was the more successful Bharara because he had left his job as a lawyer and started a business that sells diapers over the Internet. After Vinit sold the company, Quidsi (it owns Diapers.com), last year for $540 million to Amazon.com, Bharara recounted, the brothers' immigrant parents refused to answer the question about which son made them the most proud. "All I know," Bharara told the crowd, "is it was not until the day that my brother got word that Amazon was buying his company for more than half-a-billion dollars, that my very proud, Indian-American mother got on the phone with Dr. Sanjay Gupta's mother and said, 'Eat your heart out.' "

????The yukking it up that night was a rare break from a nearly two-year span that has been utterly serious. While his crackdown on insider trading has been his highest-profile pelt, Bharara has been on a tear across all aspects of the criminal justice system. Yes, he explained to journalists, his office had charged 49 defendants with insider trading in the 21 months since Rajaratnam had been arrested, and had won guilty pleas or convictions for nearly every one. But he also spent several minutes tick through a laundry list of victories unrelated to Wall Street, from the convictions of Times Square bomber Faisel Shahzad and multiple corrupt New York politicians to accused arms trafficker Victor Bout, as well as indictments of several online gambling companies -- and much, much more. He listed the dozens of accomplishments in a methodical, comprehensive way he had rarely, if ever, done before publicly.

????Indeed, the night was remarkable if for no other reason than the level of self-promotion the notoriously private Bharara was engaging in. Of the many defining characteristics that set Bharara apart from his predecessors, the most remarkable may be his dogged insistence on keeping as low a profile as possible. Nearly every conversation with him is off the record. Press conferences are tightly scripted and brief. He carefully scrubs the many speeches he delivers to make sure there is no out-of-place word or sentiment and to ensure each has maximum impact. Amusing and revelatory anecdotes about him, should they bubble up in off-the-record conversations with him or his chief deputy, Boyd Johnson, must be sourced and confirmed elsewhere. Big articles are to be discouraged; if there is no way around them, enormous effort is put into steering the story away from Bharara toward the multiple accomplishments of his team of some 200 prosecutors and his efforts to nurture them. (Reporters who closely cover the Southern District might have found it ironic that in his speech to the financial journalists, Bharara drew a parallel between the work of prosecutors and journalists, saying that while both have "come to be maligned in society," both "care deeply about justice and truth.")

????But however hard he tries, it's difficult to keep the adulation at bay. After his office won the conviction of Rajaratnam, Bharara was lauded far and wide. CNN named him one of its "most fascinating people." The Washington Post described him as the new "Sheriff of Wall Street." The Huffington Post called him "the scourge of Wall Street" -- meaning it as a compliment. The New York Times noted that the verdict confirmed the Southern District of New York was "back" and gave Bharara a heaping dose of the credit. "Mr. Bharara is a charismatic figure who is comfortable in front of cameras, can talk tough, and has a knack for the witty sound bite," the paper wrote.

An early sense of right and wrong

????It's not hard to see why Bharara is so widely admired. His Horatio Alger-esque story is nearly irresistible. Preetinder S. Bharara was born in Ferozepur, in the northern Punjab region of India. His father was a Sikh and his mother was a Hindu. They lived originally in a region that later became part of Pakistan after the partition of India in 1947; they then moved to the Indian state. (When Bharara married his wife, whose mother was Jewish and whose father was Muslim, he often joked, "Four different families, practicing four different faiths -- all compelled to flee half-a-century ago because of their religion. Even when my wife fasts for Yom Kippur, and my father-in-law fasts for Ramadan, I get to stuff my face with samosas all day.")

????In search of a way out of punishing poverty -- his father lived for a time in a house without plumbing -- Bharara's parents moved the family to Monmouth County, N.J., when Bharara was 2. They left "everything behind to start life from scratch in the United States," he has said. His father, a doctor, opened a small medical practice in Asbury Park, the legendary stomping ground of Bruce Springsteen, of whom Bharara has long been a major fan. In his office, Bharara has a picture of Springsteen and his mother together, and he listens to Springsteen at night when he is working late. (He and Johnson attend Springsteen concerts together when they can.) At 12, Bharara became a naturalized U.S. citizen.

????Bharara's favorite high school teacher recalls a phone call out of the blue in 2009: "Hi, Mrs. T, this is Preet," he said. "I'd like you to come to my swearing-in."

????By the fourth grade, Bharara's father had scraped together enough money to send his oldest son to the quirky, idiosyncratic Ranney School, in Tinton Falls, N.J. (actress Kirsten Dunst is also an alum). The school's founder, Russell G. Ranney, a World War II veteran and an admired educator, was a colorful figure who wore lavender suits and drove around in a turquoise Mercedes -- but who ruled the school with an iron fist. Students were required to wear blue blazers and gray flannel pants. It was at Ranney, after reading To Kill a Mockingbird and Inherit the Wind, that Bharara resolved to become a lawyer. By then, he was a huge believer in the American Dream.

????One of his favorite teachers there was Barbara Tomlinson, who taught American history and American literature, and was the adviser to the school newspaper when Bharara was its editor. She exposed Bharara to the writing of Kurt Vonnegut -- Slaughterhouse Five remains one of his favorite books -- and taught him about the importance of clear, succinct writing and being able to edit oneself.

????Tomlinson also taught him a lesson in injustice that he talks about to this day. Nearing the end of his senior year, after Bharara had been admitted to Harvard, he discovered that the headmaster had fired Tomlinson for objecting to Ranney's plan to give the school's teachers a raise while requiring them to work longer hours, suggesting that wasn't a raise. When Bharara heard of her firing, he went to her and vowed to take action. "This is terrible," Tomlinson says he told her. "You're one of the best teachers in the school -- we have to do something. I'll get the students together. We'll organize. We'll protest or something."

????She tried to talk him out of it. He had just been accepted to Harvard, and Ranney, she cautioned, could easily write the school a letter labeling him a troublemaker. She told him not to jeopardize his future for nothing -- that she had already lost her job. But Bharara persisted, getting a group of students together to see Ranney in his office. "This was like going to see God in his den," Tomlinson told Fortune.

????The meeting changed nothing -- Tomlinson got a new teaching job at a different school and Bharara went off to Harvard. But the injustice of her firing stuck with him. Years later, around August 2009, Tomlinson got a call out of the blue from Bharara's mother, who wanted to know if she was the same Barbara Tomlinson who had taught her son Preet at Ranney. Then Bharara was on the phone: "Hi Mrs. T., this is Preet, and I've just been nominated to be U.S. attorney for the Southern District. I'd like you to come to my swearing-in." Tomlinson was dumbfounded. "How many people in a position like that would reach back to a high school teacher and say, 'I'd like you to be there?' " she says. "I was very humbled that he would do that."

????Last year Bharara gave the commencement address at the Ranney School to the graduating class of 56 students, including two of his cousins and Jessie Springsteen, Bruce's daughter. He worked extra-hard on his speech, assuming the Boss would be in attendance. He quoted Oliver Wendell Holmes, the late Supreme Court justice. He quoted Bobby Kennedy. At Ranney, he told the graduating students, "I received the lesson that the fullest life is not spent in merely acquiring material wealth or esoteric knowledge; the fullest life involves a commitment to act also for the benefit of other people." (Springsteen wasn't there; his daughter was at an equestrian competition instead.)

????Bharara's outspokenness continued at Harvard. On the first day of classes, he met Viet Dinh, who would go on to become an assistant attorney general under George W. Bush and who many consider to be the father of the Patriot Act (he is also a director of News Corp. (NWSA). After meeting in a government studies class, they spent the entire day and all night -- until 9 a.m. the next morning -- debating whether the founding fathers believed man to be inherently good or evil. (Only at Harvard.) Dinh says now that he probably took the side of man being evil, while Bharara took the opposing view -- "and we've been best friends and we haven't stopped arguing ever since," Dinh told Fortune. He came away from the discussion impressed by his thoughtful new friend. "He asked questions and tried to find the right answers rather than the converse, which is ask who he is and then therefore derive the answer from there," Dinh said. "He knows who he is. He knows what his job requires and he calls it the way he sees it. He is as straight as the Nevada Highway is long."

Stepping stones to the Southern District

????From Harvard, Bharara was off to Columbia Law School, from which he graduated in 1993, before heading to work as a summer volunteer in the campaign of Mark Green, who was then running for New York City's public advocate. Green won the race, and Bharara left for private practice, working as a litigation associate at the law firm Gibson Dunn & Crutcher. Three years later, he jumped to the New York office of another law firm, Swidler Berlin Shereff Friedman. In 2000, Bharara became a prosecutor in the Southern District, where for five years he prosecuted organized crime, narcotics, and securities fraud, among other crimes.

????A turn of fate soon came from his friend and fellow Southern District prosecutor Ben Lawsky, now chief of staff to New York's governor, Andrew Cuomo. Lawsky had previously been chief counsel to New York Sen. Charles Schumer and at the time had been talking to Jeff Berman, the man who replaced him as Schumer's chief counsel and who himself was leaving for the private sector. The tradition was for Schumer's chief counsel to find his own replacement before departing (and then to continue to field calls for months from Schumer, who was said to have trouble letting go). Berman wanted to know if Lawsky knew of any young prosecutor in the Southern District who might be interested in being Schumer's chief counsel. "There's only one guy I can think of in the entire building," Lawsky told Berman. Bharara started working for Schumer in February 2005.

????Friends say Bharara would make a great attorney general or Supreme Court Justice. But they also suggest he might like to make some money.

????As chief counsel to Schumer, who was a leading member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Bharara led the investigation into the firing of eight U.S. attorneys -- which ultimately led to the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales -- and generally won plaudits for his even-handed, nonpartisan, and unflappable approach to the highly controversial episode. Lawsky says he believes Bharara's humor and congenial manner made him successful in that tough assignment. "He's the whole package," Lawsky says. "He's a very smart lawyer, good prosecutor, but on the Judiciary Committee you need to be able to see both sides of issues and work well, especially with people on both sides of the aisle. Preet is just one of these people who has the ability to get along with anyone."

????In the wake of Obama's election, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District, Michael Garcia, who was appointed by George W. Bush, announced his resignation. It was Schumer who recommended Bharara -- one of his key advisers -- to President Obama for the top job in the Southern District in February 2009. The New York Times headline simply said, SCHUMER AIDE IS CONFIRMED AS U.S. ATTORNEY. "I believe Preet Bharara will be one of the most outstanding U.S. attorneys that the Southern District, or any other, has ever had," Schumer said at the time.

????The new sheriff of Wall Street

????At each stop along the way, Bharara has managed to impress both his peers and his bosses and to win their confidence, and they have been eager to recommend him repeatedly for positions of increasing power and authority. "He's always impressed me as a very thoughtful guy," says Bharara's friend Brian Benczkowski, former chief of staff to Attorney General Michael Mukasey and now an attorney at Kirkland & Ellis in Washington. "He understands politics, but he's not somebody who's political, in my view. He's not unaware of politics, but I think his compass is more directed at doing the right thing."

????Bharara also gets high marks for his management of the Southern District. "They have a real spring in their step in that office now," says Bill Burke, the former deputy White House counsel under George W. Bush who has known Bharara for nearly a decade and says Bharara has brought "energy and a natural leadership quality" to the office. "One of the most important things for the assistant U.S. attorneys," he says, "is to feel like the boss has got their back. Preet trusts in them and believes in them. It has given that office a real boost."

????With the effective use of wiretaps in the Rajaratnam case -- a decision that was made prior to Bharara's taking over the office and required a judge's approval based on evidence of probable cause -- he is credited with instilling a new sense of fear among Wall Street traders of every stripe who can no longer be sure when, or if, law enforcement officials might be listening in. Bharara made that point emphatically when he announced Rajaratnam's arrest. "We believe this case represents the first time that court-authorized wiretaps have been used to target significant insider trading on Wall Street," he said in his prepared remarks. "All the defendants charged today were ultimately caught committing their alleged crimes over phones that we were listening to. This aggressive use of wiretaps is important: It shows that we are targeting white-collar insider-trading rings with the same powerful investigative tools that have worked so successfully against the mob and drug cartels."

????Neil Barofksy, who worked with Bharara as a prosecutor in the Southern District and who just completed two years as the special inspector general of the TARP program, says he believes Bharara has changed the rules of the road on Wall Street. "It scared the hell out of people," he says. "It's the thinking twice about doing the transaction because there's so many different potential ways now of getting caught. Your cellphone is not safe. Your instant message isn't safe. [He] sent a message: 'Not only are we going to get you, but you're not going to be able to cover your tracks.' Preet has really taken advantage of a unique opportunity to use these tools to make a significant difference on how people approach their jobs on Wall Street."

????Others are dubious that the Rajaratnam verdict will change behavior on Wall Street. While conceding the prosecution was a "wake-up call" and representative of a "new era of enhanced enforcement," Richard Scheff, chairman of the Philadelphia law firm Montgomery McCracken and a former consultant to the assistant secretary of the Treasury for law enforcement in the Clinton administration, says he thought the verdict's actual impact would be less than expected. "My experience is, people don't think they're going to get caught," he said. "There is significant money to be made -- and greed drives behavior."

????The main lingering criticism of Bharara -- one that may need resolution before his elevation -- is that the new sheriff of Wall Street has brought no criminal or civil cases against the bankers whose actions helped cause and exacerbate the financial crisis. Critics find this unacceptable. "The civil charges that should be brought [against Wall Street] are there screaming out to be brought," former New York governor and attorney general Eliot Spitzer said on CNN. "And the fact that it hasn't been done yet is really staggering." Spitzer was the public voice for a chorus that still echoes privately in homes around the country and outside of Wall Street (and in Inside Job director Charles Ferguson's plea in his Academy Awards acceptance speech).

????The Southern District flatly rejects this assessment. The absence of charges, they say, does not mean the absence of hard work investigating the piles of evidence to see if criminal charges should be brought and if they can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Complicating matters is the fact that, by law, the existence of grand jury investigations is to be kept confidential, and prosecutors are not permitted to share evidence that would reveal why an indictment was not sought. Barofsky, for one, is sympathetic to that argument. "I have that same intuitive disgust at the fact that we haven't seen higher-profile cases," he told Fortune. "But as a former prosecutor, without seeing the evidence that they saw, it almost could be unfair of me to make a judgment."

What the future holds

????So where does Bharara go from here? The party line is that being U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York is his dream job and that he won't use it as a stepping stone to higher office. "Preet loves his job and has no desire to run for public office now or ever," his senior press adviser, Ellen Davis, said on his behalf after the Rajaratnam verdict. Nevertheless, his friends seem to think he would make a great attorney general or federal judge, perhaps even a Supreme Court Justice. They marvel at his ability to connect with people, and think he would be able to win elective office, even if he has expressed little interest in wanting to mount a political campaign. They also talk about his quite natural desire to one day earn more money. He does, after all, have three children whom he wants to educate the way he was educated. Since he has earned around $150,000 a year in his various public-sector jobs for the past few years, they say he is not immune -- when the time comes -- to the lure of a partnership in a private law firm, where someone of Bharara's stature could earn millions a year.

????In the meantime, Bharara can be sustained by his knowledge that he is trying valiantly to right injustice -- while retaining his sense of humor. Ben Lawsky remembers the day in 2004 when a case he and Bharara had been working on against the Mafia came to a head. Thirty members of the Mafia were arrested on a single morning; Lawsky and Bharara had to negotiate 30 bail packages. As the arrests went down, Bharara, the lead prosecutor, placed calls to mob lawyers representing the criminals. When the secretary answered, he asked to speak to the lawyer involved.

????"This is Preet Bharara and Ben Lawsky calling," he said.

????"Pete?" the assistant asked.

????"Preet!" Bharara responded.

????"Peter? Preeter? Prep?" replied the flummoxed assistant.

????Lawsky says this went on and on. Finally, he says, "on the fifth call, the woman picks up, and [Bharara] looks at me with sort of a wry smile and says, 'Is so-and-so there?' She says, 'Yes, who's calling?' And he just looks at me, winks, and goes, 'Ben Lawsky.'"

????People who know Bharara well are undoubtedly familiar with his wisecracking ways. But they belie a fierce ambition and an obsession to root out injustice on Wall Street and beyond. Whether his future holds further public office or a shift to the private sector, the "other" Bharara son has already earned himself a place in the history books.

????--William D. Cohan is a Fortune contributor and author of Money and Power, a new book on Goldman Sachs