<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(etyler88 @ May 17 2006, 11:44 AM) [snapback]257033[/snapback]</div> wouldn't do too well here, tough crowd.
Personally? Or what the outcome is likely to be? If personally, not enough information to make a decision... If not, total guess: guilty
Even if they had no knowledge of events and someone pulled the wool over their eyes (which is completely unbelievable), it doesn't matter. They were paid millions upon millions upon ridiculous millions of dollars per year to make darned well sure that it doesn't happen, and they cashed their paychecks (heck, they likely wrote their own paychecks). So at the very least it is criminal negligence on a grand scale. We need serious reforms for CEOs and corporate Boards Of Directors in this country, but a good place to start would be life without parole for these two, and no Club Fed either. If people like these two are going continue to rape and pillage our economy, they had best learn not to commit fraud or negligence in order to do so.
Ken Lay was selling his stock just as the bubble burst, and at the same time blocking employees from selling theirs. Guilty. He'll probably be acquitted, though, or given a slap on the wrist and fined maybe 10%, maybe 1% of what he made on the deal. After what he did to his employees, if he's left with two cents to rub together or allowed to go free with less than 20 years in prison, there'll be no justice. Of course, with all his money, there'll be appeals upon appeals if he's convicted, and he won't pay anything but a few lawyers' fees, for the next ten years.
Where is the option for - We have a jury system to decide these things. They get the facts and trying people outside of court in the press is at best a waste of time and at worst undermines the justice process. I'm not Undecided - I know when I don't know enough to decide.
Their defense sounds like George SR. who took a powder everytime Iran-Contra was discussed.. WHere was George???? These people make school children look responsible...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tempus @ May 18 2006, 06:12 AM) [snapback]257425[/snapback]</div> The "justice" system undermines itself: How capable your lawyer is, and how much time he has to prepare his case (which in turn is dependent on how much you can pay) is what determines the outcome of the case. Only in rare instances does the actual guilt or innocence of the accused matter. Poor and black, you're convicted. Rich and white, you're acquitted. To be fair to the system, it was designed to try to be fair. To this end lots of procedures were invented and implemented. But the procedures have become more important than the facts. And in a case like this, where it's all a matter of who knew what and who made what decision or gave what orders, the legalistic court procedures will weigh far more than the tenuous facts. In the end, personal wealth is a far more accurate predictor of the verdict than is actual guilt or innocence.
