View Full Version : Judge Vacates Conviction of Ken Lay
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-18-2006, 05:02 PM
His family gets to keep all those stolen millions.
http://www.bartcop.com/lay-keeps-cash.gif
HOUSTON (Oct. 18) - A federal judge Tuesday vacated the conviction of Enron's late founder Kenneth Lay, wiping out a jury's verdict that he committed fraud and conspiracy in one of the biggest corporate scandals in U.S. history.
Lay was convicted of 10 counts of fraud, conspiracy and lying to banks in two separate cases on May 25. Enron's collapse in 2001 wiped out thousands of jobs, more than $60 billion in market value and more than $2 billion in pension plans.
Lay died of heart disease July 5 while vacationing with his wife, Linda, in Aspen, Colo.
U.S. District Judge Sim Lake, in a ruling Tuesday, agreed with Lay's lawyers that his death required that his conviction be erased and his indictment dismissed. They cited a 2004 ruling from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found that a defendant's death pending appeal extinguished his entire case because he hadn't had a full opportunity to challenge the conviction and the government shouldn't be able to punish a dead defendant or his estate.
"On behalf of his estate, I'm really quite pleased with the ruling and glad this brings to a close the criminal proceeding against Mr. Lay. The judge engaged in a fair and reasoned application of 5th Circuit law," said Samuel Buffone, the attorney for Lay's estate.
Tuesday's ruling thwarts the government's bid to seek $43.5 million in ill-gotten gains prosecutors allege he pocketed by participating in Enron's fraud. The government could still pursue those gains in civil court, but they would have to compete with other litigants, if any, also pursuing Lay's estate.
In his ruling, Lake also denied a request from Russell Butler, who said he was a victim of Enron's collapse and had asked for an order of restitution based on Lay's conviction.
"With this ruling, the criminal case is over. It doesn't end the civil case or the ability of anyone to file or pursue a civil case against the estate," Buffone said.
Kelly Kimberly, spokeswoman for Lay's family, declined comment, referring reporters to Buffone.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Justice did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment.
Prosecutors offered no counter legal argument in the case, but asked Lake to hold off on a ruling until next week so Congress could consider legislation from the Justice Department that changes current federal law regarding the abatement of criminal convictions. Congress recessed for the elections without considering the legislation.
In their motion to Lake last month, prosecutors Sean Berkowitz and John Hueston wrote that certain provisions of the proposed legislation would apply to Lay's case, including "that the death of a defendant charged with a criminal offense shall not be the basis for abating or otherwise invalidating either a verdict returned or the underlying indictment."
"Although the United States argues that applicable law might change at some unknown future date, the court is bound to follow Fifth Circuit precedent," Lake wrote in his ruling.
Enron, once the nation's seventh-largest company, crumbled into bankruptcy proceedings in December 2001 when years of accounting tricks could no longer hide billions in debt or make failing ventures appear profitable.
Lay's co-defendant, former Enron chief executive Jeffrey Skilling, is scheduled to be sentenced on Monday.
http://articles.news.aol.com/business/_a/judge-vacates-conviction-of-ken-lay/20061017160209990002?cid=403
Bronco_Beerslug
10-18-2006, 05:07 PM
Yeah, by law the criminal phase is over. The only remedy left now is through the civil courts.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-18-2006, 05:11 PM
If this doesn't make you want to write off the American "justice" system as a lost cause, then nothing will.
Is there anyone left in America that thinks we have a fair and just judicial system?
If this doesn't make you want to write off the American "justice" system as a lost cause, then nothing will.
Looks like wehad the same thought at the same time ;D
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-18-2006, 05:19 PM
Is there anyone left in America that thinks we have a fair and just judicial system?
The more $ you have, the "fairer" it is.
alkemical
10-19-2006, 06:52 AM
Is there anyone left in America that thinks we have a fair and just judicial system?
"One nation, under the dollar - with liberty and justice for noone" - Lisa Simpson
Rohirrim
10-19-2006, 07:14 AM
Oh, I don't know. That scumbag is dead and for the rest of their lives his family will be involved with lawyers and lawsuits. Isn't that an old Chinese curse? "May your life be filled with lawyers." I remember that little bitch wife of his complaining that people didn't realize how unfair everything was because, "We're losing our liquidity."
It didn't dawn on her that the average Enron employee, some of whom were already elderly, lost their entire life savings and their pensions and had to go to work for Walmart to survive. I hope the civil cases go on for decades and march these scumbags right into their graves.
Bronco_Beerslug
10-19-2006, 07:44 AM
Oh, I don't know. That scumbag is dead and for the rest of their lives his family will be involved with lawyers and lawsuits. Isn't that an old Chinese curse? "May your life be filled with lawyers." I remember that little b**** wife of his complaining that people didn't realize how unfair everything was because, "We're losing our liquidity."
It didn't dawn on her that the average Enron employee, some of whom were already elderly, lost their entire life savings and their pensions and had to go to work for Walmart to survive. I hope the civil cases go on for decades and march these scumbags right into their graves.
Yep, the civil litigation the entire family will be fighting off will last for years and years and cost millions and millions.
SPfloppy
10-19-2006, 09:52 AM
The guy is dead let him rot. So what? Why the hell should I care if they vacated litigation against a dead guy? Now if they came back and overturned the ruling against Charlie manson or Oj (wait he got off) anyway I might be concerned. What were they going to do find him guilty and intern his dead butt in the Huntsville TX prison?
alkemical
10-19-2006, 02:52 PM
The guy is dead let him rot. So what? Why the hell should I care if they vacated litigation against a dead guy? Now if they came back and overturned the ruling against Charlie manson or Oj (wait he got off) anyway I might be concerned. What were they going to do find him guilty and intern his dead butt in the Huntsville TX prison?
no, but this means that it's going to be harder for those people who worked for him who had their money stolen to have any kind of 'justice' or compensation.
I'm sure the re-action to his action will bury his family for good.
Oh yeah, when i hear peope like his wife biatch about money. **** YOU! I slept on the street.
Bronco_Beerslug
10-19-2006, 02:57 PM
The guy is dead let him rot. So what? Why the hell should I care if they vacated litigation against a dead guy? Now if they came back and overturned the ruling against Charlie manson or Oj (wait he got off) anyway I might be concerned. What were they going to do find him guilty and intern his dead butt in the Huntsville TX prison?
What it does is end the federal governments bid to recover millions of stolen monies from his real estate holdings, etc...
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-23-2006, 05:17 PM
Skilling sentenced to 24 years in prison
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20061023/i/r815123276.jpg?x=125&y=185&sig=XZ9i1LQNCOX6NVkhefuy5g--
AP - 23 minutes ago
HOUSTON - Former Enron Chief Executive Officer Jeffrey Skilling, the most vilified figure from the financial scandal of the decade, was sentenced Monday to 24 years and four months in the harshest sentence yet in the case that arose from the energy trading giant's collapse. U.S. District Judge Sim Lake denied Skilling's request for bond and ordered him to home confinement, wearing an ankle monitor.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061023/ap_on_bi_ge/enron_skilling;_ylt=A0SOwmP8Wj1F1WUARRkkkKQB;_ylu= X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
How much time do you think this handjob will actually serve, and in what sort of federal country club for white collar crooks?
alkemical
10-24-2006, 07:09 AM
No time served. he will be appointed to the head spot on the new "corporate crime division" - afterall you need a crook to catch a crook...
;)
Bronco_Beerslug
10-24-2006, 07:18 AM
Skilling sentenced to 24 years in prison
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20061023/i/r815123276.jpg?x=125&y=185&sig=XZ9i1LQNCOX6NVkhefuy5g--
AP - 23 minutes ago
HOUSTON - Former Enron Chief Executive Officer Jeffrey Skilling, the most vilified figure from the financial scandal of the decade, was sentenced Monday to 24 years and four months in the harshest sentence yet in the case that arose from the energy trading giant's collapse. U.S. District Judge Sim Lake denied Skilling's request for bond and ordered him to home confinement, wearing an ankle monitor.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061023/ap_on_bi_ge/enron_skilling;_ylt=A0SOwmP8Wj1F1WUARRkkkKQB;_ylu= X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
How much time do you think this handjob will actually serve, and in what sort of federal country club for white collar crooks?
He'll probably be in there the rest of his life and he needs to be. And federal prisons aren't a life of roses.
defenseman
10-24-2006, 07:48 AM
Yeah, by law the criminal phase is over. The only remedy left now is through the civil courts.
Really sad. I'm hoping those folks clean out all of his accounts and leave his wife with a car, and a house, and that is absolutely it. Time to go to work sweetie.....dman
defenseman
10-24-2006, 07:51 AM
Oh, I don't know. That scumbag is dead and for the rest of their lives his family will be involved with lawyers and lawsuits. Isn't that an old Chinese curse? "May your life be filled with lawyers." I remember that little b**** wife of his complaining that people didn't realize how unfair everything was because, "We're losing our liquidity."
It didn't dawn on her that the average Enron employee, some of whom were already elderly, lost their entire life savings and their pensions and had to go to work for Walmart to survive. I hope the civil cases go on for decades and march these scumbags right into their graves.
Agreed, she is truly a poster child for a rich B***H and needs her accounts "cleaned" out and redistributed to the folks that lost their money....dman
The interesting thing is that the so-called corporatocracy that truly runs this country hasn't saved these guys from serious jail time.
I wonder why.
I also wonder why their crimes were committed when Clinton was on duty - was he asleep at the wheel?
alkemical
10-24-2006, 08:21 AM
no, he was getting good head.
defenseman
10-24-2006, 08:29 AM
no, he was getting good head.
LOL , Oh so true...dman
alkemical
10-24-2006, 08:33 AM
So here's the $20 question:
Would we rather have politicians bent on power & money for the sake of obtaining it?
or would we rather have a viceful (if you will) politicians that when focused with loosing power - then do what they need to do?
Bronco_Beerslug
10-24-2006, 08:36 AM
The interesting thing is that the so-called corporatocracy that truly runs this country hasn't saved these guys from serious jail time.
I wonder why.
I also wonder why their crimes were committed when Clinton was on duty - was he asleep at the wheel?
Because they lied and ripped off too many people and got caught, nowhere to run and hide, kinda like the Bush administration.
defenseman
10-24-2006, 08:42 AM
So here's the $20 question:
Would we rather have politicians bent on power & money for the sake of obtaining it?
or would we rather have a viceful (if you will) politicians that when focused with loosing power - then do what they need to do?
In both characterizations, you are defining both the Dems and the Repubs....losing proposition
alkemical
10-24-2006, 08:54 AM
In both characterizations, you are defining both the Dems and the Repubs....losing proposition
No, actually i'm not. It's an open question.
defenseman
10-24-2006, 09:05 AM
No, actually i'm not. It's an open question.
Consider it answered. They are both guilty, and have been for a while now...dman
Rohirrim
10-24-2006, 09:13 AM
The interesting thing is that the so-called corporatocracy that truly runs this country hasn't saved these guys from serious jail time.
I wonder why.
I also wonder why their crimes were committed when Clinton was on duty - was he asleep at the wheel?
Your little puzzlers are getting easier and easier. All of Clinton's time and efforts were engaged in fighting off rabid Right wingers who were willing to squander the well being of the country in their obsessive, animosity-driven quest to impeach, and politically destroy him.
alkemical
10-24-2006, 09:14 AM
Consider it answered. They are both guilty, and have been for a while now...dman
Hmm, i still think you are missing where i'm trying to go or what i'm trying to illustrate.
I understand your position Dman - and it's not that i disagree -
enjolras
10-24-2006, 09:35 AM
I know I'm supposed to be up in arms (because everything we do in America is crap or something), but this seems like a fairly reasonable ruling. Why should we spend taxpayers time and money pursuing a criminal case against someone who is dead? It is precisely because a conviction has the net effect of opening the door for civil matters that the precedent exists. If your going to rely on criminal convictions in civil court, and the estates primary witness (the accused) isn't alive to defend themselves from that conviction, why should the estate be put in a absolute losing position when due process hasn't been fully served?
It makes perfect sense to me. This means that the civil cases simply have to do the same thing they needed to do anyways: Show that wrongdoing was commited by the estate. Sure the conviction makes it a slightly easier case to make, but the facts here are so overwhelming that it seems more a question of WHO the money goes to, and less IF the estate is going to be losing a lions share.
Your little puzzlers are getting easier and easier. All of Clinton's time and efforts were engaged in fighting off rabid Right wingers who were willing to squander the well being of the country in their obsessive, animosity-driven quest to impeach, and politically destroy him.
Yet we've heard how Clinton managed, singlehandedly, to make his time in office the best, greatest, most wonderful period in American history, for all Americans. He also, singlehandedly, made the world a peaceful and joyous place for all.
How do the activities of a bunch of pants-sniffing partisans manage to get such a Superman off track?
Rohirrim
10-24-2006, 09:50 AM
Yet we've heard how Clinton managed, singlehandedly, to make his time in office the best, greatest, most wonderful period in American history, for all Americans. He also, singlehandedly, made the world a peaceful and joyous place for all.
How do the activities of a bunch of pants-sniffing partisans manage to get such a Superman off track?
I'm afraid you'll have to make sense out of your own characterizations. I can't do it for you.
I'm afraid you'll have to make sense out of your own characterizations. I can't do it for you.
For an example, do a search for "8 years of peace and prosperity" - there will be an ample number of hits.
Why should Ubër-President Clinton be in the least bit ruffled by the GOP witch hunt?
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-24-2006, 05:28 PM
Your little puzzlers are getting easier and easier. All of Clinton's time and efforts were engaged in fighting off rabid Right wingers who were willing to squander the well being of the country in their obsessive, animosity-driven quest to impeach, and politically destroy him.
Not to mention the fact that W*GS is the ultimate advocate for the sort of "free market as government" philosophy that made the Enron debacle possible.
the guy that robs 7-11 gets slammed so why not these guys? Their crimes are worse by far and should pay the price. There is no reason for the families too keep hundreds of millions. it's a shame really.
Not to mention the fact that W*GS is the ultimate advocate for the sort of "free market as government" philosophy that made the Enron debacle possible.
Wrong. As usual. As I've pointed out a bejillion times before.
It's your ideology of the government regulating the market in the manner in which you endlessly advocate that causes things like Enron.
Since Enron did not operate in a free market, your criticism is invalid.
Bronco_Beerslug
10-25-2006, 09:01 AM
Wrong. As usual. As I've pointed out a bejillion times before.
It's your ideology of the government regulating the market in the manner in which you endlessly advocate that causes things like Enron.
Since Enron did not operate in a free market, your criticism is invalid.
Geeezus! You're really going off the deep end blaming government regulation for corporate crimes.
Geeezus! You're really going off the deep end blaming government regulation for corporate crimes.
The lesson of Enron isn't "free markets are bad", since Enron didn't operate a in a free market. The lesson of Enron is that government misregulation is bad.
It's the hiding of price signals and other information by government regulation that makes crimes like those committed by Enron possible.
alkemical
10-25-2006, 09:16 AM
Oh here i thought creating shell company fronts to move money around to inflate the stock to an artificial price was part of it. Silly me!
I guess money laundering isn't a bad thing, since it cuts the gov't out of it's 'fair share', and pensions-schensions - those poor working schmucks wouldn't know how to handle the wild sex parties and expensive trips. At least those at the top knew how to best spend it.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-25-2006, 04:58 PM
Geeezus! You're really going off the deep end blaming government regulation for corporate crimes.
:giggle:
That's a spin job even Rehab Rush probably wouldn't attempt.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-25-2006, 10:10 PM
Enron's Enablers Go Unpunished
No, I'm not thrilled over Jeffrey Skilling getting 24 years in prison for his role in the Enron scandal. While he and fellow Enron honcho Kenneth Lay were clearly guilty as charged, the handling of this case by the Bush Justice Department is a functional coverup of the Bush family's role in enabling these crimes.
The thousands of Enron employees who lost their jobs, as well as $2 billion in pension money and $60 billion in share value, deserve better. By focusing on narrowly drawn criminal charges and the public's wrath against Skilling and his late partner in crime--"Kenny Boy" Lay, as President Bush referred to his onetime chief campaign benefactor--the culpability of the president's family in this sordid saga is being whitewashed.
How convenient to close the book without considering the ties between the Enron perps and those in two Bush presidencies whose actions enabled these hustlers. The Enron crooks would never have been more than petty thieves were it not for the political support they received from their fellow Texas oil buddies. They knew that, and they paid for it: Over the years, Lay and Enron gave the Bush family politicians $3 million in contributions, as well as lending the campaigning George W. a jet on at least eight occasions.
They did so because, without the deregulation of the energy industry pushed by the first President Bush, Enron would have remained a minor company without the capacity to swindle. At the time, Lay wrote a column supporting the elder Bush's reelection by praising him as "the energy president" because "just six months after George Bush became president, he directed ... the most ambitious and sweeping energy plan ever proposed."
Specifically, Enron benefited mightily from a key ruling by Wendy Gramm, head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission under George H.W. Bush, permitting Enron to trade in highly profitable energy derivatives. A mere five weeks after rendering that ruling, Gramm, the wife of then-Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas), abruptly resigned to join the Enron board of directors, where she served on the company's now-infamous see-no-evil audit committee. Secretary of State James Baker and Commerce Secretary Robert Mosbacher also rushed to work for Enron after their White House tenures.
Dubya first got involved with Enron's Lay when they both worked on his daddy's campaign, and the relationship flowered during his years as the governor of Texas. There is, in fact, a long paper trail of "Dear Ken" and "Dear George" exchanges that have come to light, thanks to Freedom of Information Act requests. The correspondence exposes the active support given by Bush to Enron's expansion into markets ranging from Uzbekistan to Pennsylvania. As Lay wrote to Bush in a letter dated Oct. 7, 1997: "I very much appreciated your call to Gov. Tom Ridge a few days ago. I am certain that will have a positive impact on the way he and others view our proposal."
In payback for Bush's support, Lay became a Bush "pioneer" fundraiser, dumping in more than $2 million in contributions from himself and Enron executive funds. Lay's influence with Bush extended well into the first year of the Bush administration, when Bush stonewalled California while it was being extorted through a manufactured "power crisis" by Enron and other energy companies to buy energy at grossly inflated prices.
The Enron boss also became a principal architect of the new Bush energy policy in the months before his downfall, completely undermining the spirit of democracy. In fact, the public has still been denied access to the six secret conversations Lay had with Vice President Dick Cheney when the vice president was quarterbacking the Bush administration's response to the California energy crisis, which saw the prosperous state preposterously hit by rolling blackouts. Lay provided Cheney with a key memo opposing price caps that would have mightily aided California consumers.
Lay also played a major role in the dismissal of Curtis Hebert Jr. as Federal Energy Commission chairman. Hebert was too independent for Enron's taste, while his replacement was far more amenable to the company's agenda.
Without the specific energy policies pursued through two Bush presidencies, Skilling and Lay would have remained two-bit Texas hustlers going nowhere fast. But thanks to their presidential sponsors, who in turn received lavish campaign contributions, the biggest corporate swindle in U.S. history was allowed to unfold.
Why were the dots between the Enron swindlers and their government sponsors never connected by a Bush Justice Department that seemed more interested in containing the damage than exploring the true ramifications of this case? Getting to the bottom of this story is one compelling reason to hope that the Democrats gain control in this election of at least one branch of Congress, thus permitting a serious investigation of the political machinations behind the Enron swindle.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/200601024_robert_scheer_enrons_enablers/
Interestingly, the vast bulk of Enron's criminal activities took place while Clinton was President. Where was Bill?
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-26-2006, 08:49 PM
Let me guess:
W*GS with his usual difficulties with distinctions and processing facts?
What sort of ties did the Enron perps have with Clinton, W*GS?
That's right: None.
Now, your friends the Bushes, on the other hand...
How convenient to close the book without considering the ties between the Enron perps and those in two Bush presidencies whose actions enabled these hustlers. The Enron crooks would never have been more than petty thieves were it not for the political support they received from their fellow Texas oil buddies. They knew that, and they paid for it: Over the years, Lay and Enron gave the Bush family politicians $3 million in contributions, as well as lending the campaigning George W. a jet on at least eight occasions.
They did so because, without the deregulation of the energy industry pushed by the first President Bush, Enron would have remained a minor company without the capacity to swindle. At the time, Lay wrote a column supporting the elder Bush's reelection by praising him as "the energy president" because "just six months after George Bush became president, he directed ... the most ambitious and sweeping energy plan ever proposed."
Specifically, Enron benefited mightily from a key ruling by Wendy Gramm, head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission under George H.W. Bush, permitting Enron to trade in highly profitable energy derivatives. A mere five weeks after rendering that ruling, Gramm, the wife of then-Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas), abruptly resigned to join the Enron board of directors, where she served on the company's now-infamous see-no-evil audit committee. Secretary of State James Baker and Commerce Secretary Robert Mosbacher also rushed to work for Enron after their White House tenures.
Dubya first got involved with Enron's Lay when they both worked on his daddy's campaign, and the relationship flowered during his years as the governor of Texas. There is, in fact, a long paper trail of "Dear Ken" and "Dear George" exchanges that have come to light, thanks to Freedom of Information Act requests. The correspondence exposes the active support given by Bush to Enron's expansion into markets ranging from Uzbekistan to Pennsylvania. As Lay wrote to Bush in a letter dated Oct. 7, 1997: "I very much appreciated your call to Gov. Tom Ridge a few days ago. I am certain that will have a positive impact on the way he and others view our proposal."
In payback for Bush's support, Lay became a Bush "pioneer" fundraiser, dumping in more than $2 million in contributions from himself and Enron executive funds. Lay's influence with Bush extended well into the first year of the Bush administration, when Bush stonewalled California while it was being extorted through a manufactured "power crisis" by Enron and other energy companies to buy energy at grossly inflated prices.
The Enron boss also became a principal architect of the new Bush energy policy in the months before his downfall, completely undermining the spirit of democracy. In fact, the public has still been denied access to the six secret conversations Lay had with Vice President Dick Cheney when the vice president was quarterbacking the Bush administration's response to the California energy crisis, which saw the prosperous state preposterously hit by rolling blackouts. Lay provided Cheney with a key memo opposing price caps that would have mightily aided California consumers.
Lay also played a major role in the dismissal of Curtis Hebert Jr. as Federal Energy Commission chairman. Hebert was too independent for Enron's taste, while his replacement was far more amenable to the company's agenda.
Without the specific energy policies pursued through two Bush presidencies, Skilling and Lay would have remained two-bit Texas hustlers going nowhere fast. But thanks to their presidential sponsors, who in turn received lavish campaign contributions, the biggest corporate swindle in U.S. history was allowed to unfold.
Why were the dots between the Enron swindlers and their government sponsors never connected by a Bush Justice Department that seemed more interested in containing the damage than exploring the true ramifications of this case? Getting to the bottom of this story is one compelling reason to hope that the Democrats gain control in this election of at least one branch of Congress, thus permitting a serious investigation of the political machinations behind the Enron swindle.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...rons_enablers/
Repeating yourself is one of the early signs of dementia, LABF.
Clinton's DoJ was too busy extorting billions from tobacco companies (subverting the Constitution in the process), lying about the deliberate murder of children, tossing people into prison for long terms for having an ounce or two of pot, and putting a machine gun into a child's face to force him back to a totalitarian state to pay much attention to Enron's swindles.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-26-2006, 10:53 PM
Let me guess:
Another non-rebuttal of the facts I just cited from the director of deflection?
No matter how much you rationalize it or attempt to put the entire blame for Enron's criminal activities on GHWB and GWB, there's no getting around the fact that almost all their crimes were committed on Clinton's watch. Period.
bendog
10-27-2006, 08:50 AM
oh Christ, another wags whackoff. Die thread die.
btw, I heard the feds started a civil forfieture action against Lay's estate.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-27-2006, 10:28 PM
Enron's Skilling Sentenced; Bush Walks
Don't kid yourself. If you think the sentencing of Jeff Skilling, former Enron CFO (criminal financial officer), to twenty-four years in the slammer means that justice has been done, think again.
First, Skilling got away with murder - or at least grand larceny. Like Al Capone convicted of failing to file his taxes, Skilling, though found guilty of stock fraud, is totally off the hook for his BIG crime: taking down California and Texas consumers for billions through fraud on the power markets.
Jeff Skilling, his unmourned co-convict Ken Lay and Enron did not act alone. They connived with half a dozen other power companies and a dozen investment banks to manipulate both the stock market and the electricity market. And though their co-conspirators have now paid $3 billion to settle civil claims, the executives of these other corporations and banks get a walk on criminal charges.
Furthermore, to protect our President's boardroom buddies from any further discomforts, the Bush Justice Department, just days ago, indicted Milberg Weiss, the law firm that nailed Enron's finance industry partners-in-crime. The timing of the bust of this, the top corporation-battling law firm, smacks of political prosecution -- and a signal to Big Business that it's business as usual.
Skilling has to pay up his ill-gotten gains to Enron's stockholders, but what about the $9-plus billion owed to electricity consumers? The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Bush's electricity cops, have slapped Enron and its gang of power pirates on the wrist. Could that have something to do with the fact that Ken Lay, in secret chats with Dick Cheney, selected the Commission's chairmen?
Team Bush had to throw the public a bone -- so they throw us Skilling -- for the crime, note, not of ripping off the public, but ripping off stockholders, the owner class.
This limited conviction, and the announcement of only one more indictment -- of the crime-busters at Milberg Weiss -- is Team Bush's "all clear!" signal for the sharks to jump back into the power pool.
Read the original article and watch the BBC report here:
http://www.gregpalast.com/lay-convicted-bush-walks
Before we shed tears for Milberg Weiss...
(Note the fact in bold that I've highlighted)
The boot's on the other foot
May 25th 2006 | NEW YORK
From The Economist print edition
The legal scourge of American companies is itself accused
For years a lawsuit from Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman has been a common aftershock for American companies hit by financial earthquakes. After a sharp decline in a firm's share price, Milberg Weiss would threaten a class-action suit on behalf of shareholders allegedly cheated into buying overpriced equity. The company would typically settle, in effect compensating shareholders with their own money—a slice of which went to Milberg Weiss.
To Milberg Weiss and its sympathisers, this is civil justice; to the companies forced to pay, it is a shake-down. The defendants enjoyed a form of redress on May 18th when two of Milberg Weiss's senior partners, David Bershad and Steven Schulman, and the firm itself were indicted by a grand jury in California on criminal charges of racketeering, fraud, conspiracy and other things. The firm is said to have used a small stable of illicitly paid “lead plaintiffs” to start lawsuits. The indictment, which notes that Mr Bershad has been paid $161m since 1983 and Mr Schulman $67m since 1991, also refers to two unnamed partners. No one would be shocked if more charges were filed.
The indictment says that more than $11m was paid to three men who (sometimes through relatives) played a decisive role in cases in which Milberg Weiss received more than $200m in fees. If true, this would be a straightforward breach of laws barring anyone representing a class from receiving payments that would place his interest at odds with that of his fellow claimants. The plaintiffs were paid through complex and secret channels, involving a safe hidden in Mr Bershad's office, other law firms and even casinos. In other ways, however, Milberg Weiss was quite open. Two of the plaintiffs took part in 70 suits each, the other in 40. The men's investments in the firms they sued were often trivial. Given that, it would be fair to find out why they troubled to go to law.
So why did none of the besieged companies bother? The larger ones certainly have the resources to hire private investigators to look into plaintiffs. And they have had plenty of time; the California inquiry has been going on for more than five years and the alleged practices for more than two decades. A possible explanation is that not much can be done—perhaps not even a successful prosecution—to cut back litigation in Milberg Weiss's style.
One of the more disturbing possibilities, says Jonathan Macey, a professor at Yale Law School, is that this kind of litigation has numerous beneficiaries besides Milberg Weiss. The techniques spawned by the firm have created lots of business for lawyers—both those who mimic Milberg Weiss and those who defend companies.Law firms engaged in such suits have become generous donors to politicians, especially Democrats. Insurers have seen a dramatic increase in demand for policies that protect directors and officers from personal liability in cases of this kind. All these groups now have an interest in keeping this form of litigation going.
Even companies' directors have been complicit in this to some extent, by reasoning that settling lawsuits with shareholders is cheaper and easier than fighting. It has been suggested that, if the Californian prosecutors prevail, companies that had settled with Milberg Weiss may try to recover money the firm kept as fees. Just as likely, they will want to avoid admitting that they rolled over too quickly.
Milberg Weiss now has so many imitators that even if the firm dissolved, it would hardly be missed. And there is nothing to stop its other partners from setting up shop elsewhere. In 1995 Congress, despite Bill Clinton's veto, changed the rules of class-action litigation, requiring the lead plaintiff to have a significant economic interest. That took care of the practices alleged in the California suit. However, lawyers are nothing if not creative. In shareholder litigation these days, plaintiff law firms are hired by states and public pension funds rather than individuals. The politicians behind these institutional plaintiffs are allowed to receive donations from law firms they might hire, and do. Although paying a plaintiff directly is a crime, this indirect method is not.
The case against Milberg Weiss does not address the economic lunacy of the kind of litigation in which the firm specialised, but rather a quirk in how suits are begun. Milberg Weiss was always open about having an entrepreneurial business model. It justified its suits by saying that it was pursuing cases that state attorneys-general should have taken up but did not. It styled itself as a private attorney-general, with better resources and knowledge than the public variety but with the same aim—punishing miscreants. It did this by dredging money out of companies with the approval of the courts. Suing companies for their managers' errors, however, merely hurts shareholders a second time. A better route to redress for shareholders may be to go after the executives themselves.
Copyright © 2006 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-28-2006, 12:32 AM
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/2715/georgesays8wm8.jpg
Apparently, if my posts don't match LABF's word-for-word, I'm "deflecting".
Palast (and you) think Milberg Weiss is some sort of heroic organization. The truth is less than that.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-28-2006, 07:04 AM
Covering Dubya and Kenny Boy's flank is a full-time job for W*GS.
Sigh.
It was Palast who mentioned Milberg Weiss; there's less to them than meets his interpretation of them.
I could say that Milberg Weiss and law firms like it exist mainly to shakedown companies and use the proceeds for their own enrichment and to greatly benefit the Democrats; however, you've never conceded the fact that your beloved Democratic Party dances to the tune of attorneys (and public sector unions too).