Andersen gets off

[DC_DEEP]

Originally posted by aloofman+Jun 18 2005, 01:19 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aloofman &#064; Jun 18 2005, 01:19 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-madame_zora@Jun 18 2005, 02:23 AM
When the "process" interferes with the obvious, the courts no longer serve the needs of the people.

[post=321795]Quoted post[/post]​

99% of the time that "process" serves the needs of the people. If you think that people should still be convicted when the process fails, then I&#39;m sure there are some dictatorships that could serve your needs better.

The real issue is why a judge still can&#39;t get jury instructions right, not whether a destroyed company has to pay a fine.

[post=321873]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]
The real problem in this case is not "due process." The real problem is that the case was not presented in a way that the jurors simply had to decide "did Andersen have any complicity in the creative bookkeeping, thereby knowingly and willfully causing financial ruin for those with a financial stake in the company?" The lawyers for both prosecution and defense probably need to face ethics charges.

 

[jonb]

Yeah, well, those lawyers are almost as incompetent as Enron was in hiding it.

 

[madame_zora]

Sadly, they didn&#39;t need to be competent.