Replies

What's the charge? Or is that necessary these days...

Maybe we should just sit beside the court doors with knitting saying.... Guillotine! Guilllotine! (/sarcasm lots on most)

"....Prosecutors from the Justice Department's Enron Task Force presented an indictment to U.S. Magistrate Judge Mary Milloy in Houston on Wednesday. At their request, the judge sealed both the indictment and an arrest warrant."

That's odd! But now for the media hit piece

"It was unclear specifically what charges Lay would face. But the sources said they probably would allege he participated in hiding Enron's dire financial condition from investors, analysts and the public in the weeks before the energy company crumbled into bankruptcy in December 2001."

I wonder if this is from an un-named source exclusive to the Washiongton Post? (/sarcasm)

As we have discussed before, if they have evidence that he hid information from stockholders, throw the book at him. However, I expect the media to point out his connection with Bill Clinton and for someone to lament that Clinton couldn't have provided Ken with a Presidential Pardon in the closing days of Bill Clinton's Presidency. (/sarcasm)

It's the end of the day and I am in a silly mood. Guillotine! Guilllotine!

I have little doubt that most of what Enron did that led to the asset bubble was legal. I also have little doubt that the way it became legal was not. I have serious doubt that we'll ever find a paper trail on the latter. I don't like an indictment on unspecified charges, at all.

Madam Defarge. Perfect analogy.

You know, a company can get into financial trouble by borrowing too much. But their debt situation is required to be disclosed. Every financial site out there posts the debt-to-equity ratio on every security.

But these limited partnerships (or whatever financial trick Enron used to hide their debt) were not required be disclosed, apparently. IOW, they were legal.

But now the government wants to burn Ken Lay at the stake to make an example of him. Somehow...anyhow...any way. Is nobody even concerned that the charges are "secret".

But how silly of me. I should know that modern Americans have never read that antiquated document that some old white european men used to call "The Constitution". Would you just look at the kind of crap they wrote?!?!

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.