Replies

Two flaws in your argument:,P>(1) We are talking about a direct comparison between people who are convicted of second degree murder. Not instances of diminished capacity like an enraged husband.

On that basis, 24-30 is more than 15-25.

(2) You wrote: "some high level executives, in a pre-meditated manner, falsified company records to hurt other people financially in order to benefit themselves at their expense."

That's not the case - the people they defrauded were stockholders - yet they themselves were wealthy insofar as they owned options in company stock. The absolute last thing they wanted to happen was for the company stock to collapse. They were certainly not premeditating a destruction of Enron's share price.

I'll accept the first flaw you point out but not the second. It was proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the Enron directors abused their power to falsify company records and therefore defrauded shareholders, knowing full well that they were going to drive the company into the ground. It was proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the reported "assets" and "profits" of Enron were inflated by the directors and in many cases, non-existent.

What the Enron executives didn't count on was that they would be exposed before they could fully cash out and that they would be held criminally liable for their actions in the same manner that a bank robber doesn't count on getting caught before they can get away with their money.