[rednek]

now someone explain how to put a partnership in jail after "it" is convicted!. wouldn't it make more sense to indict an individual or group of individuals? more nonsense from the federal government.

regards - red

[Southack]

"now someone explain how to put a partnership in jail after "it" is convicted!. wouldn't it make more sense to indict an individual or group of individuals? more nonsense from the federal government."

Indicting the company means that Andersen is now FORBIDDEN from performing the SEC audits of all public (read: Fortune 5000) American companies. It should also get Andersen tossed from its government auditing contracts (e.g. at the FBI).

Now we just have to see how much of its assets that Andersen can illegally transfer off-shore before the lawsuits and damages eradicate the company.

And of course, whether any of this impacts Andersen Consulting (aka Acenture) financially...

Andersen is dead. Frankly, it lived too long, anyway. It was corrupt for years.

[KC Burke]

Documents were shredded. The oveall managing partners of the entire LLC notified the government of that when they became aware that it had occurred in the offices of the Houston Partners of the LLC (the Engaging Partners / Partners in Charge).

It was alleged in their defense that the main office had sent a memo reminding the Houston Partner's office that the Document Retention Policy of AA called for (1) Work/Preliminary Documents be disposed of and (2) Final Documents and workpaper versions be retained and (3) if a legal inquiry was proceeding to preserve all documents that might be called for by law (my paraphrase). No the Main Office felt that such action showed their willingness to prevent destruction of evidence. The government contends (IMHO) that the Policy memo was a back-handed way of telling the branch office to "clean their house" of incriminating evidence.

The signifigance of the LLC being charged and not just a partner is that such would bar AA as a whole from conducting Audits needed for SEC filings -- i.e., puts them out of business absent an SEC waiver which stops only the Houston office. But you see, SEC wants to maintain a deep-pocket reservoir to go after for media results and doesn't want to let the whole company off the hook. Justice doesn't want to worry about the actual culprits cause that could shield the deep pockets/ big-trophy of the whold firm being charged so they name the entire firm first....more headlines.

Hell, the Enron CFO who perpetrated this whole shebang hasn't been charged....might as well put an arrogant ol' line Audit firm out of business....

I'm just a tad bitter about this whole thing though......after all we just spent 8 years with a criminal conspiracy in the executive being ignored by 80% of government and all of the media......but, hey, its a big-business, oil croney, Republican in office, doncha know.... gotta protect those 401k fools

[Hugin]

now someone explain how to put a partnership in jail after "it" is convicted!. wouldn't it make more sense to indict an individual or group of individuals?

My thought exactly! Can any Freeper legal experts tell us how a corporation can be criminally liable, not the officers who were actually responible?

[jackbill]

now someone explain how to put a partnership in jail after "it" is convicted!.

More than that, isn't AA a "limited liability partnership"?

My guess is that AA will "dissolve", the partners will walk away with millions, the 85,000 employees will look for other jobs and the next of the "Big Four" will be looked at.

BTW, my son is everlastingly happy that he left AA five years ago.