Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Supreme Court Rules Ex-Enron CEO Skilling to Get New Trial

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:37 AM
Original message
Supreme Court Rules Ex-Enron CEO Skilling to Get New Trial
Edited on Thu Jun-24-10 09:48 AM by sabra
Source: CNBC

BREAKING NEWS: Supreme Court Rules Ex-Enron CEO Skilling to Get New Trial, Court Also Sets Aside Fraud Conviction of Conrad Black

Read more: http://www.cnbc.com/



MORE:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37896982

High Court Orders New Trials For Jeff Skilling, Conrad Black

The high court also set aside a ruling that upheld the convictions of former media baron Conrad Black and two ex-colleagues for defrauding shareholders of one-time newspaper publishing giant Hollinger International. The justices sent the case back to a U.S. appeals court in Chicago for further proceedings.

The court sided with Skilling in limiting the use of a federal fraud law that has been a favorite of white-collar crime prosecutors.

The court said that the "honest services" law could not be used in convicting Skilling for his role in the collapse of Enron. But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in her majority opinion that the ruling does not necessarily require Skilling's conviction to be overturned.

During arguments on this case last December, several justices seemed inclined to limit prosecutors' use of this law, which critics have said is vague and has been used to make a crime out of mistakes and minor transgressions in the business and political world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. This means Blago walks, too
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. No, Bllago's a Democrat without vast wealth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papadog Donating Member (118 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. The Right sticks up for their own, even when guilty. The Left......
betrays their own even when innocent. Remember ACORN-defunded, MoveOn.org-congressional resolution for accurate claiming Gen.BetrayUS. With few exceptions, like Grayson (God bless him) or Feingold Dems are spineless wimps who won't stand up for their own while Republicans dig in their heels and let their controversies blow over. Don't we desreve representation, especially when se're right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Yep... And I'd add Kucinich, Franken, and Sanders to the list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #5
12. Exactly. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
2. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Damn Ginsberg wrote the opinion
It was a terrible statute that should have been struck down long ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Maybe this is why she wrote it....
Edited on Thu Jun-24-10 09:54 AM by No Elephants
"But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in her majority opinion that the ruling does not necessarily require Skilling's conviction to be overturned."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. We are both shooting from the hip here.
Maybe I should read the damn opinion before spewing shit I don't know about. Ya think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. I do, this is a complicated ruling:
GINSBURG, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, Part I of which was joined by ROBERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., Part II of which was joined by ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, KENNEDY, and THOMAS, JJ., and Part III of which was joined by ROB-ERTS, C. J., and STEVENS, BREYER, ALITO, and SOTOMAYOR, JJ. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which THOMAS, J., joined, and KENNEDY, J., joined except as to Part
III. ALITO, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dis-senting in part, in which STEVENS and BREYER, JJ., joined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Yow, that's a mishmash.
Considering how overly vague interpretation of the law has become a tad messy, I'm not surprised, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
4. Maybe he'll rat out members of the Bush administration n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
8. SCOTUS, serving their true masters
just another day in a Billionaire's Paradise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scuba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prolesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
10. Conrad Black is why I'm unemployed
That man belongs in jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
16. 5 of 7 charges against Siegelman were based on this law. Now he only has
ine bribery and one obstruction of justice. Which means only one bribery. If he can get that one thrown out, he is free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoeyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. That seems unlikely.
Siegelman's a Democrat. Even if he manages to escape the current railroading, they'll either trump up some more charges and if that fails they'll plant something on him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doremus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-10 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
18. Why the fuck do they even keep up the pretense. As if the court would rule for the proles.
:eyes:

We're destined to be serfs and I'll deal with it, but please don't shit in my bun and call it a burger. :mad:

The oligarchy grows more powerful every day and there isn't a single thing we can do about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 20th 2024, 02:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC