Welcome to PatsFans.com

Republican Activist Judge Throws out Charges against Ken Lay..

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DarrylS, Oct 18, 2006.

  1. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,222
    Likes Received:
    325
    Ratings:
    +819 / 27 / -33

    A Republican Activist Judge throws out the conviction of Ken Lay, thus leaving any possible reparation down the flusher for the Enron folks who were hoping to get a pittance from this thief.

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4267258.html

    The criminal case against Ken Lay came to an end Tuesday when a judge vacated his convictions and dismissed the indictment that brought him to trial.

    U.S. District Judge Sim Lake granted the request by Lay's estate to wipe out the convictions against the late Enron chairman, an outcome that was widely anticipated, given legal precedent. Lake also dismissed the indictment that was filed against him in 2004.

    In his ruling, Lake cited a decision in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that makes a defendant's death before his or her appeals have been exhausted grounds for throwing out a conviction and dismissing an indictment.

    The Department of Justice had argued against vacating the conviction, saying it would unjustly enrich Lay's estate by preventing criminal forfeiture proceedings to recover restitution for victims of Enron's downfall.
     
  2. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams pfadmins PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,955
    Likes Received:
    212
    Ratings:
    +579 / 50 / -8

    #75 Jersey

    The judge vacated the conviction, because the man is DEAD! WHich makes him unable to pursue an appeal of his conviction. What the judge did do, is make sure that the civil suits agaisnt Ley were allowed to continue. This is routine and settled case law, nice try.....
     
  3. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,222
    Likes Received:
    325
    Ratings:
    +819 / 27 / -33

    It is no less true or less biased than any other thread on this board.. somethings are posted tongue in cheek.
     
  4. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams pfadmins PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,955
    Likes Received:
    212
    Ratings:
    +579 / 50 / -8

    #75 Jersey

    Actually the US Attorney's office really screwed up here, in federal cases, you are not considered "convicted" until you are sentenced. I don't think that Ley lived to reach his sentencing. But the real kicker here, is that the assest forfeiture provisions of his conviction, also only go into effect at sentencing.
     
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,926
    Likes Received:
    286
    Ratings:
    +780 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    Whatever, it's just the way the law works. He wasn't sentenced and died without the opportunity to appeal. Everyone who "lost" money in Enron put most of the money there by choice. OK so Kenny advised them to. So what. It was their choice. And a large amount of their losses was losing what they'd already gained in Enron stock.
     
  6. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Look, there's the legal issue of the conviction of a dead person being set aside if they die before getting to appeal, which is based on case law and and is routine. But his conviction being set aside has nothing to do with his innocence, or that his victims should have known better. These were employees who had their money in the company's retirement fund - they had a legally binding expectation that their money wouldn't be used on parties for Ken Lay's wife. The they should have known better defense at least requires informed consent.
     
  7. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Bullcrap. You got caught lying outright in a feeble attempt to make Republicans look bad and you got called - and humiliated - on it. Now you are backtracking as fast as possible by trying to claim the remarks were "tongue in cheek".

    Nice try. Actually, no it wasn't.
     
  8. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    No offense, but you show a certain amount of ignorance regarding what exactly happened at Enron. Newsflash: The company was worth billions of dollars (on paper, that is) and they didn't go belly up because Ken Lay threw a lavish party for his wife.

    Nobody deserves to lose all their life's savings, but when you are stupid enough to invest your entire life's savings in one company, then that's the chance you take and I have very little sympathy for people who are stupid with their own money.
     
  9. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    They had no choice, it was a retirement fund and Enron got to invest it however they wanted, including into Enron.
     
  10. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,926
    Likes Received:
    286
    Ratings:
    +780 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    That basically sums it up. The people who lost money don't deserve anything. I have all my retirement money in diversified mutual funds. So I only average about 10% a year. Poor me. I could pick a company, Exxon, Wal Mart, take your pick, and put it all in there. Maybe I'd win big. Maybe I'd lose big. But that's no different than the Enron employees. They gambled and lost. Too bad, they should have played it safe with their money instead of thinking Enron was a golden goose that would give, give and keep giving. The only thing stupider than investing all your money in one company is investing all your money in the company you work for.
     
  11. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,926
    Likes Received:
    286
    Ratings:
    +780 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    We've been through this, that isn't true. They could invest their money in whatever they wanted. I think I heard the money Enron MATCHED (in other words, totally free) had to go into Enron but no company can force an employee to put their 401K contributions into that company. There was also a short lockout period when the employees couldn't move it out of Enron but that was a short period near the end.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2006
  12. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    So this is your basis for defending Lay? If one of your fund managers stole your money and you were out 10% of your investment, would you say "too bad, I should have known better" or would you want him rightfully prosecuted?
     
  13. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    What cracks me up the most is their mentality that they should be compensated for the maximum value of their investment, and not the investment itself... For example:

    Employee X invests $50,000 in Enron in 1997.
    In 2000, that investment is worth $1,000,000 (on paper).
    In 2001, sh*t hits the fan, investment now worthless.

    So what do you suppose Employee X wants...? He $50,000 back, or his $1,000,000..? Obviously he is going to talk about how he lost $1,000,000 when he really only lost $50,000.

    Lesson: When you hear or read about how much money an individual lost on Enron, they are usually taking the sensationalistic view and using the maximum value of their investment, not the original investment itself.
     
  14. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Their company's 401K plan only allowed them to invest in Enron. True, they could have taken the money and invested it themselves, but then they would lose the ability to invest pre-tax, which you can only do with an affiliated 401K plan.
     
  15. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    This is a horrible analogy. Furthermore, no one is defending Ken Lay. He's a scumbag who deserves a fate worse than the one he got. But that isn't the issue at hand... the issue at hand is reparations to the investors.

    Like I said before, nobody deserves to lose their life's savings, but when you put all your eggs in one basket, you have no right to complain when that "basket" goes belly up.
     
  16. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    When you lose $50K that you invested years ago, you've lost way more than the original $50K. You've lost the interest, too, which is meant to protect you against inflation risk. Would you want your money sitting in a mutual fund for a decade, only to get your original investment back when you withdraw it? If so, I have some real estate I'd like to sell you.
     
  17. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Bullcrap. There are other ways you can invest money pre-tax (or, better yet, pay taxes up front and receive it tax free on the back end).

    But essentially you are saying that their own greed enticed them to invest all their money in just one company. So why should anyone but them be blamed for their own stupidity and greed...?
     
  18. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,926
    Likes Received:
    286
    Ratings:
    +780 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    I don't think that's true. But I can't prove it without investing more time than I want to. But any 401K is typically allowed to be rolled over into a tax deferred IRA of the employees' choice.
     
  19. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Pretty weak response Pujo - even by your standards. What's the interest on $50,000 over 4 years...? At 5% annual interest, you would have about $60,000 instead of $50,000. So my point stands.
     
  20. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,926
    Likes Received:
    286
    Ratings:
    +780 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    It would suck but not only do I have my money in mutual funds, I have it spread through about 10 different ones. Lower upside, lower risk. Others go for higher upside and higher risk. Good luck to them.

    Bottom line, though, I have half my retirement in the S&P 500 which is about as sexy as a 65 year old woman weighing 300 pounds. But it averages 12% over the past 70 years and it can't be "stolen" from bad investments as they have to invest it in a balanced way through the S&P 500 companies. Safe. But secure.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>