I made the comment on the last death penalty thread

""... killing poeple like Ken Lay would do enormous good..."


"...a fantasy ...seeing corrupt CEOs hang..."

"...the executing of only the poor (I was researching and have not found a single person that made over 30 thousand a year in todays money that has been executed since before WW2)..."

(though somewhat truncated)

and the comment was made

"Interesting injection of class hatred/envy/warfare into a debate with rather straightforward questions. Perhaps you could start a new thread called-"Why don't we start executing these wealthy crooks?" I'm sure there is plenty of meat to grind on that one! If I had read into the questions-"What other crimes should be subject to the death penalty?" I might have added "shoplifters", "check forgers", and "welfare cheats."

I do not think of it as class warfare, but justice for society done by poeple who harm others on a wholesale level. White collar crime in this country carries not even an 1/8 of the jail time (if any jail time at all) of a crime such as a B&E- where no violence is done- though the damage is more severe by many fold and thier are more victims. Take the Enron thing or Michael Milken- they have proven crime does pay. Michael Milken bilked hundreds of thousand of investors of hundreds of millions of dollars and got five years, and came out of jail a billionare. A guy breaks into a house, steals some silver, and can wind up with double that sentence in many states. Heck, a first time pot seller can get more time than that in many states! Same with cocaine possession!

More damage to society is done by these monsters than even a serial killer, with more wrecked lives. Poeple lose thier homes, thier retirements, thier businesses they have worked thier whole lives for, while these guys get rich and walk away scot free!

This is one area I am for very draconion punishments, and very low standards of proof, with redefining the crimes themselves.

I think if you are a CEO making 16 million a year plus, there should be some risk involved when you are unethical, loss of all property, with no bankruptcy protection whatsoever, where literally the clothes off your back are sold, and your kids owe thier college tuition back to the debt collector, plus mandatory minimum sentences of 20 years or more for over 250 thou in fraud, and the death penalty if over 100 victims are involved, with no appeals, because, let's face it, you have bought the best defense money can buy!

So my question is:

What is the appropriate punishment for corrupt CEOs, and what is an acceptable burden of proof, and what constitutes criminal behavior?

Can't go for the death penalty, or any penalty greater than a serial rapist would face. Even the worst crimes against property pale in comparison to murder and causing great bodily harm. I think a standard sentence of 40 years, with at least half to be served and all property confiscated would get the job done

I could live with that punishment- but the second part of the equation is the tough one- what burden of proof and how do you determine the crime? Look how unbelievably difficult it is to even bring charges against guys that are obviously as crooked as a dog's hind leg- Ken Lay is still free- as well as Niel Bush- and the only poeple that don't see a crime are the prosecutors and judges!

I would agree, CruisingRam that draconian punishment is demanded. The first step, of course, would actually be investigating corporate crime and prosecuting cases in the first place. We're even a long way from that. I personally feel that penalties involving theft or fraud should be graduated, based on the amount of money illegally acquired. One year on top of a minimum sentence for every five million dollars or something along those lines - and no parole. That way, the worst of our white collar criminals would be out of commission for life. Also, all "country club" prisons should be stripped of their outrageous financing, their golf courses turned into farmland to be worked by their inmates. If nothing else, this would be an enormous boon to our flailing economy.

I would also argue that more punitive action should be taken toward corporate as well as individual abuse. Executives should be responsible, accounting firms should be accountable, corporate boards should be representative of shareholders. Two simple initiatives could make a start in ensuring more corporate responsibility in this country. One is pension protection: requiring 401(k) diversification, capping overconcentration of company stock, and not locking employees in to their shares. The other is cracking down on corporate tax evasion: eliminating the keeping of two sets of books, for example, or prohibiting companies which incorporate offshore from eligibility for government contracts or government-tendered contracts. While none of these proposals address criminal acts as such, they would be a first step in fighting some of the corruption which is costing honest American citizens billions of dollars annually.

I agree with Hugo on this one. First of all, all of their assets should be auctioned of regardless of the states homestead act. They should be left with nothing, so even if they deny knowing anything about the fraud that would give them some incentive to find out.
Second, I think that not enough consideration is give to their competition. Worldcom has been hiding its debt and making its competitors look crap by providing its service for cheaper at a loss, while getting investor money because it was hiding expenses and looked like it was generating a profit. When the judgement was passed it was fined only $150M dollars, a month worth of revenue, and allowed do go into chapter 11 rather then chapter 7. Now when they emerge from bankruptcy they will be able to cut better deal since their debt is now erased despite stealing $11B from investors. This doesn't even address them routing calls over competitors networks to avoid the costly access charges as well. I anticipate numerous amount of bankruptcys and take overs once they emerge from chapter 11 for the companies that have been taking it on the chin from Worldcom, now MCI, for years.

Yikes! "...very low standards of proof..." And what kind of standards would those be? "Gee, I just had a feeling about the guy." Or "Look at his Rolex, he must be guilty!" Or "Nobody could have gotten that rich honestly!"

In answer to the first question "What is the appropriate punishment for corrupt CEO's?" I would say- vague question. What was the exact crime?

To the second question "What is an acceptable burden of proof?" I would say- The same burden applied to any other citizen charged with a crime- "Beyond a reasonable doubt" in a criminal case or "preponderance of the evidence" in a civil case.

As to question #3 "What constitutes criminal behavior?" I would say- Any behavior that violates another person's right to their life, their liberty, or their property.

Okay, I will answer your question with a question- why is it so hard to get a conviction against someone like Ken Lay? Because the burden of proof is so difficult and what is a crime so carefully worded it is near impossible to get a conviction. Arthur Anderson was easily convicted as a corporation and as indviduals because the crime they were convicted of was so easy to prove and very clear cut- they destroyed evidence.

So- basically making the burden of proof and the crime based on what it would take to get a conviction and long sentence to Ken Lay may be a good starting place. He clearly decieved investors, he clearly decieved his employees. Can you agree with this, or is Ken Lay just a nice guy that deserves the benefit of the doubt from evil liberals that just want to wage a class war against the rich?

So- instead of trying to guess his intent, or some other minutea of the law just the fact that he knew his company was in trouble and did not allow his employees to cash out when he did should warrant a total loss of all his earthly possesion and a 40 year lock up in a federal pen in general pop, dating the big guy with the most cigarettes.

So why not just ask the jury what they "think" he did, call that a "crime", and reduce the verdict requirement to just one juror? Wow man! Have you ever read Kafka?

If Ken Lay commited any "crimes" and it is as "clear" as you say it is, then he could be found guilty. If his activities are not considered "crimes" and you think they should be, then write your congressman. I don't know if Ken Lay is "just a nice guy" or not but I do believe in our system of "not guilty until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt" even with all it's shortcomings. Not sure what to make of the "evil liberals" part of your question? Was that a Freudian slip?

[QUOTE]What is the appropriate punishment for corrupt CEOs, and what is an acceptable burden of proof, and what constitutes criminal behavior?


I'd say the appropiate punishment would be to live the rest of their lives working towards restitution.
1. Never to be allowed to hold a decision making positin in a company.
2. A salary affordable to that of someone at the poverty level.
3. Mandatory community service for life.
4. Barred from starting own business.

Burden of proof? Thousands of investors lose money because someone at the top thinks they deserve to live lavishly illegally without consequence.

Same rules should apply to CEOs as Captian of a ship. You are responsible for all actions for those who serve under you. After all they're getting the big bucks to know all that is happening in all aspects of the business.

Not the death penalty. The death penalty would be considered harsh punishment.

The best punishment should be 50 years in jail. Manipulating a company's finances is a major fraud against investors is serious but not serious enough to warrant the death penalty.

50 years in jail seems appropriate


mrbluiis:

That was one of the parts of Bush's corporate corruption bill that he passed after the ENRON and Worldcom incidents. All CEOs are responsible even if the fraud was done by the Chief Financial Officer without the CEO's knowledge

Confiscation of personal property by the government is not a road we want to go down...

Why not just convict Bill Gates on monopoly charges and solve the budget deficit right now?

It's not? I take it you are just as opposed to having the government confiscate whatever they please if drugs are involved? If some guy can get his house, car, cash, etc. taken away for selling somebody a bag of weed, these pathetic excuses for a human being should definitely part with their riches for ruining hundreds of people.

I completely agree with you, because how much of that stuff has been bought on the back of their employees, investors, creditors. Bernard Ebbers even had Worldcom issue him millions of dollars of loans. Now that the telecom bubble busted I can't even get my company to issue me training on new equipment. (well I just read the manual now, so don't worry the internet is still safe for now)

The instant justice is supplanted by revenge any notion of law & order goes out the window. It saddens me that so many people are calling for blood (as it were) instead of treating this issue rationally.

What really enrages me is the amount of jobs that are cut and people losing jobs just so the CEO can have his millions of dollars in pay plus a good hefty bonus.

What is the average salary of a CEO now? Some where around 400 times the average worker(not sure of that figure,but I think it is in the ballpark)which is obscene.

Just think if he or she only made 40 times the average worker. How many more people would have a job.

Any punishment(great or small) is not enough for these parasites.

And as a side note-Who allows the CE0 to get away with these atrocious deeds.

Why the BOARD OF DIRECTORS. Who are overpaid. So much for the fox guarding the hen house.

Looks like we might get a little sight of this topic soon- martha being guilty and all!

After thinking about this on her particular case- and I believe it is not near as egregious as what the Enron or World com guys did- so whatever she gets, they should get more!

I think she should have to repay all investors 150% of thier losses, starting with the smallest investor to the biggest, and it all must come out of her personal wealth first- then liquidating everything she owns as well.

Restitution makes sense.

However, if I personally had the chance to mete out punishment, I would have Martha work as my personal housekeeper and cook. She would have to come up with healthy meals that my daughter wouldn't turn up her nose at, and she would be cleaning my house. She might miss Club Fed in comparison.

I am curious, why Martha got the complete and total shaft while Ken Lay got ...uh, nothing? I dont condone her insider trading, but it dwarfs what was done by Enron. Why the double standard? How did Martha get so persecuted when Ken Lay AND the Worldcom execs got off without a smudge? Where are the big Enron trials?

It is too early to say the Ken Lay got off without a smudge. It is very difficult to take on executives and their legal teams.

I worried early on that the justice department team that was going after Enron was not staying on the job and would use the declining interest in Enron to put out declining efforts.

But I have been happy with recent developments in Enron. Fastow pled after being under a long investigation. Jeffrey Skilling is on the hot seat now, and very likely Ken Lay will get his day before a judge dealing out a criminal sentence.



Even top dogs can go to doghouse

Post article

Yes, but the diffrence in speed of going to trial for martha vs Enron is amazing- of course, you absolutely must take into account that Martha is not a close personal friend of the Bush family and lives nowhere near Texas

However, As with ARtemise, the level of wrongdoing between what martha did and what the CEOs commited is striking- and it is also striking that it is so much harder to get a conviction on those CEOs

Bravo Paladin! This is rich and deserves a

IMO, Martha Stewart's crime doesn't begin to smack of the complexities or seriousness of the CEO's (and others) of Enron, World.com, and Tyco and why the brevity of her "being brought to justice" excluding the judge's sentencing phase.

The crimes of those involved in the Enron, World.com, and Tyco depended upon the actions of many individuals and departments within the corporations and some of the crimes could not have been pulled off successfully without the help of individuals from outside banks, accounting firms, etc. Thus, why it is taking so long to go to trial and for justice being served.

There is no doubt in my mind that those involved will be held accountable and depending upon the crime will have to do the time because thanks to them, our corporate culture is having to restructure and abide by new regulations that will leave no doubt in anyone's mind...that this type of white collar crime is no longer going to be ignored or without consequences!

I believe if they did the crime they serve the time plus restitution in the way of fines and reimbursement to the employees.

Edited to add:

Restrictions on compensation for novels, movies, selling/telling their stories, etc. with 100% of their compensation going to the corporate employee restitution fund.

If found guilty, they do the time and re-enter society with their "jobs" all cutout for them in working with the proper authorities and corporations in a "watch dog" capacity to spot and prevent crimes such as theirs.

As I see more and more of how much she donated to dem causes I believe she is the target of selective prosecution by GW and company- over 100,000 club for donaters to the DNC- now I am sure of why she went to trial and was convicted so quickly.

I think they should treat them like anybody else. First they pay retribution/reparations to their victims. That will leave them pretty much broke and with nothing but state appointed counsel. Second, they suffer criminal charges for EACH count (i.e. each victim violated). If you have 100,000 employees and you STOLE say $20,000 of retirement money from each (on average) you just found yourself with 100,000 felony counts. It sounds absurd, but it should be reflected upon when considering whether to EVER let them out of prison. And I am not talking about 'resort' prison, but the other kind.

One more solution to the problem. In the words of Ralph Nader,

We need to end this retarded practice YESTERDAY.