镉0rRH W9
W uW㬐W㬐W㰐W & & o KC P : : $ D A T A s who made the alleged statements. Moreover, fingering unindicte the Task Force to prevent testimony that is favorable to the defense because persons named as unindicted co-conspirators are likely to the assert their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and thus, not be defense witnesses during the trial. Thus, the Task Force's liberal use of the co-conspirator tag has a double-whammy effect -- not only does it allow the Task Force to use out-of-court statements against defendants without havi n, it has also effectively prevented previous Enron-related defe ng>the Nigerian Barge trial, the Task Force used out-of-court statements of co-conspirators regarding the key factual issue in the case -- that is, what was said during a conference call between several Merrill and Enron executives, including former Enron CFO Andrew Fastow -- without ever having to put a witness on the stand who actually participated in the call. Similarly, none of the defendants during that trial, so the Task Force's use of the tactic effectively prevented the Merrill Lynch executives in that case from providing the jury with exculpatory testimony. Not l of the Enron Broadband case last year. In a trial that, at the outset, appeared to be a sure-thing for the prosecution, href="http://blog.kir.com/archives/002068.asp">Lawrence Ciscon and disastrous mix of acquittals and jury deadlock on the prose ssue could have an equally dramatic effect on the Lay-Skilling trial. Although reasonable people can disagree about whether the charges against executives such as Lay and Skilling would be bet rejudice Lay and Skilling's right to a fair trial by manipulating the unindicted co-conspirator tactic to use otherwise inadmissible hearsay testimony and to chill witnesses from providing exc uch dubious tactics to obtain convictions of Lay and Skilling is strong evidence that the government's criminalization of agency costs in the post-Enron era is contrary to justice and the rule of law.
Posted by Tom at January 27, 2006 04:25 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://mtcgi.kir.com/mt-trackbk.cgi/2822
Comments
Tom,
I am not a lawyer or entirely knowledgable of the judicial process. But, I am wondering if Lay/Skilling defense team is working towards the legality of the prosecutions use of the 'unindicted co-conspirators' either from scaring them from testifying for the defense or using damaging testimony that can't realistically be cross examined?
If they did find this strategy as illegal or improper on the part of the prosecution, would that mean that a g mmediate overturning of his witch trial conviction?
anything that occurs in Lay-Skilling with regard to this issue will have any meaningful impact on the case of Dan Bayly, whose trial was also deprived of substantial exculpatory testimony by the government's use of the tactic.
Posted by: Tom K. at January 27, 2006 12:50 PM
< ning in,
.
Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the den1"/>
Remember me?