Saturday, July 26, 2014.

< The reeling prosecution in the Skilling case | Main | "Why, those sorry bastards" >

October 15, 2009

The Leader of the Mob reacts

Loren Steffy_4 You know, it's not every day that a federal appellate court concludes that a newspaper's coverage of a particular event was a major factor in the creation of a presumption of community prejudice.

But that's precisely what the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals did with regard to the Houston Chronicle's coverage of the demise of Enron generally and the prosecution of Jeff Skilling specifically  (see pp. 41-45 of the Fifth Circuit decision).

And now the Supreme Court has decided to review the Fifth Circuit's refusal to grant a Skilling a new trial in another venue because of that presumption of community prejudice. That almost never happens.

So, what does Loren Steffy -- the Chronicle's main business columnist and one of the main leaders of the mob against Skilling (see here, here, here, here and here) -- have to say about the Supreme Court's decision to review his handiwork?:

More surprising was the court's decision to review the venue issues. The district court never gave much credence to the argument that pretrial publicity and Enron's stature in Houston tainted potential jurors, and Skilling's attorney, Dan Petrocelli, never mentioned it his is argument before the appeals court.

As I've said before, the media coverage issue is especially interesting, given that someone from Skilling's legal team apparently was actively engaging in the media coverage by making anonymous posts on Chronicle blogs, including this one.

So, let's review. Houston's only daily newspaper reports on the demise of one the city's largest employers in such a biased fashion that an appellate court uses it as a basis for finding a presumption of community prejudice in the criminal trial of one of the company's leading executives. Then, the Supreme Court of the United States finds the issue so troubling that it decides to review it, which rarely happens in regard to this particular issue.

And the leader of the mob's reaction to all this?:

(1) That "the district court never gave much credence" to the issue?

Well, the Fifth Circuit has already decided that the district court was wrong about that.

(ii) That Skilling's lawyer "never mentioned it" during oral argument?

Oral argument is driven by the appellate judges' questions to the lawyers, which in this case were directed to the honest services wire-fraud issue. A substantial part of Skilling's appellate briefs addressed the community prejudice issue.

(iii) That the Chronicle's biased coverage was no big deal because someone from Skilling's team attempted to provide at least a small dose of balance to the Chronicle's biased coverage of the Skilling trial by commenting on Chronicle blog sites?

So much for fair and balanced reporting, eh?

Meanwhile, over the past couple of years, precisely what happened to Enron has also taken down numerous trust-based Wall Street firms and substantial evidence has arisen that the Enron Task Force engaged in widespread prosecutorial misconduct in prosecuting Skilling.

The Chronicle has not even acknowledged the former, while it has soft-pedaled coverage of the serious scandal represented by the latter.

Wouldn't it be ironic if that, in its haste to lead the mob against Skilling and Enron, the Chronicle misses what Larry Ribstein has characterized as the real crime in regard to Enron -- the prosecution of Skilling?

Posted by Tom at October 15, 2009 12:01 AM |

Comments

Thanks for the update Tom. It is so amazing to me the amount of mob justice we see these days. Look what happened to Rush Limbaugh and the 1200 DWI's that are being reviewed.. It scares me to death..

Posted by: Dennis Bailey Author Profile Page at October 15, 2009 12:02 AM

In the ashes of the Enron frenzy in the Houston area in the early beginning of the Enron mob mentality, Jamie Olis of Dynegy was offered up for practice for prosecutional personel to hone thier skills for the larger game (Skilling). Woe to any defendant wearing a suit and tie. Jamie Olis paid with a 24.3 year sentence for two and a half years, before his sentence was reduced to six years. Jamie is out of prison now, but still on a 3 year probation. In the area now with millions and even billions thrown around in the legal circles. Jamie Olis made no financial gain and was not allow lawyer fees to pay for a sufficient defense per Houston DA office holding Dynegy tightly by its throat to stop all financial legal aid to Olis legal defense team. Shamne on this office and members of their team.

Posted by: silo74 Author Profile Page at October 15, 2009 11:18 AM

"In the ashes of the Enron frenzy..." Wow!

Ok, which was it, "the ashes of the Enron frenzy" or "the early beginning (as opposed to the late beginning) of the Enron mob mentality"?

The "Houston DA office" had nothing to do with what happened to Jamie Olis. It was a federal prosecution.

Yes, Jamie Olis got screwed. Rob Doty has to be laughing to this day that he was never called to account for his role in Project Alpha. That being said, if you are going to try to place shame on the actions of others, skip the 8th grade composition class embellishments and get the basic facts of the case right.

Posted by: cmilford Author Profile Page at October 15, 2009 6:11 PM

steffy need to put the bottle away when he edits whatever it is he thinks he is putting out there as an editorial. Before I thought he was just a little ocd....Now he just sounds like a senior in high school with a big ego.

Posted by: lovesteffythecerebraldumbass Author Profile Page at October 18, 2009 2:01 AM

is he crazy?

Posted by: lovesteffythecerebraldumbass Author Profile Page at October 18, 2009 2:02 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?


© 2003 - 2014. Tom Kirkendall. All Rights Reserved.