Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JEB who wrote (264111)	6/15/2002 1:04:43 PM
From: gao seng	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

As I said, last I heard it was not legal, but maybe there has been a precedent set in the last few years. If the defendent doesn't divulge the info, and doesn't consent to it's divulgence to the jury, then the prosecutor can not release it because that contaminates the impartiality of the jury. A defendant has a Constitutional Right to a trial by an impartial jury. Maybe since the government is prosecuting the case against a business entity and not an individual, they figger Andersen doesn't have constitutional rights. I would vehemently disagree with the prosecution, if that is their justification for what appears to me to be an extreme abridgement of constitutional rights.