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.

Non-Tech : The Enron Scandal - Unmoderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Calladine who wrote (2644)	4/6/2003 7:06:39 PM
From: Glenn Petersen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3602

Good analysis. The fines are relatively small, though the real damage to the firms will come from civil suits that are sure to follow. The effectiveness of the whatever reforms that are ultimately put into place will be driven by the pain from the civil suits. I would not agree with your observation that the final result was "fixed", though there is no question that Spitzer could have proceeded further. The article suggests that Spitzer brought his investigations to a close and settled with the firms for several reasons. First, the lack of resources in his office. He accomplished quite a bit with a limited number of people. Secondly, the investigation had broadened and involved various states with conflicted interests and varying levels of prosecutorial expertise. The whole process was spinning out of control. Thirdly, he did not want to destroy a local industry, a la Arthur Andersen. Not a good thing when he intends to run for Governor.