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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (157443)	1/5/2009 10:20:09 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361718

<<...It is amazing that the remaining lawyers survived the scandal with their "name" intact. Interesting...>> jpg: I agree...It seems like Milberg has kept a lot of their talent and their core business...and they are experts when it comes to financial fraud...they used to scare the heck out of public companies and they recovered billions for pension funds that lost money because of the Enron fraud. Madoff may pay a big fine and spend many years in a country club prison (which shouldn't be as nice as the place where Martha Stewart spent time). We know that Milberg will be relentless when it comes to going after the Madoff family assets (in the U.S. and overseas)...and then Milberg will aggressively go after the "deep pockets" behind the Madoff ponzi scheme (eg. the large feeder Fund of Funds and firms that own them like Mass Mutual Life Insurance)...These law suits will go on for years and will have truckloads of discovery...This could be very profitable for Milberg. btw, I wonder what may happen to Lerach and Weiss when they get done serving time -- I know they paid fines, have tarnished reputations, and most likely won't ever re-join their former firms...Yet, I don't expect the legendary Lerach and Weiss to be camping out on the beach...they don't need more money but they are tenacious and seem like the type of lawyers that will try to make a comeback.

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (157443)	1/6/2009 2:42:57 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361718

Skilling’s Conviction Upheld, Resentencing Ordered (Update1) By Jef Feeley and Thom Weidlich Jan. 6 (Bloomberg) -- A U.S. appeals court upheld the conviction of former Enron Corp. Chief Executive Officer Jeffrey Skilling for spearheading the fraud that destroyed the world’s largest energy trader, while finding defects in his sentence. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans today rejected all Skilling’s arguments to throw out his conspiracy and fraud convictions. The court did order that Skilling be resentenced because the trial judge misinterpreted sentencing guidelines that led to his 24-year prison term. “The appeals court has directed the trial court to construe sentencing-guideline components in a different light,” said Christopher Bebel, a former U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission lawyer now in private practice in Houston. “But the underlying modifications may not bring about a change in a sentence. The net effect will be relatively minimal.” A Houston jury found Skilling and ex-Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay guilty in May 2006 of deceiving investors, analysts and employees about Enron’s deteriorating financial condition through the use of fraudulent accounting and off-books partnerships that concealed billions in debt and losses. The company’s 2001 collapse into bankruptcy wiped out more than 5,000 jobs and $1 billion in employee retirement funds. Investors sued seeking to recover more than $40 billion in losses. Those suits later were thrown out by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the same court that upheld Skilling’s convictions today. Lay died before the appeal of his conviction could be heard. Skilling’s Arguments Skilling had argued that the trial judge had misinstructed the jury, that the jury was biased, that prosecutors had used an invalid legal theory to convict him and that the government had engaged in unconstitutional misconduct. “Skilling failed to demonstrate that the government’s case rested on an incorrect theory of law or that any reversible errors infected his trial,” U.S. Circuit Judge Edward Charles Prado said in a 105-page decision released today. Skilling also argued that the judge had misapplied federal guidelines in enhancing his sentence, partly by saying he had endangered a “financial institution” with his conduct by damaging the value of Enron’s pension fund. The court found the fund was not a financial institution. “I suspect at the end of the day if that’s the only basis of resentencing it would be a modest reduction,” said Kirby Behre, a partner at Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker in Washington and co-author of “Federal Sentencing for Business Crimes.” “It might be more than modest, but it’s not going to get him down to 10 or 12 years.” Laura Sweeney, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Justice, and Skilling’s lawyer Daniel Petrocelli didn’t immediately return calls for comment. The case is U.S. v. Skilling, 06-20885, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (New Orleans). To contact the reporter on this story: Jef Feeley in Wilmington, Delaware, at jfeeley@bloomberg.net and; Bob Van Voris in New York at +1- rvanvoris@bloomberg.net. Last Updated: January 6, 2009 14:17 EST