Enron & culpability (was: Dear John Hall)

John Hall johnhall@evergo.net
Thu, 24 Jan 2002 17:48:18 -0800


The formatting on this was bad.
I added two comments:
Or could be expected to understand it was in fact criminal.
... and ...
And with that, I agree 100%.

Everything else was Russell Turpin

-----Original Message-----
From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com]On Behalf Of John Hall
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 4:35 PM
To: fork@xent.com
Subject: RE: Enron & culpability (was: Dear John Hall)


From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com]On Behalf Of Russell
Turpin
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 8:17 PM
To: fork@xent.com
Subject: RE: Enron & culpability (was: Dear John Hall)

It is enough that they understood what they were doing,
and that it was in fact criminal.
Or could be expected to understand it was in fact criminal.

>If you can't know, with a normal effort, that your actions will be
>considered illegal then you should never be convicted. ..

What constitutes normal effort depends on the legal
responsibilities one assumes. Lawyers and certified
accountants carry special burdens in their professional
capacity. People who run public companies are also
stepping up to a plate that may require them to learn
some about law related to that undertaking. Or so it
seems to me.


And with that, I agree 100%.





http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork