Thursday, December 14, 2006

Waseca Prison Blues

Jeff Skilling reported to prison yesterday to begin serving his 24-year sentence. Not to put too fine a point on it, but, as I have argued before, Skilling is getting screwed. It is shameful that he is serving 24 years while Andrew Fastow is serving only six. The single biggest factor in the length of Skilling's sentence is not the criminal activity for which he was convicted. It is that he exercised his constitutional right to have the government prove the charges against him before a jury of his peers. I have no problem with giving Fastow something of a break for pleading guilty. But it is Fastow -- not Skilling nor Ken Lay -- who is most responsible for Enron's demise. I don't care what he has contributed to the Skilling case or the civil cases,. For him to get six years is a disgrace.

The question of Skilling's guilt or innocence is both difficult and interesting. Here's an interesting analysis (warning: it is a long post) from Houston lawyer Tom Kirkendall's blog of the case against Skilling (FCB shout out: How Appealing).

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

People trade the certainty of a deal for the uncertainty of trial. Sometimes they win - even if they're guilty - and do no time at all. Admittedly, sometimes they lose, even if they're innocent. But that's the risk that Skilling took.
Like so many of the risks that he took with other people's lives, it was stupid - particularly in light of the evidence against him. Just another ego trip for Jeff. Let's not turn him into a martyr for the Constitution.
If Fastow got a light sentence, that's one thing, but it's unrelated to the question of whether if Jeff Skilling is guilty of the crimes for which he was charged - and a jury said he is - does the sentence fit? If not, we need to fix the sentences. If so, then there's nothing worth discussing.
-- A friend in Philly

9:26 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home