Lay is giving a Press Conference right now. EDIT: I should say speech. What I got out of it was that he loves the Lord and so does his family.
Somehow, I suspect our Founding Fathers weren't using the same dictionary you were when they decided justice demanded a trial by your peers. They wanted a system where you would be judged by your fellow citizens, not a professional judge. That's what we've got. I don't know why you'd assume that the jurists here are dumb. All you have to go on is their occupations (of which you only listed half; I know one of them owns two businesses) and their genders. For all you know, the lot of them might be smarter than Skilling and Lay (they, after all, didn't run their companies into the ground and earn decades of prison time -- that seems pretty dumb to me). As I've said, they've had months of training on the subject now. It's detailed but it's not rocket surgery. Your average dairy farmer could figure this stuff out if someone takes the time to teach them. Which they have. But, you're just going to assume, on the basis of their occupations, that they aren't smart enough to sit in judgement? You think Skilling and Lay are somehow a cut above the average citizen because of their wealth/intelligence/professional acumen?
i've done jury selection and tried cases to juries, mostly on financial fraud issues. though not criminal matters. you bring in experts. you bring in accountants. even very complex matters can be broken down. the questions the jury has to answer aren't complex ones.
I honestly don't think the verdict has hit Lay and Skilling yet. Like one of the reporters said, those 2 guys just aren't used to losing. Seems like Lay is still on his "aw shucks, I'm just a good ol' boy" schtick. Does he not realize that the trial is over? As far as the makeup of the jury goes, it makes it even more impressive that the government lawyers were able to break all of this down for the jury to understand it. They must have presented a HELLUVA case.
Since you have experience with jury selection, madmax, would you say that the defense would be more or less likely to dismiss the financial gurus that Aceshigh apparently wants trying these two?
It almost seems as though skilling and lay testifying backfired on themselves. I wonder if they regret doing that now. Oh well they got what they deserved.
you should be banned from all intelligent discussion on this board. and all unintelligent discussion as well.
apparently im the only one who agrees with aces.... Do we really want important cases of this magnitude to be settled by pigfarmers and garbage men? "A jury of your peers" - In my mind means people in the same industry or more closely associated with the defendant, in this case Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling. And for some reason, I don't think Ken Lay is hanging out at the ole barnyard on the weekends. What's wrong again with having a jurier as a paid profession? At least they would be committed to the case and understand the law. (And also be literate, since pigfarmers and garbage men can't read )
I second this sentiment. How could you sympathize with these people? What's wrong with you? Did you have Enron stock or something? Even then you'd have to be a terrible human being to agree with the things these guys did.
about what? I do believe their should be jurors that serve as a profession. I mean when is "jury duty" ever a positive thing? No one wants to go to those. Why not just have people who are committed and qualified at the hearings. I've never met anyone who is excited about having to go to court for jury.
Why not just do away with jury trials and just have judges rule? Seriously the point of jury trials is that you are tried by average citizens and not professionals since guilt or innocent should be determined as a matter of common wisdom and not an elite opinion. That's why you wouldn't want a class of paid jurors. As far as Aceshigh trial by peers idea that average citizens are qualified to judge Lay and Skilling well how far should that idea be taken? Should a Klansman be able to argue that he should only be tried by a jury of white supremists? Moussaioui argued that he should be tried by a jury of Muslims well if it a jury of peers in the strictest sense then he should've been.
