05-31-2024, 05:57 PM
(05-31-2024, 05:17 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: One thing is sure if I somehow need a judiciary advice for an US Court, I'm not asking any of the self called specialist out there.
I've made wrong predictions more than my fair share but being that completely wrong ? I don't remember.
Also feels a bit like a unique case of reverse "jury nullification" where there's no proof of a crime, knowledge or intent beyond a reasonable doubt but the jury convicts anyway.
Best I can make of it, because I still haven't seen a really solid breakdown, is they found him guilty of falsifying business records according to the instructions given them. And apparently the mere act of signing a check is proof of knowledge and intent beyond a reasonable doubt. CEO's and CFO's of public companies have to attest to the accuracy of their filings, but failing in their fiduciary duty doesn't automatically imply an intent to break the law or commit or cover-up some other crime. Unless it's gross negligence (which following the advice of counsel would never be), it doesn't automatically make you a party to the fraud.
--------------------------------------------------------
