Kenneth Lay died of a heart attack

[maddhatir]

ahhh- you are assuming he felt guilty. I doubt he did.

This IS very true- i would like to retract my statement-- people like that do not have a conscience therefore no guilt. i apologize for thinking he was even capable of a human emotion.



sorry but OT

Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

HOLLY YOUR HIPPYMOM.COM WEBSITE LOOKS GREAT-- I NEED TO CHECK IT OUT A BIT MORE-- ALTHOUGH, I AM NOT A PARENT- IT STILL LOOKS VERY INTERESTING.

 

[Zippa D Doodah]

This IS very true- i would like to retract my statement-- people like that do not have a conscience therefore no guilt. i apologize for thinking he was even capable of a human emotion.

Glad you apologized I cannot believe I am on here "defending" Kenneth Lay. I deplore all his deceit as much as anyone. But to say the man had no conscience and therefore no guilt is probably not correct. I suspect he was pretty guilt-ridden. His actions were so out of step with morality and faith that he claimed

 

[maddhatir]

His actions were so out of step with morality and faith that he claimed

nothing new there!

 

[Pigeon]

nothing new there!

Ain't that the truth. I saw Mr. Lay's minister give a TV interview. It was pretty

 

[disneymouse]

I guess the coroner, the sherriff's office and the hospital are all in on the "conspiracy"?

someone said that kenny boy had alot of low friends in high places with lots of money and resources. sometimes reality is stranger then fiction.

 

[BuckNaked]

someone said that kenny boy had alot of low friends in high places with lots of money and resources. sometimes reality is stranger then fiction.

 

[disneymouse]

 

[rparmfamily]

His estate is still liable for any civil lawsuits that are pending and there are a number of lawsuits out there. In addition, the SEC can still seek fines and forfeitures. I also heard that the government is evaluating whether to seek the fines anyway i.e. the govt may test the old cases that say a guilty verdict goes away when you die (a legal version of the old saying that you can not beat a dead horse).

Lay's heirs will not likely get much out of his estate. There are a couple of different class actions pending. Any life issurance may be safe to the extent that the estate is not the beneficiary.

Actually the lawsuits are going to be tough since he died an innocent man. The SEC can't use his conviction as a means of getting money from a lawsuit or use any of the evidence introduced. Just like the civil lawsuits, what are they going to present in court?? They can't use anything from the trial because technically he was never convicted or indicted since he died a natural death. Mrs Lay on the other hand will receive all of his money thru the Will and good luck trying to get that. The probability of him setting up tax-exempt trusts of various assortments is highly likely. As much as he did all of harm to a lot of innoncent people, Ken Lay 1, Government 0.

 

[Bob Slydell]

Actually the lawsuits are going to be tough since he died an innocent man. The SEC can't use his conviction as a means of getting money from a lawsuit or use any of the evidence introduced. Just like the civil lawsuits, what are they going to present in court?? They can't use anything from the trial because technically he was never convicted or indicted since he died a natural death. Mrs Lay on the other hand will receive all of his money thru the Will and good luck trying to get that. As much as he did all of harm to a lot of innoncent people, Ken Lay 1, Government 0.

He didn't die an innocent man. He was indicted AND convicted, just not sentenced yet.

 

[rparmfamily]

He didn't die an innocent man. He was indicted AND convicted, just not sentenced yet.

Actually he did. The death of a criminal defendant while the appeal of the case is pending abates the entire criminal proceeding. Everything associated with the case is extinguished leaving the defendant as if he'd never been indicted or convicted. So technically he died an innocent man because you are not guilty of a crime until your appeals have been exhausted. He will have no record of conviction either. Another key thing to remember her is that the governments forfeiture claim has been wiped out. That's our law system for you. I am not saying I agree with it but just stating the facts.

Rex

 

[Bob Slydell]

Actually he did. The death of a criminal defendant while the appeal of the case is pending abates the entire criminal proceeding. Everything associated with the case is extinguished leaving the defendant as if he'd never been indicted or convicted. So technically he died an innocent man because you are not guilty of a crime until your appeals have been exhausted. He will have no record of conviction either. Another key thing to remember her is that the governments claim forfeiture claim has been wiped out. That's our law system for you. I am not saying I agree with it but just stating the facts.

Rex

Gotcha. I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.

It does sound like the government will likely still file civil suits against Lay to try to seize his assests. Nobody seems to know whether or not that will work, though.

 

[nuke]

Actually he did. The death of a criminal defendant while the appeal of the case is pending abates the entire criminal proceeding. Everything associated with the case is extinguished leaving the defendant as if he'd never been indicted or convicted. So technically he died an innocent man because you are not guilty of a crime until your appeals have been exhausted. He will have no record of conviction either. Another key thing to remember her is that the governments forfeiture claim has been wiped out. That's our law system for you. I am not saying I agree with it but just stating the facts.

Rex

So he not only screwed the Enron people he screwed the government too.

 

[Chicago526]

Glad you apologized I cannot believe I am on here "defending" Kenneth Lay. I deplore all his deceit as much as anyone. But to say the man had no conscience and therefore no guilt is probably not correct. I suspect he was pretty guilt-ridden. His actions were so out of step with morality and faith that he claimed

Well, I don't know about that. Several people who knew him that have been interviewed since his death said that he maintained his inocence to everyone. Now, that could have been because he was trying to appeal, but the "vibe" I got from the article is that he honestly believed he did nothing wrong and he was a victim of circumstance, and that Enron stock collapsed because of negitive press reports.

We'll never know for sure, but from what I've read, he didn't sound like a man racked with guilt. More like "Why is everyone picking on me".

As for him faking his death, well, they preformed an autopsy so I doubt it. If you're going to fake your death it's generaly easier not to leave a body behind to examine.

 

[rparmfamily]

So he not only screwed the Enron people he screwed the government too.

You got that right. I have a feeling that he threw a lot of his money into pensions that cannot be touched if a civil suit won against him. Reminds me of the whole O.J. thing where they couldn't touch his NFL pension and various other assests.

Rex

 

[TheDoctor]

Actually the lawsuits are going to be tough since he died an innocent man. The SEC can't use his conviction as a means of getting money from a lawsuit or use any of the evidence introduced. Just like the civil lawsuits, what are they going to present in court?? They can't use anything from the trial because technically he was never convicted or indicted since he died a natural death. Mrs Lay on the other hand will receive all of his money thru the Will and good luck trying to get that. The probability of him setting up tax-exempt trusts of various assortments is highly likely. As much as he did all of harm to a lot of innoncent people, Ken Lay 1, Government 0.

While the verdict in the criminal trial is not binding in the civil cases, the civil class action plaintiffs and the SEC can still pursue their cases against Lay. First the civil lawsuits do not necessary need Ken Lay's testimony. The plaintiffs in those cases can still use the testimony from the criminal trial if they need to. Much of the evidence againt Lay came from his co-workers such as Fastow. Second, if they need it, the testimony by Law given in the criminal trial can be used in the civil case. I believe that it is likely thatone or more of the class actions will get a judgment against Lay's estate and that the heirs will not get much from that estate.

 

[rparmfamily]

While the verdict in the criminal trial is not binding in the civil cases, the civil class action plaintiffs and the SEC can still pursue their cases against Lay. First the civil lawsuits do not necessary need Ken Lay's testimony. The plaintiffs in those cases can still use the testimony from the criminal trial if they need to. Much of the evidence againt Lay came from his co-workers such as Fastow. Second, if they need it, the testimony by Law given in the criminal trial can be used in the civil case. I believe that it is likely thatone or more of the class actions will get a judgment against Lay's estate and that the heirs will not get much from that estate.

Thanks for the additional info and I still think it will be a tough battle no matter how you look at it
but correct me if I am wrong, my understanding of collateral estoppel will prevent any testimony from the case from being used in civil matters.


Rex

 

[TheDoctor]

Thanks for the additional info and I still think it will be a tough battle no matter how you look at it
but correct me if I am wrong, my understanding of collateral estoppel will prevent any testimony from the case from being used in civil matters.


Rex

Collaral estoppel will not apply here. The testimony in the criminal trial can be used in any civil trial. There will be no res judicata effect for the criminal conviction because it will not be a final conviction. Once Skilling's conviction becomes final after all appeals, then that verdict will be res judicata and be binding on him in any civil case. However, it is likely that the civil cases will come to trial long before appeals are exhausted in the criminal cases.

Normally the testimony in a criminal case is not much help because the defendant normally does not take the stand. Here both Lay and Skilling took the stand and that testimony can and will be used in any civil trial or case brought by the SEC.

 

[DISUNC]

I bet it was a body double.

I feel sorry for the poor dead guy whose only claim in life would be he looked just like Ken Lay!

 

[NCRedding]

Actually he did. The death of a criminal defendant while the appeal of the case is pending abates the entire criminal proceeding. Everything associated with the case is extinguished leaving the defendant as if he'd never been indicted or convicted. So technically he died an innocent man because you are not guilty of a crime until your appeals have been exhausted. He will have no record of conviction either. Another key thing to remember her is that the governments forfeiture claim has been wiped out. That's our law system for you. I am not saying I agree with it but just stating the facts.

Rex

That isn't what I recall from criminal procedure in law school. Death of a defendant prior to trial or judgment results in a dismissal of the underlying criminal charges. But, it is my recollection that the appeal can still be heard. If the court rules against Lay, then the conviction stands. If a new trial is ordered, then the charges would be dismissed.

 

[TheDoctor]

That isn't what I recall from criminal procedure in law school. Death of a defendant prior to trial or judgment results in a dismissal of the underlying criminal charges. But, it is my recollection that the appeal can still be heard. If the court rules against Lay, then the conviction stands. If a new trial is ordered, then the charges would be dismissed.

Here is something that I saw yesterday on this issue. I have not read the cases cited and think that collateral estoppel is not relevant to this issue.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/whitecollarcrime_blog/2006/07/ken_lay_dies_of.html
____________
Under the Fifth Circuit's law of abatement of a criminal conviction when a defendant dies before appellate review of the conviction, "It is well established in this circuit that the death of a criminal defendant pending an appeal of his or her case abates, ab initio, the entire criminal proceeding." United States v. Asset, 990 F.2d 208 (5th Cir. 1993). In a recent Fifth Circuit decision, United States v. Estate of Parsons, 367 F.3d 409 (5th Cir. 2004), the court explained that "the appeal does not just disappear, and the case is not merely dismissed. Instead, everything associated with the case is extinguished, leaving the defendant as if he had never been indicted or convicted." In Parsons, the court vacated a forfeiture order, which means that the government's forfeiture claim against Lay for $43.5 million (see earlier post here) will be dismissed. The Fifth Circuit explained the rationale for the rule: "The finality principle reasons that the state should not label one as guilty until he has exhausted his opportunity to appeal. The punishment principle asserts that the state should not punish a dead person or his estate." An interesting question is whether one can still describe Lay as having been convicted of a crime, at least in a technical sense, because the law no longer recognizes there having been any criminal case initiated against him.

Unlike the criminal case, civil claims against Lay, such as the SEC's case and the securities class action, will continue against his estate. However, because the criminal conviction is wiped out, the plaintiffs cannot rely on it as proof in their case, if my dim memory of collateral estoppel serves me right.(ph)