Let's All TRY To Understand Why Lay's Conviction Was Vacated

[MrCoffee]

If a defendant dies prior to the exhaustion of their final appeal of right (which is almost always to the Circuit Court), the death is grounds for vacating the conviction and for dismissing the original indictment. This is the Fifth Circuit rule, and it's pretty universal for the whole country. This is the common law rule, developed over the course of centuries of jurisprudence.

Why is this the case? You cannot punish a corpse. What are you going to sentence a dead body to, life in prison?

Remember, the Dept. of Justice tried to get Congress to pass a law in September to change the common law rule by statute, and no body sponsered the bill. 535 Congresspeople passed on the opportunity to change the law, which pretty clearly was intended to stop Lay's conviction and indictment from getting tossed out.

It's not the judge's fault. It's not the justice system's fault. Justice was fully served today. I'm from Houston, I know what Enron did to the city. I feel fully confident that the legal system still works.

[_testify_]

1. Well done.

Answered all my questions before I asked them.
:thumbsup:

[silverweb]

2. What about civil suits?

Can the people who were defrauded by Lay file suit against his estate to try to recuperate some of their losses?

[MrCoffee]

5. No, because the conviction was vacated...

that's the real crappy part of the whole thing. It's like the trial and guilty verdicts never happened.

Which sucks massively, but it's the way it is.

ETA that a civil suit would have to retry the whole case.

[Gabi Hayes]

11. what about the OJ civil trial? why does a civil trial have anything to

do with a criminal one?

if you get acquitted of a traffic violation involving PI, you can still be sued by the other party

you sure about this?

[MrCoffee]

18. my bad...they could file a civil suit, but nothing from the criminal trial

could be used. They'd have to redo EVERYTHING. Depositions, exhibits, testimony, experts...and that takes serious money.

And there are different laws involved. It would be a nightmare for a plaintiff.

[AlCzervik]

8. maybe but his large life insurance policy would go to his chosen

beneficiary and doesn't actually pass through the estate so it couldn't be attached in the event of the many civil suits that will be filed.

[MrCoffee]

27. Life insurance passes outside the estate...civil suitors can't touch it.

It's a non-probate asset. Contractual relationship between the policyholder, the company, and the beneficiary.

[AlCzervik]

31. i think i just said that

[rinsd]

9. Civil suits can certainly go forth.

They may not have the ease a conviction would bring but they can still be pursued against his estate.

[MrCoffee]

10. They'd have to re-try the whole thing in a civil case.

Nothing from the criminal case could be used.

[rinsd]

15. Of course. They would have to in any civil trial

"Nothing from the criminal case could be used"

The conviction can't be used but the evidence certainly can.

[MrCoffee]

21. It would all have to be re-introduced...which is a nightmare.

The overwhelming majority of the prosecution's work in Enron was getting the evidence in to the record. It's a monumental task, authenticating all the records, taking depositions, lining up experts...it would be brutal for a plaintiff in a civil trial.

It could be done, but would be a whole lot easier with the groundwork done (i.e.; if the criminal record could be introduced).

[rinsd]

34. "whole lot easier with the groundwork done "

Totally agree.

[Lautremont]

3. I think what people are stuck on is the first word in the body

of your post: IF. They think he hasn't even died! I wouldn't be surprised to find out he'd just pulled a disappearing act myself, but I'm not letting it keep me up nights.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Righto.

So what happens now when KennyBoy gets back from his vacation in Argentina?

[MrCoffee]

12. IF he's not dead, there's no grounds to vacate the conviction...

with no grounds to vacate the conviction, it's still valid.

[Jackpine Radical]

28. If it turns out that the conviction was vacated in error,

can it be un-vacated?

[MrCoffee]

29. Absolutely. No grounds to support vacating. Conviction stands.

[Cronus Protagonist]

19. I like the way you think

We need more critical thinkers like you here. I'm not convinced he's dead either.

[Dr Fate]

6. Sure- and they knew this when they murdered him. n/t

n/t

[htuttle]

7. Why not punish a corpse?

Corpses have estates attached to them. I think that's what is really bothering everybody?

And is it really any crazier than charging inanimate objects with drug offenses? Isn't that the common law principle that the entire civil forfeiture procedures are based on? Aren't the court dockets for civil forfeiture cases labeled something like, "1998 Chevy Corvette vs The State of Florida"?

[MrCoffee]

13. Estates can't commit crimes...this was a criminal trial.

[htuttle]

16. But if he'd been charged with a drug crime...

...they would take his assets anyway through civil forfeiture. The assets would be guilty until proven innocent.

In fact, I see no reason why civil forfeiture couldn't still be used in this case.

??

[MrCoffee]

24. Not my area, but I think it has to do with drug laws...

again, drug forfeiture is not my area, but it might have to do with the way the drug laws are written (that's my best guess)...i really don't know.

[htuttle]

32. I think they can be used for any "profitable" crime in theory

For example, here's a link I found for a case in 1999 in Seattle where they used them to seize all the assets of a suspected 'Madam':

http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/9914/features-anderson.php

As I understand it, the standards for seizure by civil forfeiture are more lenient that those for charging a human with a crime, since it is the property itself that is 'the accused', and inanimate objects don't really have any rights. Sounds odd, but that's how I've always understood it.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

14. Yup...The Legal System Still Works

The legal system is set up to get those powerful enough, who are involved in high cries, a way to escape from ultimate liability.

It works this way all the time. From KKKarl, to Libby(who will probably get a slap on the wrist), to OJ(who will Never Pay One Dime), to Budd Dwyer(Look Him Up), and now Lay.

Once in awhile the system benefits those at the lower rung, but it ALWAYS benefits those at the top.

[madmusic]

17. Hard to believe the prosecution isn't into necrophilia.

As much as they like to fuck people, why let a little thing like death stop them?

[MrCoffee]

23. You have a problem with the way DoJ handled this case?

You don't like the fact that they got 6 conspiracy charges and 4 fraud charges against him? Think you could have done better?

[madmusic]

35. I got a problem with Alberto in general.

[Ksec]

20. It still sucks

and they should dig his corpse outta the grave and throw darts at it.

[MrCoffee]

22. I couldn't agree more.

[librechik]

25. if it were Joe Shmoe and not Ken Lay

would there be this rush to judgement? or would the case languish unless "somebody" pushed and pushed to make it happen? Seems to me, in Texas, the rich get the justice, and the poor can stick it where the sun don't shine.

[MrCoffee]

26. huh? you lost me...he was indicted AND convicted.

he got his justice. he'd be in jail soon if he weren't dead.

[Gabi Hayes]

30. just curious....are you a lawyer?

[librechik]

33. I mean, if you are alive & want your record expunged, you have to ask

If you are dead, someone still has to make a request to the court to have the record expunged. It doesn't happen spontaneously. Who is in such a big hurry to do this? and why? If a non-famous person died and the family asks for an expungement, isn't there a long wait and maybe the name goes to the bottom of the stack. It seems there is a rush here to make the declaration (of "innocence", or whatever) come out pre-election. If so, isn't that rather unfair? Is Lay getting the same treatment as some other dead guilty scumbag? Or is he getting the royal treatment of being cleansed of all his sins posthumously?