In a message dated 8/5/00 11:02:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< The ACLU did some less-than-honorable things during the high cold war. I am
> certain it would not do them again.
>Now they are taking tobacco money, aren't they?
Are they? That's a different order of malfeasance, though, than turning folks
in and refusing to defend those who need defense against the state. The money
is tainted, to say the least, but it doesn't pose a conflict of interest,
because the ACLU doesn't do, e.g., plaintiff's class actions in mass tobacco
torts, so there's nothing that tobacco money could buy for the companies
except, maybe, good publicity for defense of civil liberties. And given their
reputation, even that won't buy much of a whitewash.
> > Neil exaggerates some when he says that the law will not go after a big
time
> capitalist.
>Oh no. Neil is on target here.
As I said, in general, the point is valid, but:
>> Ask Dwayne Andreas, heir to the ADM fortune, who is going to prison for
> criminal price-fixing.
> Are you sure? But we mention him because he is probably the only example.
>>
Yes, I am sure. I read the opinion again (by a very conservative 7th Cir.
judge) only yesterday. The opinion is rather funny. An ADM exec actually
said: "Our competitors are our friends. It's the customer who is the enemy."
This is not the sort of evidence you want to take to a jury.The Supremes will
not take Andreas' case, which poses no interesting legal questions. He's
going down.
But there are other examples. Boesky. Millkan.
Look, I agree with the general point. However, even if the very rich are not
immune, which was my point, and if they are unlucky enough to be indicted,
they stand a pretty good chance of going to prison, because the authorities
won't go after a target like that unless the case is pretty solid.
--jks
