WorldCom Inc. chief Bernard J. Ebbers Guilty

[outrun]

Just a quick question since I am not quiete business well knowing.

IS the defence not having knowledge of your subordinates behavior valid?

From what I read he stated that he could not possibly be aware of his VP's etc illegal activities.

Thanks-

 

[Dan4510]

The way I think, if you are the captain of the ship, you are responsible no matter what.

Also, if you are the financial genius that drove the stock price upwards, you should at least be able to detect the wholesale fraud that happened. If you are that much of a genius, how could you not know what was going on?

Cant have it both ways.

And to think these were the visionaries of the 90s that were going to save the business world. All these CEO, etc that are indicted now were the heros of the Harvard Business school and other elite MBA programs. Makes me shudder to think what is on the horizon.

I guess ethics and stewardship was not a viable part of the programs...

Dan

[ March 16, 2005, 08:30 PM: Message edited by: Dan4510 ]

 

[k1xv]

It is simply not credible that someone running a major corporation has no knowledge of what is going on inside it.

End result.....NO REASONABLE DOUBT

I hope this is the first of a string of convictions of a bunch of modern day robber barons whose misdeeds shake the confidence of investors. Such confidence is necessary to make capitalism work.

 

[pitzel]

Big part of the problem I think in this instance, and in many other instances of corporate fraud was the absolute complacency of the Board of Directors.

Who actually elects these boards, and who leaves them in power? Why do they seem to entrust the entire business to one person (the CEO) when they should be taking more of an overall role in operating the business?

We need a culture where absolutely everyone in a business, from the lowest levels of employees, to the most senior, are held accountable for corporate malfeasance. How many professional accountants, professional lawyers, professional engineers and professionals from other specialties were involved in the cover-up at Worldcom? I think the reason problems like these don't get brought to the forefront is because we treat, as a society, whistleblowers in such a poor way. Instead of rewarding honesty and integrity, whistleblowers are usually cast out of jobs, face expensive litigation, and become ostracized within their professions and from potential new employers when they try and move on.

 

[GROUCHO MARX]

If someone came to a management meeting to give Bernie bad news, he would throw them out.

This supports his defense of "not knowing".

 

[Pablo]

Pretty good justice on one hand.....in the other we have the shareholders and employees this mf destroyed financially. Puke should die. His wife was crying.....sure.

 

[Last_Z]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pablo:
Pretty good justice on one hand.....in the other we have the shareholders and employees this mf destroyed financially. Puke should die. His wife was crying.....sure.

---

P,

You are my hero! Out of all people here, you always manage to crack me up.

 

[wulimaster]

Looks like a dog and pony show to take the focus away from the real crime. Does anyone know who benefitted from the cooking of the books?

I think he was set up as a distraction.

CEO's don't run the day to day business, that is for the President. Likewise the CFO is appointed by the CEO also. If it is the CEO's position to micromanage everything their VP's and CFO's do than why even have them. The fact that the head of accounting cut a deal with the prosecutors makes his testimony suspect. the fact that he wasn't convicted on evidence but the fact that noone could believe he couldn't possibly not know what was happening should make you wonder.

I want to know who the plea bargainer was working with outside the company and how much money he made for them. I want to see an investigation of the money trail and not a quick lets implicate based on a crooks testimony so noone ever learns why the books were cooked to begin with.

By pleading guilty and plea bargaining none of what went on ever see's the light of day.

And everyone goes away happy that they have linched someone.

Anyone who thinks he is guilty because he couldn't possibly have not known want to fill me in on why and for whose benefit the books were cooked? An inquiring mind wants to know.

 

[Pablo]

wu li - from what I read, the jury did not believe the plea bargainer either.....

 

[keith]

The "I don't know" defense is hard to sustain when there is more than one first hand witness who says you did know. It didn't fool the jury. I recall reading something about "the love of money is...".