Monday, September 18, 2006
Enron cooperators clearly benefit from their guilty pleas and later cooperation with government investigations.
The Houston Chronicle reports here that David Delainey received a sentence of 2 1/2 years for his netting $4.2 million in illegal trading. The bottom line is that the government was satisfied with a lenient sentence because this individual testified in their star prosecution of Jeff Skilling and now-deceased Ken Lay.
Is it fair to sentence cooperators after they testify in the trials of others? Does a jury really understand the full benefits that the cooperating party will receive as a result of their substantial assistance to the government? Should jurors be apprised of the sentence the person testifying will actually serve versus what they could have served if they had decided to avail themselves of their constitutional right to a jury trial?