Kozlowski, prior to trial, asserted his innocence by stating, "I am absolutely not guilty of the charges. There was no criminal intent here. Nothing was hidden. There were no shredded documents. All the information the prosecutors got was directly off the books and records of the company."
the larceny charges at the heart of the case did not depend on whether the defendants took the money—they did—but whether they were authorized to take it
All these cases show is the very nuanced thing they did wrong, and how to do the same thing within the frameworks available.
The decision making authority and the written latitude available for it. They paid excessive ambigious things.
Very different from selling shares you own at market values and leasing property you own back to the company, and IP trading. This is the fun you see at WeWork.
Comments
tell that to Dennis Kozlowski
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Kozlowski
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_servant
All these cases show is the very nuanced thing they did wrong, and how to do the same thing within the frameworks available.
The decision making authority and the written latitude available for it. They paid excessive ambigious things.
Very different from selling shares you own at market values and leasing property you own back to the company, and IP trading. This is the fun you see at WeWork.
This was a really interesting case. I agree with the civil rights lawyers who fiercely criticized putting it in front of jurors.
Then why didn’t he request a bench trial by a judge?