View attached explanation and answer. Let me know if you have any questions.
In 2006 Bernard J. Ebbers, the former CEO of Worldcom inc was found guilty of nine
counts of fraud and related crimes. This landed him sentencing 25 years in prison after a sevenweek trial period. This is after he was found guilty of falsifying the company’s financial records,
among other crimes that led to the company’s decline and ultimately filing for bankruptcy.
However, the accused appealed against the ruling made by the court, citing that the ruling made
The appealed dispute
In the appeal made by Bernard J. Ebbers, he claimed that the court made some errors,
which made the ruling given by the jury to be unjust. In the appeal. The defendant claimed the
court erred by discriminatory providing immunity to witnesses (“UNITED STATES v.
EBBERS”, n.d.). The defendant claimed that the court issued immunity to witnesses that would
incriminate him and denied witnesses that would exculpate him from the charges he was facing.
When it comes to a case of such an appeal whereby the court granted immunity discriminatorily
to the witnesses, the court of appeal could overrule the ruling if the defendant provides sufficient
evidence that there was discrimination in issuing immunity. However, In this case, the defendant
could not provide sufficient evidence of the discriminated issuance of immunity. The
dependence was also unable to sufficiently prove that the testimonies of the discriminated
witnesses would be of importance to the case.
Reasoning on the ruling made
When it comes to whether the ruling was just, the court finding the accu…
15 Million Students Helped!
Create Account to order