Re:Backpage Raided, CEO Arrested on Sex-Trafficking Charges
by rayiner on Friday October 07, 2016 @01:29PM
(#12662365)
> My opinion: Anyone who took part in it either knowing it is illegal or even if the person should have known it is illegal considering his/her position.
As a general rule, we don't hold people criminally liable for simple negligence.
Re:Backpage Raided, CEO Arrested on Sex-Trafficking Charges
by dragonwriter on Friday October 07, 2016 @07:58PM
(#12664830)
As a general rule, knowing that something is illegal isn't part of the required mental state, even for acts that require doing something "knowingly"; that usually refers to knowing the specific facts that make the act illegal, not knowing the law under which those acts are illegal.
Re:Backpage Raided, CEO Arrested on Sex-Trafficking Charges
by DominikR on Friday October 07, 2016 @03:43PM
(#12663410)
I did not say "simple" negligence, that is determined by others who know the specifics of this case.
Re:Backpage Raided, CEO Arrested on Sex-Trafficking Charges
by rayiner on Friday October 07, 2016 @04:10PM
(#12663580)
Criminal law makes a distinction between gross negligence (locking the doors to a busy club so people can't get out which then catches on fire and kills everyone), and ordinary negligence (securing a heavy thing in the air with just a knot that falls and kills someone). Even if someone "should have known," that is almost never enough for criminal liability.
My opinion: Anyone who took part in it either knowing it is illegal or even if the person should have known it is illegal considering his/her position.
Same goes for persons that didn't necessarily know about it but acted negligent or ignored standard procedures that are in place to prevent such a thing.
> But in general a CEO should have a duty to ask questions why a certain division seems to be doing well
Could be negligence, I don't know the specifics here. If it was then he has to be held accountable. But his head might roll in the end regardlessly as people always need a scapegoat, no matter if it's his fault or not. Yet when the government takes action it should not do so just to punish a scapegoat, they should punish because the person broke a law. (if the shareholders fire him even though it's not his fault I couldn't care less, it's their investment and they do not have to act rationally if they want to)