Of course its your humble opinion. A decision went against what you thought is right, and it was the entire court not a 5 to 4 split, so they must all be corrupt. Perhaps, the opinion is actually correct. The jury instructions given, were plainly wrong. Telling the jury that even if the firm believed what they were doing was legal, then you can find them guilty. That even goes against the constitutional protection against ex post facto laws. This is clearly true in this case. If what Andersen was doing was legal, a court cannot later say it is illegal. Tsk Tsk Tsk

dmk