Pleading Ignorance
Do I read “White-Collar Prosecutions May Face Higher Hurdle” (June 1) correctly that, from now on, ignorance of the law is now, finally, an excuse for breaking it with impunity? Does this mean that I can now win in traffic court by demanding the police prove, first, that I was actually paying attention to the speedometer and therefore consciously broke the speed limit and, second, that I deliberately intended to break the speeding laws? After all, the court said in order to obtain a conviction, the government had to prove that accounting firm Arthur Andersen was “conscious of wrongdoing.” Oh, happy day!
Christine M. Rodrigue
Reseda
Start your day right
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
