WTO ruling to be offered as grounds for dismissal re Carruthers

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Could it also go to mens rea of the defendant? If our properly signed and ratified treaties makes conduct appear like it is legal, could the defendant not argue that he relied upon the language of the treaty when engaging in his conduct, thus eliminating the criminal intent necessary in the statute.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's a hell of an argument to make: sophisticated gaming executive thinks he's doing nothing wrong in the eyes of U.S. law because of a WTO ruling that the Government has been publicly treating with utter contempt? Sounds ridiculous to me.

IMO this criminal intent argument could never be grounds for dismissal. If the judge thinks it's a legitimate argument then the defendent's intent becomes a matter of fact for the jury to decide. But even being allowed to argue it during trial would help the defense greatly because it's humiliating for the Government and would tend to nullify the jury.

It would also deter future prosecutions at least a little. Having this ugly topic reraised every last time they prosecute someone is politically horrible.

[JPFisher55]

I don't know about the mens rea argument. However, I hope that having to argue against the WTO deters prosecution of the two Neteller executives and other ewallets in future.

[dave88]

Why should China pay any attention to the WTO ruling against them regarding piracy of primarily US software and movies. If the US ignores WTO rulings against them regarding gambling?

[Grasshopp3r]

China does not pay any attention to the WTO. There is no enforcement mechanism that is meaningful.