Consider the following remarks made after the convictions in the original trial (Greenhouse 1985, 1):

a. Following the conviction in the original trial, then attorney Richard M. Daley said the verdicts meant that employers who knowingly expose their workers to dangerous conditions leading to injury or even death can be held criminally responsible for the results of their actions.

b. Ralph Nader, consumer advocate lawyer, said, “The public is pretty upset with dangerously defective products, bribery, toxic waste, and job hazards. The polls all show it. The verdict today will encourage other prosecutors and judges to take more seriously the need to have the criminal law catch up with corporate crime.”

c. Professor John Coffee, Columbia Law School, said, “When you threaten the principal adequately, he will monitor the behavior of his agent.”

d. A California deputy district attorney put it more bluntly: “A person facing a jail sentence is the best deterrent against wrongdoing.”

e. Joseph E. Hadley Jr., a corporate lawyer who specializes in health and safety issues, said the decision would not send shockwaves through the corporate community: “I don’t think corporate America should be viewed as in the ballpark with these folks. This was a highly unusual situation, but now people see that where the egregious situation occurs, there could be a criminal remedy.”

f. Robert Stephenson, a lawyer defending another corporation, said, “I don’t believe these statutes [murder and aggravated battery]

were ever meant to be used in this way.”

g. Utah’s governor, Scott M. Matheson, refused to extradite Michael T. McKay, a former Film Recovery vice president then living in Utah, because he was an “exemplary citizen who should not be subjected to the sensational charges in Illinois.”

Which of the statements best describes what you think is proper policy regarding prosecutions of corporate executives for murder? Defend your answer.