The CEO at Enron was able to use his compensation to mount a solid legal defense when the government charged him. Some contend he should not have been allowed to do that. Others say it must be allowed because the defendant is innocent until proven guilty and clawing back his salary and gains would be a pronouncement of guilt if the government did that before the trial. Discuss both sides of this issue from a business and legal perspective, state where you come down on the issue and indicate why.

Thank you !!!