Civil racketeering suit against tobacco

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Civil racketeering suit against tobacco
7
Tue, 09-21-2004 - 1:15pm

Trial begins in largest-ever civil racketeering suit against tobacco giants.


http://www.newratings.com/new2/beta/article_469668.html


A historic trial against the leading cigarette manufacturers began today in the US, associated with federal charges of racketeering and deliberately deceiving the public about the risks of smoking since the 1950s.

A federal court ruled yesterday that the US government could seek $280 billion from the tobacco industry's profits, as part of its case against the tobacco giants, which is likely to result in the largest ever civil racketeering lawsuit in the US. The suit was filed by the Clinton administration in 1999 and is expected to continue for six months, with more than 100 witnesses to be heard. The Justice Department lawyers are scheduled to present their opening arguments for the trial today. The lawyers of the cigarette manufacturers are scheduled to respond with their opening statement after the government's presentation. The government lawyers are expected to call the former FDA (Food and Drug Administration) Commissioner, David Kessler, as their first witness later this week.


The US Justice Department wants the tobacco industry to return past profits worth $280 billion, and seeks tougher rules on the marketing, advertising and risk-warning claims on tobacco products. The lawsuit targets leading cigarette manufacturing companies, including Altria Group and its Philip Morris USA unit, Loews Corporation's Lorillard Tobacco unit that has a tracking stock, Carolina Group, Vector Group Limited's Liggett Group, Reynolds American's RJ Reynolds Tobacco unit and British American Tobacco Plc’s British American Tobacco Investments Limited unit.

However, the tobacco companies have denied the allegations, saying that their marketing practices have drastically changed since 1998. The tobacco companies had reached a landmark settlement, for about $246 billion, with the state attorney generals, which severely restricted their marketing practices and made cigarette manufacturers subject to oversight.

cl-Libraone~

 


Photobucket&nbs

Avatar for baileyhouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 09-21-2004 - 1:28pm
I am really on the fence about this whole suing tobacco companies. I am 43 years old I have known for at least 30 years that smoking is bad for a person. I feel our tax dollars could be better spent....Maybe I'm missing something here.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Tue, 09-21-2004 - 3:21pm

"smoking is bad for a person"


Yes you're correct, but the tobacco co's have continued to advertise. Remember the ads on TV promoting

 


Photobucket&nbs

Avatar for baileyhouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 09-21-2004 - 3:32pm
>>but the tobacco co's have continued to advertise. Remember the ads on TV promoting smoking..... it was manly, sexy, even slim to appeal to women..... some magazines still carry ads with the same messages. They definately use false advertising.<<<

well the same can be said for beer, fast food, (seen the Hardee's commercial for the angus beef burger???) and many perscription drugs. Do you think we should we try and control advertising???

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Tue, 09-21-2004 - 4:07pm
<>

I thought this was one of the basic reasons for filing the suit. Think the rationale was

that future medical needs of smokers would drain Medicare. But whose to say what will be done with the money.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Tue, 09-21-2004 - 4:09pm

Smoking ads were controled they were taken off TV. Alcohol is somewhat limited, I'd like to see it removed.

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Tue, 09-21-2004 - 4:15pm

"medical needs of smokers"


The states that sued & won were surposed to use their share for smokers. I'll have to check but I'm pretty sure some of the monies were used for other things.

cl-Libraone~

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Wed, 09-22-2004 - 10:40am
<>

I'll take your word for it! On second thought, CO was one of those states, and I remember they were trying to divert the money into the general account, or something like that. Who can you believe?