Discussion:
What was the U.S. Supreme Court's reaction to a case where a business executive was found guilty of aiding and abetting in the bribery of an Internal Revenue Service Agent even though the Internal Revenue Service agent had been found not guilty of the bribery in a separate trial?
A. Because of the inconsistent outcomes, a third combined trial was ordered to reconcile the different outcomes.
B. This simply underscores the fact that there is always the possibility that different juries might reach different results in a given situation.
C. Because one of the defendants had been found guilty, then both should have been found guilty.
D. Because one of the defendants had been found not guilty, they both should have been found not guilty.