The prosecution and defence rested their cases on Monday in the trial of former Enron executives Jeffrey Skilling and Kenneth Lay after 14 weeks of intense questioning of the key figures in one of the biggest collapses in corporate history.
The court adjourned and closing arguments will be heard next week before the jury starts its deliberations in what is also one of the most complex criminal cases in US legal history.
Defence lawyers again claimed that several witnesses who could have cleared Enron founder Lay and Skilling, who later became chief executive in his place, refused to testify because for fear of being prosecuted.
”We didn’t get a chance to call all the witnesses or get all the facts on the table,” said Skilling’s lawyer, Daniel Petrocelli.
The defence case relies mostly on the testimony of Skilling and Lay who blamed Enron’s implosion under an estimated $40-billion of debt on the company’s former chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow.
Fastow was the prosecution’s star witness.
He said his former bosses were complicit in hiding Enron’s financial disaster in partnerships that were not properly registered. Fastow said Skilling ordered him to get him ”as much of that juice as you can” referring to the revenue generated by the off-balance sheet partnerships.
Fastow’s testimony demonstrated a contrition that Skilling and Lay did not show while on the stand.
They betrayed little regret or overt sympathy for the thousands of employees who lost their jobs and life savings when the energy giant declared bankruptcy in 2001.
Skilling and Lay steadfastly maintained that the company was fiscally sound and all its accounting was legal.
Lay blamed the collapse of his energy company on ”vultures” who sold the company stock short and ”viscious” articles in the Wall Street Journal.
A parade of prosecution witnesses supported Fastow’s version of events.
Lay’s lead defence attorney, Mike Ramsey, returned to the court on Monday despite having emergency heart surgery in April.
Lay chose to continue with the trial without Ramsey, who said he would participate in closing arguments.
Legal analysts have speculated that Ramsey might have more effectively controlled his client during questioning. Lay surprised many in the courtroom by not only having heated exchanges with prosecutor John Hueston, but also with his own lawyer, George ”Mac” Secrest.
”Where are you going with this, Mr Secrest?” he testily challenged the lawyer at one point.
Known for his temper and stinging rebukes, Skilling was expected to lose his cool on the stand, not Lay.
But Skilling maintained his equilibrium while Lay, known as a convincing and polished public speaker who associates with American presidents, came off as irascible and haughty.
”He became a metaphor for the governments case about what was going on at Enron,” said David Berg, a Houston attorney who defends white collar clients and has watched the trial closely.
”You strip away the veneer that the public sees and you get something really ugly.”
Also damaging were discussions of Lay’s personal spending on Enron which amounted to more than $7-million per year.
Reminiscent of convicted Tyco chief executive, Dennis Koslowski, Lay spent $200 000 on his wife’s birthday party which was held on a chartered yacht called the Amnesia.
The party was held shortly after Enron declared bankruptcy. Some jurors exchanged incredulous looks when Lay explained his own birthday celebration only cost $12 000.
Enrons collapse in 2001 was then the largest in history and continues to undermine investor confidence and faith in financial disclosure.
The case against Lay and Skilling is widely seen as a key test of the governments ability to combat corporate fraud.
Skilling faces 28 counts of fraud and conspiracy and Lay is charged with six. Lay also faces a separate trial on federal banking violations, which will begin May 18.
If convicted in this trial, both men could be sentenced to more than 30 years in jail.
The trial started on January 30 and Judge Sim Lake warned the jury on the opening that it would be ”extremely complex”. But he added that it would also be ”one of the most interesting and important cases ever tried”. – Sapa-AFP