This Houston Chronicle article relates ex-Enron CEO and COO Jeff Skilling‘s inadvertent meeting at the Houston Federal Courthouse this past Thursday with ex-Enron treasurer Ben Glisan, who was ex-Enron CFO Andrew Fastow‘s right hand man during the final year and a half before Enron’s collapse and the first former Enron officer to be imprisoned. Glisan is currently serving a five year prison term after negotiation of this plea bargain with the Enron Task Force last September.
Meanwhile, this NY Times article is about Jeff Skilling’s brother, Tom Skilling. Tom Skilling has been a beloved weatherman in Chicago for the past 25 years.

All the major newspapers have multiple articles on yesterday’s indictment of former Enron CEO and COO, Jeff Skilling. The best are The Houston Chronicle, The Wall Street Journal ($), and The New York Times.
As mentioned in earlier posts, I have read all of the books that have been published over the past couple of years on the Enron collapse, and the best one by far is Bethany McLean and Peter Elkind‘s “Smartest Guys in the Room.”

Here is the indictment against ex-Enron CEO Jeff Skilling, which also serves as a supeceding indictment against former Enron chief accountant, Richard Causey.
As noted earlier in an earlier post, the indictment continues a government strategy in the Enron-related criminal cases to allege dozens of criminal counts that would result in the equivalent of a life sentence for Mr. Skilling if he is convicted on all or simply most of the counts. The criminal case against Mr. Skilling landed in federal District Judge Sim Lake‘s court, who is smart and fair, and an outstanding trial judge. This case is shaping up to be a real donneybrook.

The Chronicle is reporting that the Houston federal grand jury investigating the demise of Enron Corp. indicted Jeff Skilling, Enron’s former CEO, this afternoon. Mr. Skilling surrendered to the FBI to the FBI in Houston early Thursday. Earlier posts regarding Mr. Skilling are located here, here and here. Other relevant documents are the indictment against former Enron CFO and Skilling confidant Andrew Fastow and the indictment against former Enron chief accountant, Richard Causey.

The Houston Chronicle leads with a story today that the long expected indictment of former Enron CEO Jeff Skilling this week does not mean that the government will have an easy time convicting Mr. Skilling of a crime. The same thought was expressed last week in an earlier post on Mr. Skilling.
Interestingly, although numerous former Enron executives have been indicted, the Enron Task Force has yet to take one of the cases to trial. Indeed, the only Enron-related prosecution to date has been the conviction of corporate defendant Arthur Andersen, which by no means was an easy (or clear cut) victory for the government.
Virtually every Enron-related indictment to date has contained so many alleged offenses that a conviction would lead to a prison sentence of draconian length. Accordingly, rather than risk an extremely long prison sentence after a trial in an environment that is extremely hostile to anyone related to Enron, most of the Enron defendants are electing to cop plea bargains, such as the plea bargain that ex-Enron CFO Andrew Fastow agreed to last month.
The government’s strategy in the Enron criminal cases is at least mildly troubling. The government indicts an individual with so many counts of alleged crimes that the defendant is confronted with the choice of risking trial and the potential of virtual life imprisonment or striking a plea bargain that limits their jail time, but waives valid defenses to the alleged wrongdoing. The government’s job is to indict and convict wrongdoers, not to sledgehammer citizens into copping pleas. I am hopeful that the District Judges involved in the Enron criminal cases (and there are several very good Southern District of Texas Judges involved in these cases) dismiss criminal counts that the government has merely added for leverage purposes and allows the government to proceed to trial only on those counts where there is sufficient evidence that a fact finder could decide that a crime occurred.

The NY Times follows yesterday’s Houston Chronicle report with this article on the impending indictment of former Enron CEO, Jeff Skilling. Mr. Skilling and former Enron Chairman Ken Lay are the two highest ranking former Enron officers who have not been indicted by the U.S. Justice Department’s Enron Task Force. Messrs. Skilling and Lay are coming under intense scrutiny at this time because of the recent plea bargain that ex-Enron CFO Andy Fastow struck with the government last month, as noted in this earlier post. Here are links to the Fastow indictment and plea bargain agreement.

The Houston Chronicle reports today that the Enron Task Force is close to indicting Jeff Skilling, the former CEO of Enron, possibly as early as next week. The recent plea bargain of former Enron CFO and Skilling protege Andrew Fastow, noted in this earlier post, probably means that the Government is using Mr. Fastow as a prime source and eventual witness in its case against Mr. Skilling.
Despite the public perception that a conviction in a criminal case against Mr. Skilling is the legal equivalent of a gimme, I’m not buying it. For all its well-publicized excesses and arrogance, Enron spent multi-millions each year on outside legal and accounting analysis and review of its various deals and public disclosures. You can bet that Mr. Skilling’s capable defense lawyer–Bruce Hiler of Washington, D.C.–will point repeatedly to Mr. Skilling’s disclosure to and reliance on Enron’s accountants–Arthur Andersen–and its top notch law firms–Vinson & Elkins, among many others–in defending against any allegation of criminal intent in his conduct of Enron’s affairs.

In an earlier post, I noted a report that the Justice Department is currently focusing on whether to indict former Enron Chairman and CEO Ken Lay. In a NY Times piece today, the timing of which is not good for Mr. Lay, Bethany McLean and Peter Elkind –authors of the best Enron debacle book to date, “The Smartest Guys in the Room“–question why Martha Stewart is enduring a securities fraud trial over a relatively trifling matter while Mr. Lay has still not even been indicted?
The probable answer is that the criminal case against Ms. Stewart is simpler than any possible criminal case against Mr. Lay in regard to the hyper-complicated affairs of Enron. However, the more troubling issue is whether Ms. Stewart’s high profile status has generated a high publicity prosecution by the Justice Department attorneys in a case that probably would have never been prosecuted (or at least been settled quietly) had the defendant not been as high profile as Ms. Stewart.