Skilling and Lay Trial with My Own Eyes
By Steve | May 02, 2006
Finally. After years of reading about Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay, I attended a bit of the trial today, Lay's last day on the stand. We have all read a lot about the trial, so no boring readers with that. But I did leave with a few questions:
In 2006, why are computer-projected exhibits still barely legible (if that) to the jurors? Don't they matter?
In the diverse city of Houston, why is the jury all white? (Or almost all-white--I am relying here on my observation and not on any formal demographic study.) Will this make any difference in the outcome?
Do character witnesses really work? I watched an ex-Mayor of Houston (Mr. Bob Lanier) testify on Lay's behalf. After ten minutes of platitudes, the prosecution rose to ask one question: "Did any of your comments apply to Mr. Lay's work inside Enron?" The firm reply "No," ended his testimony, and perhaps any chance that his compliments would stick.
How do the loved ones of Lay and Skilling steel themselves for day after day of relentless pounding? Regardless of the outcome of the trial, or one's belief in the guilt of Skilling and Lay, this constancy is admirable.
Speaking of the outcome, the ethics community of Houston was marginally more sympathetic to the defendants than the national audience in San Diego profiled in a different blog. I came to Houston not to view the trial, but to give a presentation called "What your Board wants to Know about your ethics program, besides 'everything is fine," to 35 members and guests of the Greater Houston Business Ethics Roundtable (GHBER). 94% of the participants thought Skilling would be convicted, and the same percentage say he deserves it. Lay fares better, with 81% saying Lay will be convicted, and 86% saying he deserves it.
Like me, they haven't heard all the evidence. Watching the jury today zone in and out today, I am not sure they have either. . . .