The government and the defense in the criminal trial of the two central figures at Enron outlined widely different approaches to their cases during opening statements here on Tuesday, with the prosecutors eschewing arcane financial detail and the defense embracing it.
"This is a simple case," said John Hueston, a federal prosecutor. "It is not about accounting, it is about lies and choices."
In the first hours of statements in the trial of Enron's former chief executives, Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling, the government made it clear that it would not get bogged down in the kind of mundane details that, legal experts say, have cost prosecutors convictions in other recent high-profile white-collar criminal trials.
But a lawyer for Skilling countered that accounting was central to the case and would play a key role in the defense of the executive. "This place was infested with accountants and lawyers, so it is about accounting," the lawyer, Daniel Petrocelli said.
The role of accounting will not be the only distinction between the approach of the two sides to the case. Whereas Hueston described Enron as a "ticking time bomb" and said the executives had lied to investors and analysts about the true state of the company's finances, Petrocelli characterized Enron as a successful and healthy enterprise that was brought down by a "punishing drain on its liquidity. "This is not a case of hear no evil and see no evil," Petrocelli said. "This is a case of there was no evil."
The jury, consisting of eight women and four men, who were selected from a pool of almost 100 on Monday, listened attentively. The group includes three people who work in the oil and gas industry and a few in accounting.
The trial of Skilling and Lay, the two men most ...