Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (46868)	1/23/2002 12:24:12 PM
From: T L Comiskey	Respond to of 65232

JIm...8K is no thing for the Bush fam...Why even the 'Silent One' son Neil..( of Silverado Savings and Loan FAME) could toss the old gal a handfull of chump change to cover the loss Im sure she will struggle through........ Mean while The Foxes are guarding the Hen House......... all Disgruntled Shareholders should sleep Better.... I sure Feel better about This hot off the presses item T Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2002 Enron security guards were stationed on the 19th and 20th floors of the company's building here Tuesday to prevent further shredding of documents, company lawyers said during a federal court hearing. Former executive Maureen Castaneda said Monday employees were shredding documents as late as January 14, in spite of the company's December bankruptcy filing that costs thousands of investors and employees their life savings. In the wake of the reports of continued shredding, Enron lawyers said the company allowed FBI agents in the building to interview employees and that guards had been posted round the clock to prevent more document destruction. Some 40 attorneys representing investors asked a judge to place federal marshals or an outside firm's security guards in the Enron building to prevent shredding. The lawyers also asked the judge to take possession of all documents relevant to the investigation into the collapse of the energy giant -- including boxes of shredded papers they said company executives ordered destroyed. It was also revealed in court that shredded documents were found in a wastebasket, which was turned over to authorities. It is not clear who conducted the search in which the papers were discovered. Castaneda said she took boxes of shredded paper home with her to use as packing material. She later realized the significance of the refuse. She recalled e-mails telling employees how to handle financial documents. "One said our policy is not to destroy documents, given the threatening legal suits," she told CNN. "And that's what made me realize that I had more than just shreds." "It is an absolute smoking gun," said Castaneda's attorney, Paul Howes, referring to the shredded papers. Howes is with Milberg, Weiss, a San Diego-based firm that specializes in class action suits. The firm also represents Amalgamated Bank, which lost about $17 million in the Enron collapse, and the regents of the California University System, which lost $144 million. Castaneda told CNN on Tuesday that her former employer had become arrogant. "There was a lot of arrogance at the company ... to the point where you think you can lie to Wall Street and get away with it," Castaneda said. "You can't get more arrogant than that." Enron spokesman Mark Palmer told CNN the company told its employees in a company-wide e-mail October 25 to "retain all documents which include handwritten notes, recordings, e-mails and any other method of information recording. "You should know that this document preservation requirement is a requirement of federal law, and you could be individually liable for civil and criminal penalties if you fail to follow these instructions," the e-mail said. Palmer said the company sent out four e-mails on the subject -- the most recent one last week. Each one broadened the scope of what employees are asked to retain, he said. Howes' senior partner William Lerach said some of the shreds Castaneda took home contained references to "phony partnerships set up to inflate the profits." He called the reported document shredding "a horrible, horrible decision" and said the documents would be pieced back together. "It's always better to live with whatever the facts are, however bad they are, than destroy the evidence," Lerach said. Ken Johnson, spokesman for the Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said in a statement the allegations were "likely to be of interest to our committee" as well as the Justice Department. "Making bad business decisions is one thing, but hiding or covering up bad decisions is another," Johnson said. "If it turns out it is true -- that they were shredding documents while knowing inquiries were under way by Congress and the Department of Justice -- somebody's probably going to be in hot water." The House committee will issue subpoenas to executives of Arthur Andersen, the accounting firm that once handled the energy company's finances. According to committee sources, among those expected to be subpoenaed to appear at a hearing Thursday is David Duncan, a former Andersen partner who had been in charge of the Enron audit. If Duncan is subpoenaed, Johnson said, he probably would exercise his right to protection against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Duncan was fired after reports that he ordered the destruction of Enron documents. He said through his attorney that he was following the advice of in-house counsel. Joseph Berardino, Andersen's CEO, will also be subpoenaed, sources said, noting that both men indicated through their attorneys that they would not appear voluntarily. Nancy Temple, an Arthur Andersen attorney, and Michael Odom, a risk management partner, were described by one source as "not reluctant" witnesses. But they too will be subpoenaed because otherwise some of the information they have about Andersen could be considered privileged, the source said. -- CNN Correspondent Ed Lavandera and CNN Capitol Hill Producer Ted Barrett contributed to this report.

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (46868)	1/23/2002 11:31:24 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 65232

Enron may provide a huge civics lesson for America January 23, 2002 by LIONEL VAN DEERLIN The San Diego Union-Tribune Believe whatever else you want, you must admit the folks involved in this Enron mess have raised explanations and denials to an art form. First in line was Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, telling of his reaction upon learning this huge corporation was on the rocks. After Kenneth Lay called with the bad news, did O'Neill thereupon alert President Bush? Well, no. Says he: "I don't run across the street to tell the president every time I get a phone call." Bush's bejowled economic adviser, Lawrence Lindsay (one of several White House aides formerly employed by Enron) views it all through rose-colored glasses. Asked if Enron's collapse reflects badly on the government's regulatory system, Lindsay said "No, it's the glory of our free-market system. A business may prosper, or it may go broke." Jeffrey Skilling, who resigned as Enron's chief executive officer after creating those offshore tax havens, said "This is a tragedy . . . The company was in excellent shape." But my favorite quote comes from a spokesman for Andersen, the accounting firm. He was asked whether Andersen's CEO, Joseph Berardino, lied about the shredding of documents and other matters. The response: "Mr. Berardino was truthful, but from what we know now, he would have given somewhat different testimony." Uh, what's this – the truth untruly told? Indeed, a good many tunes may change when participants raise their right hand before the investigative committees of Congress. Some observers think that because so many persons in and out of government have been tarnished, this scandal cries for yet another special prosecutor. Let us hope not. Sure, there is evidence of sheer greed within Enron management, and of trusting employees who were shafted. But it's not the first time. Given a chance, there always will be hustlers ready to lie, cheat and steal. Indictments and convictions appear inevitable. Yet the most important result from all this, beyond the punishment of criminal wrongdoing, may be simply an important civics lesson. We'll learn anew how the leaders we elect can tilt a regulatory process that's intended to protect us from many perils – including, we'd suppose, from the likes of Kenneth Lay. We're not talking evil intent. President Reagan acted from the purest of motives in reshaping the Federal Trade Commission. The chairmen he chose for that agency were intended to let corporate mergers go unchallenged, to ease fuel consumption standards in the auto industry and to abandon advertising restrictions on tobacco. Reagan, don't forget, promised to "get government off our back." Before that, a burgeoning cable-TV industry was almost killed by the regulators that two presidents – Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon – installed at the Federal Communications Commission. New hookups were frozen for nearly six years while commission worrywarts sorted out cable's supposed threat to "free" television. Again, nothing criminal, but a case of public policy turning on highly questionable judgments. The Enron imbroglio stems in part from a policy change at the Securities and Exchange Commission. As its new chairman, Bush last May installed corporate lawyer Harvey L. Pitt. The displaced Clinton appointee, Arthur Levitt, had won attention – and brickbats – for trying to reform the relationship between market accounting firms and their corporate clients. The new man, Pitt, had been a paid lobbyist for the five largest accounting firms – including, alas, Andersen. On taking over the SEC, he quickly abandoned Levitt's intended reform. Unfortunate timing, this. Although it seems to have been within the law, we now know that the Andersen firm made as much money "consulting" Enron as it billed for auditing services. Inasmuch as investors must rely on the honesty of independent audits, this was like having an assistant coach for the St. Louis Rams in charge of the replay booth too. Chairman Pitt may have felt less compunction than chutzpah in writing a recent op-ed column for The Wall Street Journal. Its title: "How to Prevent Future Enrons." But the hand of a new administration is felt beyond the SEC alone. Bush's new chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is said to have been Kenneth Lay's personal selection. Moreover, Curtis Hebert, the ex-chairman who was bounced to make way for Lay's man, has said he rejected a chance to stay on "if I would change my views on deregulation." Which apparently he refused to do. Wow. Repeated under oath, this too should enliven our classroom in the weeks ahead. ____________________________________________ Van Deerlin represented a San Diego County district in Congress for 18 years. Copyright 2002 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.