SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Non-Tech : The Enron Scandal - Unmoderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1910)3/15/2002 3:24:20 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 3602
 
Execution Before Trial for Andersen

By FLOYD NORRIS
The New York Times
March 15, 2002

Arthur Andersen admits to making a lot of mistakes, but it refused to plead guilty to obstruction of justice. And so yesterday it was indicted in what the firm said was "a gross abuse of government power."

It is customary to say that a judge and jury will decide guilt. But in this case, the punishment may well come before the verdict. The maximum legal penalty, said Deputy Attorney General Larry D. Thompson in announcing the indictment, is a $500,000 fine. In reality, many in the accounting business believe, the death penalty seems virtually certain.

As Dr. Samuel Johnson once pointed out, the prospect of hanging concentrates the mind. Knowing it faces death if it dallies, Andersen may choose to demand an immediate trial and see if the Justice Department can prove that the firm — as opposed to some of its partners — is guilty.

Conceivably, acquittal could give it a chance to survive. But this is a firm that was unable to find a merger partner because of its incalculable financial liabilities stemming from the problems at Enron (news/quote) and that is having more clients desert every day. Even though the Securities and Exchange Commission says it will still accept Andersen's audits, few companies want to risk telling their shareholders that they are hiring Andersen again. Even before the indictment, Andersen's reputation was in tatters.

Andersen does have some supporters. "They should survive," said David S. Ruder, a law professor at Northwestern University and a former S.E.C. chairman. "Even the allegations at their worst," he added, make it appear that 95 percent of the firm was not involved. "I don't see any need to dissolve Andersen and force it into bankruptcy," he said, adding that the firm could be a very good auditor after it makes the reforms proposed by Paul A. Volcker, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. Yesterday, Andersen pledged to make those reforms.

Deputy US Attorney General Larry Thompson, center, joined by Task Force Prosecutor Leslie Cauldwell, left, and Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff, announces the indictments against the accounting firm of Authur Andersen for destruction of document pertaining to the United States government's investigation of the Enron energy company at the Justice Department in Washington, DC, on Thursday.

One government official involved in the case expressed concern about the indictment's consequences for Andersen. "The sentence does not fit the crime," said the official. He added that he feared reform efforts would be set back if Andersen did not survive to adopt Mr. Volcker's ideas. The other major accounting firms, now being called the Final Four, have shown scant enthusiasm for the Volcker proposals.

Andersen's death, if it does come, could be messy. Others in the Final Four may try to pick off Andersen affiliates in foreign countries. There could be a scramble by companies to sign up new auditors before competing firms decide they have all the clients they can handle.

In recent weeks, there was talk of a global settlement in which Andersen would cut a deal with the Justice Department and resolve S.E.C. charges with commitments for reform. Such an agreement might have provided the basis for Andersen's survival, either alone or with a dignified merger into another firm. But negotiations broke down, and the indictment followed.

In the current political environment, said Arthur Levitt, a former S.E.C. chairman, it was impossible for government agencies "to broker the kind of settlement that might have preserved the best elements of Andersen" and kept it in business.

"This is a sad moment," Mr. Levitt added. "I hope the opportunity for reform will not be lost."

There is no doubt that Andersen employees shredded huge quantities of Enron documents after the S.E.C. began its investigation. Andersen argued that its senior management did not authorize the destruction, and presented a report by independent law firms to support its claims. If prosecutors have evidence to the contrary, they did not disclose it.

But even if top management did not know of the shredding, it did make some major errors in judgment. Last year, when Andersen became the first major accounting firm in decades to face a civil fraud complaint filed by the S.E.C., Andersen settled the case without admitting or denying the charges, which stemmed from fraudulent financial statements filed by Waste Management (news/quote) in the mid-1990's.

Andersen did not even appear contrite. There was no sense that the firm thought the Waste Management case showed it had a serious internal problem. The partners implicated in that case were not publicly disciplined, and one of them was even allowed to write the document-retention policy that David B. Duncan, the fired Houston partner in charge of the Enron audit, cited as support for the shredding he ordered.

Had Andersen's management appeared to be vigilant about bringing change, perhaps the Justice Department would have been less eager to prosecute now. Or perhaps one of the many Andersen employees involved in the shredding would have notified senior management when it started, thus perhaps stopping it quickly.

"It is sad about Andersen, because there are thousands of good people there who do not deserve what is going to happen to them," one former federal regulator said yesterday. "But they should have thought about this possibility."

There was plenty of sadness yesterday. "I find it impossible to believe this happened," said Karen Andersen, whose grandfather, Walter, was Arthur Andersen's brother and first partner in the firm when it began in 1913. "They were such a good firm for so long."

One Andersen partner, reached at his desk last night, said auditors were trying to carry on. "We're working like we'll be here," he said. "I guess we're optimistic, or maybe we are naïve. I'm still proud to be associated with this firm. I think the firm should get a chance to survive. It is worth saving."

Andersen's corporate motto, "Think straight, talk straight," was translated from the Norwegian by Arthur Andersen, said Ms. Andersen, who now lives in St. Paul, and works as a publications coordinator for a nonprofit organization. She said it came from her great-grandmother, Marie Kathinka Aaby Andersen, an immigrant from Norway.

Perhaps the Andersen family history provides some hope. Arthur's father nearly died when a ship he was on sank in the Atlantic as he was traveling from Norway to America. He was rescued by the S.S. Missouri and wound up in Chicago. To some, survival for his son's namesake firm would now seem no less miraculous.



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (1910)3/15/2002 4:07:25 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 3602
 
<<Most feel that Andersen has been singled out, while other firms that reviewed the nuts and bolts of many of the partnerships and the law firms and investment banks that structured the deals have gotten off the hook.>>

Workers call atmosphere a witch hunt
By TOM FOWLER
The Houston Chronicle
March 14, 2002, 11:38PM

Houston employees of Arthur Andersen say they don't blame their colleagues on the Enron account for Thursday's Justice Department indictments.

Instead, they blame a volatile mix of politics, innuendo and ignorance that have led to a witch hunt.

"When you read that indictment, you can just hear the wheels of politics in action," said Christine Hazelwood, an audit team member. "It's not about finding out the truth or getting at justice. It's about doing something fast."

When the 89-year-old firm turned down a federal plea bargain this week, it chose a path that promises to be an ugly fight, observers say.

Andersen's tactics before Thursday have been to offer up Chief Executive Officer Joseph Berardino for repeated visits before Congress, share documents with investigators and aggressively preach their position to clients.

In the last two weeks, however, the story slipped away from the firm.

First, plaintiffs' attorneys leaked word of their multimillion-dollar settlement offers.

Then Justice Department officials wafted hints about the indictments as a way to force the company to the bargaining table.

All the while, more and more clients chose to leave the firm rather than face what was becoming an unpleasant association.

Some employees and partners who sat back while Congress and the press denigrated the company and its Houston office say it's about time the company changed course.

"Corporate McCarthyism is what it's felt like so far," said David Winn, a Houston partner.

"A lot of what we want to say would be somewhat obscene," said another partner frustrated by the abuse.

While most employees said it was unfair for the whole company to be painted with the same brush because of the actions of "a few people," many say they aren't willing to lay the blame on former partner David Duncan and others who worked with Enron.

"We're willing to take on any liability that is ours," said Wes Stockton, an Andersen manager. "But what they've indicted us with isn't ours. And most of the facts really aren't known yet."

Andersen has been cooperating with the Justice Department for many months and actually provided the documentation the indictments were based on.

The severity of the indictments and their tone seems to show.

"It's almost like we're being punished for doing the right thing," Hazelwood said.

Watching members of Congress ask pointed questions about accounting intricacies they no doubt never heard of before this year -- nevermind actually understand -- would be laughable if it weren't so damaging, said Amy Oglesby, a Houston auditor.

"I'll bet most of Congress never read an audit statement and don't know what auditors do," Hazelwood said. "We don't prepare financial reports. We don't structure their deals, we don't handle their financial transactions."

"We're just like a teacher in that we grade the test based on the rules set up by the SEC," Oglesby continued, referring to not only the Securities and Exchange Commission but other accounting regulators.

"And we don't 'let' clients do anything. We see if they follow the rules or not."

Most feel that Andersen has been singled out, while other firms that reviewed the nuts and bolts of many of the partnerships and the law firms and investment banks that structured the deals have gotten off the hook.

The recent client defections are disheartening, but the Andersen employees say they understand the public pressure they must feel to make that decision.

"Our clients don't doubt us," Stephen Caivano said. "The business world doesn't doubt us. They are all saying they received great service. They're just having to do this because of the appearance of a stigma."

Worst of all has been how personal the attacks have been, Andersen employee Amanda Howton said.

"We're the people you stand next to in the grocery store, the ones you see walking around the neighborhood. They don't realize the impact this witch hunt is going to have on us as people, on our families, on our community," Howton said.

"You look at the damage caused when Enron went out of business. How much worse is it going to be now that the government is willing to take an 85,000-person company and ruin it?"