Suspicions Confirmed

Neal Boortz and Jack Kelly have noted this excellent article by the WAPO's Carol Rust quoting several of the Enron Jurors' reactions to the evidence presented to them in the lengthy trial which seemed to validate my gut feelings immediately after the verdict was announced, e.g.:

As to Lay:

Speaking shortly after a federal judge read their verdict, jurors said Lay's indignant outbursts while testifying in his own behalf made him seem "that he very much wanted to be in control -- he commanded the courtroom," said Wendy Vaughan, a Houston business owner.

"He was very focused, but he had a bit of a chip on his shoulder that made me question his character," she said.

As to Skilling:

...who spent days explaining the tedious financial inner workings of the once high-flying energy company, the jurors couldn't understand how he could know so much about that and not be aware of illegal business maneuvering, whether or not he was responsible for it personally.

"Skilling was supposed to be a hands-on individual," said Freddy Delgado, an elementary school principal. "It's hard to believe a hands-on individual wouldn't know what was going on."

"When he got on the stand and knew what a [technically complicated] chart was and how it worked, we knew he was involved," Delgado said.

As to both:

Elementary school teacher Kathy Harrison said she was glad Lay and Skilling took the stand during their trial. Had they not, "I would have always had questions," she said.

Talk about turning the jury to proscutors, check this out:

"The people with plea bargains we questioned from different angles," said Don Martin, an electrical designer. "All their answers led to one result."

"Fastow was . . . Fastow," Martin continued, referring to former Enron finance chief Andrew S. Fastow, who faces 10 years in prison for stealing millions from the company. "We knew where he was coming from, and we kind of discounted some of what he said, but we weighed all the stuff the government witnesses said, and their answers all came to the same conclusion."

Whenever there was doubt about credibility, jurors dug through the 10 crate-size boxes to find evidence to support or discredit the testimony.