The Securities Litigation Watch blog has a very handy scorecard (here) of the settlements by investment banks that served as underwriters for WorldCom’s various bond issues while it engaged in accounting fraud.  The total paid in the settlements so far is $3.564 billion, with Citigroup contributing the largest amount to date ($2.58 billion).  The latest to settle are: ABN Amro ($268 million), Mitsubishi ($75 million), BNP Paribas and Mizuho International ($37.5 million each). Among the defendants who have not settled yet are J.P. Morgan and the former directors of WorldCom, whose earlier settlement was not accepted by the judge. (ph)

The jury in the Bernie Ebbers prosecution may be near a verdict, although they also asked the court to order out for Dominos pizza for lunch today because they’re tired of the food from the cafeteria — no great surprise there for those who have spent more than a day in most federal courthouses.  The jury asked the judge if they had to agree unanimously on supplemental charges related to sentencing issues that the government had added to the indictment after the Supreme Court’s decision in Blakely threw the Sentencing Guidelines into question.  After Booker, those supplemental charges on sentencing factors became irrelevant, and apparently there was never a ruling on the defense motion to strike the language from the indictment as surplusage.  Judge Jones informed the jury they should ignore the supplemental charges, and denied a defense motion for a mistrial. If Ebbers is convicted, this will be one more issue to raise on appeal, largely due to the court’s failure to rule on the motion in a timely manner.  The jury appears to have reached the final part of the indictment, so they may be ready to deliver a verdict — after the pizza, of course.  See an AP story here discussing the jury’s dealings with the court. (ph)

The pizza bit has definitely been noticed by more than one journalist.  See the Wall Street Journal story here.  (esp)

The jury in the Bernie Ebbers trial continued through a third day a deliberations by, among other things, reviewing a video of Ebbers at a 2000 investment conference, excerpts of his cross-examination, and testimony from two other government witnesses who entered guilty pleas, former accounting executives Betty Vinson and Troy Normand.  It will be interesting to see how long it takes for a verdict, and if we’re getting close to a potential deadlock. An AP story here discusses the third day of deliberations. (ph)

The jury deliberated on Friday in the case of Bernard Ebbers, former Worldcom chief, and will resume their deliberations on Monday.  So far the jury has asked to re-examine some of the evidence.  Their request to re-examine some of he testimony of Scott Sullivan, a key witness in the trial is particularly noteworthy. See more here (Atlanta Jrl. Const.) and here (Wall St. Jrl).

(esp)

In its final rebuttal to the jury, the prosecution in the trial of Bernard Ebbers focused on restoring the credibility of Scott Sullivan.  See AP here. It is now onto jury instructions and then deliberation. See more in the Wall Street Journal here.

(esp)

As one might suspect, Attorney Reid Weingarten had words to say about the testimony of Scott Sullivan.  In the closing argument for the trial of his client, Bernard Ebbers,  he noted that Sullivan was "more rehearsed in his direct testimony than the actor who plays Hamlet on Broadway."  The case is coming to a close and may go to the jury as early as today. See more in the Wall Street Journal here and via AP here.

(esp)

The defense rested its case in the Bernie Ebbers trial and the prosecution then proceeded into closing argument. Did he or did he not have knowledge of what was happening?  Was this all Scott Sullivan, or was Ebbers a major player in the alleged criminal activity?  These appear to be the key issues that will need to be resolved in the jury room. 

In closing argument, the prosecution hammered away at the credibility of Ebbers and whether he had been corrupted by power.  (See AP)  (See Wall Street Jrl).  Tomorrow the defense will take its turn before the jury.  Heavy penalties are at stake here and it may all come down to who the jury believes – Scott Sullivan or Bernie Ebbers.

(esp)

Assistant U.S. Attorney David Anders continued the cross-examination of Bernie Ebbers by focusing on the loans Ebbers took — which WorldCom guaranteed — on his WorldCom stock, and the pain from the margin calls as the price of shares dropped.  The government has argued that Ebbers pressured former CFO Scott Sullivan to engage in accounting fraud to maintain the company’s share price at a level sufficient to keep the loans from being called.  Anders also focused on Ebbers’ involvement in the details of the company, and Ebbers admitted that he was "fairly detail-oriented . . . in the areas that I paid particular attention to." It will be interesting to see if the jury accepts the position that Ebbers paid attention to certain areas of the company (e.g. the water in the water-cooler) but not accounting entries that would affect the stock’s price.  Articles from the Wall Street Journal (here) and AP (here) discuss the cross-examination.  The WSJ also has a poll regarding whether it was a good idea for Ebbers to testify.  The problem is that we will not know the effect of the testimony until the jury returns its verdict, and defense lawyers make the decision to call the defendant to testify without the benefit of hindsight or knowing how the person will react to cross-examination. (ph) 

As promised this past Friday, Bernie Ebbers was called to the witness stand on Monday to present his variant on the "honest-but-ignorant CEO" defense, asserting that he knew little about technology and apparently even less about accounting.  Ebbers testified that his grades in college were not very good, and that at WorldCom he was the company’s "coach" much like he had been a high school coach before entering the backwaters of the telecom world.  Ebbers denied ever being advised by former CFO Scott Sullivan that the accounting entries were incorrect, and noted that Sullivan had an "uncanny knowledge" of accounting.  The defense gambit is risky, and to this point Ebbers appears to be comfortable on the witness stand, but the cross-examination may tell another story. Articles from the Wall Street Journal (here) and AP (here) discuss Ebbers’ first day of testimony. (ph)