Ken Lay was the Chairman of Enron. He resigned a few months before it collapsed. I’m pretty sure that his name, and I’m pretty sure he sold all his stock when he quit the company. Why hasn’t the SEC gone after him for insider trading? As chairman, wouldn’t he have had knowledge of the accounting fraud and therefore had inside information when he sold his shares at the time of his resignation?
Am I remembering what happened wrong?
They have gone after him, and he refused to give up his docs citing the 5th amendment. The court is, of course, of another opinion.
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr18372.htm
Of course, why it’s taken so long is that Mr. Lay has lots of expensive lawyers who like to draw things out if, for no other reason, than to bill as much as possible.
http://www.cfo.com/article/1,5309,7011,00.html
Also, Mr. Lay’s accountants, while heavy on the shredding were no fools and made it very difficult to track things, so uncovering hard evidence (whether it exists or was destroyed) is quite difficult.
I wonder whether Mr. Lay’s people wil advise him to calim to suffer from Alzheimer’s disease , only to have a most unusual and miraculous cure later. 
YOu know, like that nice Mr. Saunders of Guinness - so far the \U.K.'s longest ever fraud trial, I believe.
Chairman, just to be technical, aren’t the charges in your link charges that he violated SEC standards while he was an officer of Enron? Have they brought civil or criminal charges that he personally sold his shares while in possession of inside information? I know Martha Stewart complains of being singled out, but actually the SEC has only sought a civil penalty against her regarding her alledged insider trading but has charged her criminally with, in plain English, covering up her insider trading. So it makes me wonder whether they ever tried to hit the top guy at Enron for insider trading. I know after he resigned and sold his stock the price started to drop.
Lemon, yes, you’re right.
I should have clarified my statement more: from what I can tell, there are federal probes into his insider trading, but no charges have been brought as of yet. I imagine that pending a positive probe (positive in that they find evidence of insider trading), they (SEC) will charge Mr. Lay.
I believe the lengthy investigation and pause to bring charges is a result of the combination of the feds desire to make a case that will stick and the complications of sorting out various witnesses’ likely testimony. I am assuming that a Ken Lay trial will be forthcoming.