HOUSTON -- Jurors deliberating the fate of Enron Corp. founder Kenneth Lay and former CEO Jeffrey Skilling have the weekend off after finishing their first full day of deliberations in the premier case to emerge from one of the biggest corporate scandals in U.S. history.

The jury of eight women and four men received the case Wednesday and had deliberated for about 9 ½ hours by day's end Thursday. Deliberations will resume Monday as the jury mirrors the four-day a week schedule the trial followed.

"This is nerve-racking," Skilling's lead lawyer, Daniel Petrocelli, said about the wait for a verdict. Skilling's trial was the California civil attorney's first criminal case.

"By far and away, this is the most difficult part. You've done everything you can. It's out of your hands. There's nothing more you can do. (You get) all of the thoughts about what you might have said, so this part is not easy," Petrocelli said.

Skilling can wait in his legal team's so-called "war room" in an office building across the street from the federal courthouse in Houston. But Lay went on trial again Thursday on bank fraud charges stemming from his personal banking.

The banking case is being tried without a jury before U.S. District Judge Sim Lake, who presided over the pair's conspiracy case as well.

Lake plans to issue his verdict in the banking case, which is expected to last several days, after jurors in the larger conspiracy case render theirs. The jury aims to deliberate Monday through Thursday and take Fridays off, mirroring the conspiracy trial's schedule.

Next door to Lay's bank fraud trial, the first of three retrials of five former Enron broadband-unit executives was winding down in its third week, with closing arguments expected as early as Friday.

In that case, former unit finance chief Kevin Howard and former in-house accountant Michael Krautz are charged with conspiracy, fraud and falsifying records for allegedly using a sham deal to fake earnings in late 2000. Both testified this week that the deal was legitimate.

Last year's three-month trial ended in a hung jury, and the other three ex-executives are to be retried in separate cases later.

Enron, once a Wall Street favorite, landed in bankruptcy protection in December 2001 amid scrutiny of hidden debt and inflated profits. More than $60 billion in market value, almost $2.1 billion in pension plans and 5,600 jobs disappeared in the failure of the company.

In the conspiracy case, Skilling faces 28 counts of fraud, conspiracy, insider trading and lying to auditors, while Lay faces six counts of fraud and conspiracy. If convicted on all counts, Skilling faces a maximum of 275 years in prison. Lay faces a maximum of 45 years.

The government sought to prove through 25 witnesses that both men repeatedly lied about Enron's financial health when they knew accounting trickery and fudged numbers created a glossy illusion of success.

The defense countered through 29 witnesses, including Lay and Skilling, that neither did anything wrong and no fraud occurred at Enron other than that committed by a few executives who ran lucrative side deals behind their backs. The defendants attributed Enron's collapse to bad publicity and lost market confidence.

Lay Goes On Trial In Another Fraud Case

Enron Corp. founder Kenneth Lay wasn't satisfied with federal loan rules that limited his purchase of stock, so he lied on bank forms and used the borrowed money to improperly buy stocks anyway, prosecutors said as his bank fraud trial began Thursday.

"This is a straightforward trial about lying to the banks," prosecutor Robb Adkins said in a brief opening statement. "Evidence will show Mr. Lay repeatedly and falsely executed forms relied on by banks and required by banks."

Lay's attorney, Ken Carroll, said Lay had no motive to violate rules, had collateral to back up the loans and even paid them off.

"If somebody told him he wasn't doing the right thing with these lines (of credit), he would have fixed them," Carroll said in response to a question from U.S. District Judge Sim Lake, who is trying the case without a jury.

Carroll declined to make an opening statement immediately following Adkins.

Carroll also suggested many of the documents may have been signed by an automatic signature machine both Lay and his wife, Linda, used, and that Lay's assistants would have used the machine "if somebody sends him a pile of bank documents and had to be signed in order to get a loan done."

When Lake asked Carroll if there's a distinction to be made if the signatures were made electronically, Carroll responded that while it could be a civil or regulatory matter, "It's not a crime."

Lay's federal fraud trial began as jurors were in their first full day of deliberations in the fraud and conspiracy trial of Lay and former Enron Chief Executive Jeffrey Skilling. Lay is charged with six counts in that case, Skilling with 28.

In the new trial, Lay faces four charges -- one of bank fraud and three of making false statements.

Prosecutors allege that beginning in 1999, Lay obtained $75 million in loans from three banks -- Bank of America, Chase Bank of Texas and Compass Bank -- and then reneged on an agreement with the lenders that he wouldn't use the money to carry or buy stock. Under federal rules adopted after the 1929 stock market crash, only 50 percent of a loan can be used to buy stock, Adkins said.

"Mr. Lay was not satisfied with the 50 percent of this loan," Adkins said.

Instead, Lay secured loans from the banks, signed documents agreeing to the rules, but "repeatedly time and again, over a period of years," drew down on the loans to buy stock "he promised he would not purchase from these lines of credit," Adkins said.

Lay used his Enron stock as collateral for the $75 million in loans. Lenders issued margin calls as Enron's share price fell throughout 2001, which he said prompted him to tap the company for cash and repay the energy giant with Enron stock. Although Lay repaid the bank loans, legal experts have said that's no defense for fraud.

The first government witness was James Shelton, who from 1993 to 1998 was Lay's private banker at what is now Bank of America. He said he advised Lay about the 50 percent rule and that Lay was surprised he couldn't use up to 75 percent.

"There are penalties to the bank, and to me personally as an officer of the bank," Shelton said. "There was no way we were going to make that loan for purpose of buying margin stock. We just weren't going to do it."

Margin stocks are those purchased with borrowed money. The indictment does not specify what company stock was bought.

Lay ultimately obtained two lines of credit through Shelton, one of them for stock purchases, and signed documents agreeing to the regulations, according to evidence. The documents raised objections from Carroll, who said Lay's signatures could not be authenticated as original.

Under cross-examination, Shelton said he personally never saw Lay or anyone associated with him misuse the lines of credit and that no regulatory or law enforcement agency ever raised questions about Lay's loans until after Lay was indicted. Shelton also said he often mailed or had documents delivered to Lay and didn't personally see Lay sign them.

Robert Hanisee, who oversaw Lay's investments at a Los Angeles-based management firm where Lay was on the board of directors, testified that he considered Lay a sophisticated investor who made all the decisions on his investments.

And Sally Ballard, the administrative assistant who paid the bills for Lay and his wife, described Lay as an active manager of his accounts. She acknowledged using the automatic signature machine when Lay was out of town or unavailable, but said she never used it without his permission.

Under cross-examination by Lay's attorney George Secrest, she said Lay never asked her to transfer funds from one of his accounts to another in a way that would conceal the purposes from a bank.

"Oh no, no," she said.

Prosecutors said they expected to wrap up their case early Monday. Lay's attorneys said they planned to call three witnesses, including Lay, and could end no later than Tuesday.

There is no testimony on Friday.

The banking case originally was part of the July 2004 conspiracy indictment against Lay. But Lake, ruling in October 2004 on a request by Lay to have his entire case heard separately from Skilling, said only that the four counts would be tried separately.

Conviction on each charge carries a maximum 30-year prison term.

Lake has said he'll deliver his verdict in the banking case after jurors make their decisions in the fraud and conspiracy case.