Other witnesses? What other witnesses?

Even though testimony is over in the Enron trial, the action isn't — well, depending on what you call "action," we guess. Yesterday, prosecutors asked Judge Sim Lake to keep the defense from saying that the government didn't call, or barred, certain witnesses during its closing argument next week.

The request stems from a defense claim that the government has control over the forces that could keep witnesses from testifying. Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling's lawyers have repeatedly said some witnesses refused to help the defense becuase they were afraid of further prosecution — because the prosecutors refused to grant them immunity. But that's bull, the prosecution countered:

"Witnesses who refused to testify based on the Fifth Amendment are equally unavailable to both parties, and defendants should not be able to ask the jury to draw an adverse inference from the witnesses' refusal to testify," prosecutors argued in the court papers.

Skilling lawyer Daniel Petrocelli has named several former Enron executives who he said could have backed Skilling's contention that the actions of ex-Enron CFO Andy Fastow and a small group of evildoers brought Enron down. "We didn't get a chance to call all of the witnesses or get all of the facts on the table," Skilling said Monday. Lake had forbidden mentions of witnesses who weren't called or refused to testify during trial, and he had to reprimand one of Lay's lawyers twice for asking a witness about why the government didn't call a certain former Enron exec.

As the Chronicle notes, there's been a move among defense lawyers to get the ability to offer witness immunity — only prosecutors may do so now. Closing arguments in the Enron case are set to begin Monday.