THe key to the audit committee is so the audit function can bypass normal management. It gives another chain of command for audit matters that bypasses or circumvents the CEO, the Treas, etc.
Lets say I am the auditor in charge and I discover a potential malfeasance. The second thing I do (The first is to contact my own lawyer because the auditor gets sued no matter how it plays out in these cases)is to contact the audit committee. I don't have to worry that I was hired by the CEO or worry that the CEO might be involved.
That said, with the kind of dollars involved here and the ability of the creditors involved, its absolutely nuts to think that the outcome would have been different had Mrs. Gramm been a CPA. Unless of course she ignored explicit warnings from company members, other directors or AA.
I asked myself that same question for over 20 years. As the Administrative Services Officer for a BOD, I watched in amazement was the Directors would listen to the oral report of the auditor, agreement by staff and never even open the audit. It wasn't just audits either - there were multiple things that just whizzed right past their heads. My feeling is that most Directors are never apprised of the legal, moral, and personal responsibilities they hold as Directors.
I also think Red Jones has it in for the Gramms!