Suky Occasions Blog

Views On “Questions Over Galleon Defense Move”

Since any cautious attorney (I’ve been in a mildly similar situation as an expert advice witness years ago) would have disclosed a conflict or potential conflict of interest upfront, in the first question to the witness, absent some other consideration, it’s easy to conclude that this was either under the direct orders of the client, or the legal team didn’t know of the investments, the attorney thought the risk of the other side learning of the investment was lower than the risk of disclosure, or the legal team is incompetent. The defendant’s legal team appears to be very competent. From this distance, the impression is that the client is in total control.

This isn’t over; the judge could instruct the jury to disregard the testimony of this witness due to the presentation on direct.

There is one other, rather remote possibility: this witness has a more serious problem, and the defense decided that the best course of action was to let the prosecution wallow in the chum thinking that it will prevent them from discovering the witnesses real problem.

Imagine how many expert witnesses they interviewed before settling on this guy.