Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM)

QCOM 173.60

+0.1%

Dec 30 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Stan who wrote (147593)	1/12/2007 8:36:34 AM
From: JeffreyHF	Read Replies (2) of 152472

Re: Big Ouch I wouldn`t jump to that conclusion, Stan. Cross-examination is fun, and much easier than direct exam (i.e. more "natural") for experienced trial lawyers. Past writings and statements of experts often prove to be fertile fields for the extraction of sound bytes on "cross". However, without hearing the professor`s (author`s) explanation, it would be wrong to assume that he had no reasonable testimony as to context, nuance, and his intent when the passage was penned. Qualcomm knew full well of that choice of language when they decided to call him as an expert, and their lawyers undoubtedly had a reasonable expectation that his explanation would be accepted by the jury. If the jury finds him to be a knowledgeable, authoritative, and appealing expert witness, they will readily accept his explanation of such zinger points made on cross examination.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next