Rudedog, I've been involved in a couple of court cases myself, and as I recall, there are three basic rules to answering a question to a deposition:
1) Answer the question.
2) Tell the truth.
3) Do not volunteer information that wasn't asked.
Yes, if you are not sure of something, you are supposed to say "I don't remember," and yes, you don't have to give them information that they're not smart enough to ask. And yes, you can occasionally get away with saying "I don't remember," even when you do. However, telling the truth is still a legal obligation. Bill Gates lied in his deposition when he said "I don't remember," so many times. And that was obvious to everyone, whether or not people consider it shrewd.
Now here's my point: credibility is IMPORTANT in a deposition. If Bill Gates is not credible, then ALL of Microsoft's positions lose credibility. What's going to happen when Boies asks a Microsoft employee, "do you remember this email from Bill Gates?" and shows him an email that Gates had no recollection of? That employee will have to choose between showing up his boss by saying "Yes I remember," or looking like an idiot on the stand. What's the judge going to do when deciding whom to believe? He'll very reasonably take the side of the people who were willing to answer the questions.
The point is, this whole thing may have aspects of a game, but the game is far more subtle than Microsoft is playing it. Frankly, I can't wait for Boies cross-examination-- that's going to be the high point of this trial. |
