Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pagejack who wrote (33179)	11/8/1999 2:43:00 PM
From: taxman	Respond to of 74651

thanks. regards

To: pagejack who wrote (33179)	11/8/1999 3:23:00 PM
From: RTev	Respond to of 74651

I do sense that the MSFT litigation team was not "calling the shoots" as they should have when it came to questions of what testimony and/or evidence would be offered during the trial. During the trial, I suggested the same thing on this thread. Preparation of MS witnesses seemed to be a major problem. As you said, it's nearly impossible to know whether that's the fault of the attorneys or of the client. The DOJ team seemed to do a great job of preparation. They seemed to find just the right document or prior testimony to embarrass or impeach a witness. Too often, the Microsoft witness seemed surprised by the exhibit. That kind of thing should never happen in a civil trial since the universe of possible exhibits is identified beforehand. That points to a failure in witness prep or a more basic failure in litigation support services -- the massive databases that are so important to such cases. Either failure could be the "fault" of the client. If Microsoft did not give its own employees enough time with their attorneys, then they wouldn't be adequately prepared even by the best law firm. It's a lot of work to get ready for testimony. If Microsoft downplayed the importance of doing that work, then the lawyers would have been at a severe disadvantage. So too, as you point out, the lawyers would have been at a disadvantage if Microsoft was trying to manage the case itself rather than listening to legal advice.