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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (91173)	10/3/2007 1:34:24 AM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

My understanding is the following, If the prosecution interviews a witness and doesn't share what they learn, especially something that may help the defense - that's prosecutable. But the prosecution is under no obligation to interview witnesses they might reasonably suspect would weaken their case. This is the job of the defense to find and depose these witnesses. In presenting their case they can tell a story that the CEO deceived the Accounting Department so long as they don't know that to be false, even though they might have found contradicting witnesses. The defense can leave them looking foolish with a witness who will contradict this, but know of the witness in advance the prosecution will change their characterization of the case. If the CEO admits to his attorney, "I did this in secret and I'm guilty," the attorney can say "I know my client is innocent, and everyone knew of and approved these actions in advance." This CEO, with all of his money, needed better legal counsel. Like many things, the case is largely won or lost before it goes to trial. .