kbp wrote:
Then one of the two parties must schedule a deposition based on the assumption the other party will cooperate. If either or both parties disregard communicating with the other to schedule such, only the state could have complained about this prior to the mandate.
Did that happen?
I'm trying to find out who may be at blame for delay prior to the mandate (why it was filed).
liesel wrote:
I blame Crump and Nelson, not necessarily in that order. Nelson has rushed, rushed, rushed, the defense so much that it could appear she was doing it deliberately to prevent them from being able to adequately prepare for trial. There have been many late days of trial and jury selection. I know I've missed a lot, even today, but MOM and West can't miss a minute and must do a lot outside of the courtroom too. They must be physically and mentally exhausted already, before they even begin presenting their case.
We'll likely not know the answer to your question until someone from the defense comes out with a book or an extensive interview. I wouldn't trust the info from other sources, of course. It could have been and likely was a combination of overworked and overwrought defense attorneys with precious little time to work in even such an important depo; part of defense strategy to put it off until after #8's testimony; and Crump's availability.
Then I assume you're saying Nelson did not assign specific blame for any specific date missed by either party for the deposition.
Login
FAQ
Do not go gentle into that good night.
"patent holder" 
