News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Britpack

07/26/11 6:57 PM

#239767 RE: doughboy2 #239766

I don't think any attorney would have gotten much out of this guy, he may not have actually pleaded the fifth, but why bother when I don't recall, I don't remember, I don't know work equally well. Other than comedic value, 20 minutes of my life I will never get back - lol.
icon url

Jim01

07/26/11 7:03 PM

#239768 RE: doughboy2 #239766

That's what I mean...

I skimmed over the dep before I began reading all the posts about it on the boards. I never got past page 8 or 9 because there was no 'there', there.

I don't know what Jeff's attorney's strategy is but, don't you think that in a trial before the Judge... or, with just a review of Canouse's dep. BY the Judge before any trial... that Canouse's feigned memory lapses and obfuscations would, in the Judges opinion, be GLARING evidence that Canouse's case should at least be thrown out the door... or, decided AGAINST with prejudice and/or frivolous to the max?


Jim

.
icon url

crazy horse 0

07/27/11 10:44 AM

#239789 RE: doughboy2 #239766

Yet some support Joe C even with the Dep.

Joe C is a shark out for himself. He obstructed and still is obstructing the exchange and he has not worked in the best interest of QASP Shareholders.
May Dean will sue Joe !


Just finished.

Not as bad as I feared - joe seemed evasive throughout.

Seems joe is alleging he knows nothing about anything really.

And, surprisingly since he is the "corporate head", completely clueless about the allegations in the complaint against Jeff.

IMO, Jeff's attorney could have painted him into some corners throughout the testimony but did not.