WORLD Law Direct Forums  





Go Back   WORLD Law Direct Forums > Forum Information > Law News
REGISTER FAQ SEARCH Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Personal Lawyer Legal Forms Calendar

Law News Breaking law news and events.

In Big Backdating Trial, Defense Rests Without Putting on Witnesses

Consult Your Own Personal Lawyer Now!
Reply
AddThis Feed Button
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old Oct 1st, 2008, 05:20 PM     #1
News
 
WSJ_law_blog's Avatar
 
Last Online:
Jul 16th, 2008 11:37 AM
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog
Posts: 640

Default In Big Backdating Trial, Defense Rests Without Putting on Witnesses



The McAfee backdating trial, which began with a big to-do over a certain discovery gaffe, appears to have come full circle.

The stock-option backdating case against former McAfee GC Kent Roberts went to the jury without the defense calling any witness. According to this report by the Recorder’s Dan Levine, Roberts’s lawyer, Cooley Godward Kronish partner Stephen Neal, merely informed the jury about McAfee’s late production of relevant e-mails at the beginning of trial. In his closing argument, Neal (pictured) referenced the gaffe again, saying at one point that the jury was Roberts’ last guardian against “a system that hasn’t worked the way it was supposed to work.”

Here’s what he might have had in mind: At the beginning of trial, Robert Gooding Jr., the Howrey partner who headed the firm’s internal investigation into backdating at McAfee, blamed contract lawyers for the firm’s failure to turn over relevant e-mails. Gooding said he was sorry. “In a document production this size, these things do happen,” he said. But the Cooley Godward defense lawyers, who filed a motion to dismiss shortly after the hearing, were incredulous. “It is fanciful for [Howrey] to get up and say it is inadvertent,” Cooley Godward’s Neal said in court. “This is one of the most irresponsible searches in history.”

Whether the jury will consider that important is anyone’s guess.

In her closing, AUSA Laurel Beeler, according to the Recorder, hammered home the point that Roberts, as GC of the company, knew the rules. And regardless of what former controller Terry Davis might have told him, Beeler said Roberts knowingly broke those rules when he changed his grant date without board approval. “Saying someone said it was OK doesn’t make it true,” the prosecutor said. “It makes no sense. His story makes no sense.”

Most of Neal’s argument focused on evidence that Davis had the authority to change Roberts’ grant. If that’s the case, no crime was committed, he said. Neal also used the discovery gaffe, reports the Recorder, to raise questions about another document — a list of stock option grants that might show that the board actually signed off on the change after all. But since the company never produced the list, Neal said, the government can’t prove Roberts’ grant was unauthorized. “It’s not [the government’s] fault they don’t have it,” Neal said of the list, “but they don’t have it.”

Last edited by top_admin : Oct 1st, 2008 at 05:34 PM.
WSJ_law_blog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Add Forum to Google Toolbar | Format Your Messages

Posting Rules

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mattel Gets Big Win in Bratz Trial, Damages TBD Later WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 Jul 17th, 2008 08:10 PM
SEC Accuses Former Pixar CFO of Backdating WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 Apr 29th, 2008 09:00 AM
Potter Trial: On Last Day, Defense Outshines Rowling WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 Apr 16th, 2008 08:30 PM
Putting money into HIS house Unregistered Divorce, Separation, Annulment 2 Jul 31st, 2007 08:02 AM
Neighbor putting water on our property Ed E Neighbor Law 1 May 30th, 2007 06:01 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:14 AM.


Powered by U.S. Legal Forms

Subscribe

Use of the Forums is subject to our Disclaimer which prohibits unapproved advertisements, solicitations or other commercial messages, and false, harassing or abusive statements. All postings reflect the views of the author but become the property of WORLD Law Direct.

Questions and information submitted in the Forums are assumed inquiries for general information and not legal advice.

Copyright 2000-2009 by WORLDLawDirect.com, Inc.