For those worried about Jon taking the stand, watch this video...
Note that last year he wrote a book called "Winners Never Cheat"...
Do you really think the Banks' lawyers want to challenge his integrity on the stand???
Someone else made the point that the defense may be trying to bait Huntsman's counsel into putting him on the stand. This could be for making their appeal stronger, or hoping they can show some level of discredit to the Huntsman family. At this point, they appear to have nothing to lose in trying.
Someone stated they opened pandora's box to allow our counsel to introduce the fact that the Huntsman's charity owns the largest stake of HUN. The banks may be planning to use that as a way of whining that they could never receive a fair trial due to this. Even though, they were specifically instructed that if they talked about the $15MM fee, that Huntsman's counsel was free to introduce the charities.
I truly feel the banks are attempting to lose the battle to win the war.
I am concerned with putting Huntsman Sr. up there. Peter Huntsman did his job, no need to put up another Huntsman to show that they are acting with integrity.
Continue on with the rest of the DB/CS execs and let the banks tighten their own noose. I am confident, however, that Huntsman's counsel has already worked this topic across every possible angle and came to the proper conclusion, whatever it ends up being.
you do not feel banks want jon up there to discredit black personally and his testimony against the banks (remember black committed to do that in the HUN-HEX settlement?). who better to do it?
I don't think that anyone can impeach his integrity. However having been in the chair a number of times at trials and depositions, you often get a witness to say something that you can use. He is already viewed by the jury as a Saint as you put it. I don't think you attack that, just go fishing, he might say something that leans you to thinking that maybe the business climate wasn't good or that he got some bad advice. I don't think this will work, but in the banks case, he's already 10.0 with the jury so what can it hurt. I'd fight to get him up there, I hope that if they do he comes off the stand as 15.0 which is the danger but it's worth the risk if their case is weak.
NY lawyers will say and do anything for a buck. No one is perfict but compared to the opposition, he is a saint.
Everyone knows that the defense arguments are the same arguments as a 6 yr old. Their arguments are just plain dumb. What ever they end paying is still a win. If each defendant paid 3 billion, they still would be ahead of the game. At the time the deal would have closed, the defendants would have to take a 3 1/2 billion negative mark.
These old guys are out of touch. Who do you think is to blame for the 10% unemployment, the destruction of the dollar, the blow up of the mortgage mess, the insatiable appetite of private equity leveraging up america and destroying america business.
Who does the defense think they are fooling.