kgfree,
Charles mark has been doing alot of family law, divorce, land settlements, etc. This was his first big case in years. He was having a hard time remembering points, and did not do the proper prepping of witnesses. He is very intelligent and funny, but did not put together all the evidence we gave him to make a great case. Scott and I spent 5 years doing our own research, finding witnesses, putting together questions for him to ask, and he used little to none of it. In fact I personnally took notes for him during the trial. After he questioned a witness, he would ask me if there was anything I wanted to add, but would rarely use what evidence I had found. It was all very fustrating. He kept saying we had to make the case more simple, and that there was "no way they could out of it". Well they almost did. If he had put together the info we had found, it would have went better. For example, we gave him the flock book to use, and he didn't. He had forgotten to include some really important letters into evidence, and it was too late to add it. So this is what hawk is talking about. He did what he thought was his best. But many thought otherwise.
vic