John Goodman retrial - Live Stream --- Start date: 10/6/2014

Ann - Tx wrote:

Ann - Tx wrote:
Mainstream media sites that are "Live Streaming"  the John Goodman trial and/or tweeting:


http://www.wptv.com/john-goodman-trial
WPTV - West Palm Beach, FL   -- Includes  tweets by Brian Entin, Reporter - WPTV, to the right of the video screen.


http://www.wpbf.com/news/live-retrial-of-john-goodman/28985718
WPBF - West Palm Beach, FL  


http://www.sun-sentinel.com/fl-john-goodman-live-blog-htmlstory.html
Sun Sentinel - West Palm Beach, FL   - John Goodman Trial   -  Stream and "live" blog  (Sun Sentinel's reporters - "live" notes)


http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/goodmantrial/
Palm Beach Post - West Palm Beach, FL   ---   John Goodman Trial  - "live stream" from WPTV with "live blog" from Palm Beach Post reporters


https://twitter.com/wpbf_terri
Twitter:    WPBF - Terri Parker (Reporter)  ---   (One does not have to have a Twitter account to read Parker's tweets)


Non Mainstream Media Links:

Although this is not mainstream media, Wild About Trial is streaming the John Goodman trial "live" at this Link:

http://www.wildabouttrial.com/one_off/john-goodman-trial-live-stream/
WildAboutTrial - John Goodman Trial "Live Stream"

~~~~~~~~
If anyone knows of other sources that are streaming this trial or tweeting, please post the Link.   I will add to this list.  Thank you!

Bumping for the convenience of those following the John Goodman trial!

• Discussing the types of medications stored in this system (narcotics and non-narcotics)
  
• Showing pictures of the dispensing machines
  
• Inventory done at the close of every shift
  
• She was asked to run different searches (by patient name, nurse's name, dept. specific, etc.)
  
• Showing the witness one of those reports
  
• There was no medication dispensed for John Goodman on the day in question
  
• JG was assigned a unique ID # that is used on all related medical records
  
• Search was run for his ID # as well as a hospital-wide search (vs. specific machines) - no medication dispensed for JG by anyone in the hospital
  
• She also searched under the nurse's name (Betts); no medication dispensed
  

• Consulting engineer; Houston, TX
  
• BS in Electrical Engineering; emphasis on circuitry
  
• Has been employed for Car (?) Engineering since 1988
  
• Specializes in control and braking systems in cars
  
• Also analysis in car crashes (especially for cases claiming malfunction failures)
  
• His company charges $325/hour
  
• He went to Sugarland, TX to inspect the vehicle in Feb. 2014
  
• Photographed and measured the vehicle
  
• Looked at detail of braking system and throttle control system
  
• He reviewed service records for this vehicle
  
• He also located another car of the same make and model with the same features; did testing on that "exemplar" Bentley
  
• He reviewed other reports, depos, photos, etc., about other inspections of the car
  
• Has been working on this case since February
  
• Total bill was roughly $80K-$90K
  
• His opinion is that the braking and throttle control systems were working properly up until the crash
  
• The damage to the throttle body on the driver's side was from the crash
  
• He has photos to support his opinions; going through those now
  
• Did driving tests with the exemplar Bentley; has videos of these tests
  
• Photos and videos entered into evidence
  
• 14467 was the mileage on the car at the time of the crash
  
• At about 13500 miles, there was a 36-month service done on the car (1 month and 1000 miles prior to the crash); brakes were tested; no problems
  
• It was regularly serviced at dealerships
  
• Never an indication that there was ever a problem with the brakes, throttle control system, etc. based on service history
  
• JG never reported any problem with any of these systems over the time he had it
  
• Throttle control valve controls how much air gets into the engine
  
• ECMs had been removed (Elec. Control Modules); wiring harness was intact, as were electrical connectors
  
• Throttle closes automatically under loss of power
  
• Showing diagram of how the throttle system works
  
• The Bentley is a 12-cylinder car
  
• If the throttle system were stuck open, adding more air, a failsafe mode  would not have caused the car to accelerate; in fact, the car would be in a limited power situation; would feel like accelerator pedal is not operating properly
  
• Bentley is 500 horse power; can go 200 mph
  
• Throttle valve on the passenger side was closed; no damage
  
• On driver's side, cover of throttle body was damaged by crash
  
  (Had to step away for a moment)
  
  
• Even though the ECMs were gone, he was still able to measure the voltages on the throttle bodies (defense witness said it wasn't possible to test without the ECMs)
  
• Measured values with the throttle valve in various key positions; tested on Goodman's and on exemplar vehicle
  
• Goodman's driver side throttle body showed different values than the other ones; his opinion is that the "error" was caused by the crash damage
  
• One of the component shows damage (I think the defense expert said there wasn't any)
  
• Going through the photos
  
• For any damage to these system components he's showing, he's explaining exactly how the damage occurred because of the crash; the crash damage is what caused the error codes
  

• Discussing what types of things are tested through diagnostics
  
• There would have been a different error code if the engine had been running; the error code seen was for "key on, engine off" condition
  
• The codes generated could not have been generated when he last started the car before the accident; the mileage would not have matched (mileage is part of the error message)
  
• The car is designed to have enough power to deploy the airbags, no matter what - #1 priority; called "failsafe" mode
  
• Due to crash damage, as a 2ndary priority, it may not have enough power to write the data for later download; it may be too damaged at that point
  
• Even though there were items missing, he was able to do all the testing necessary
  
• Found exemplar vehicle in Dallas, TX by searching online
  
• He didn't do any destructive testing to get his results
  
• Showing pictures of exemplar car for comparison
  
• Even though exemplar car was one model year off (he's not sure if older or newer), it was functionally identical to Goodman's
  
• Did driving tests:  at 35 mph, throttle valve was open only 5%; at 45 mph, it's 11%; the conditions were: drive at speed, floor the accelerator and while holding it down, brake to a stop (this emulates a function that the car has automatically; shows that the brakes override acceleration)
  
• Even if the valve was stuck, it would still have stopped the car if the brakes were applied
  
• If there had been a problem with the throttle, when JG started the car at the last bar, it would have generated another error code with the mileage on the vehicle at that time; that did not happen
  
• Showing video now
  
• Tests show that flooring it and simultaneously braking takes little brake pressure to stop the car; the brakes override acceleration
  
• Tested driving at 35 mph and forcing throttle wide open by pulling on a cable; vehicle did not accelerate away, as soon as he took his foot off the gas, the car slowed down; went into failsafe mode; when he braked, the car stopped; error code generated was not the same as the one seen in JG's car
  
• Data from JG's car did not show any "engine on" throttle error codes
  
• The car could not have accelerated out of control as JG says
  
• The car was operating as designed on the night of the accident
  

• Attorney saying that witness was not truthful when he said he searched online for the exemplar
  
• Apparently witness knows someone who works at Bentley USA; attny implying that this person found the car, not the witness; witness says no; pulling his previous testimony
  
• Previous testimony says he asked the person to find the car for him
  
• Witness was first contacted for this case by a lawyer in NY who represents Bentley; not by the state of FL
  
• It was a law firm that protects Bentley in legal cases; they asked him to work on this case
  
• Attny showing witness emails that he copied to the Bentley lawyer
  
• Attny moves to put emails into evidence; state objects; sidebar; objection sustained
  
• Attny going through the bill/charges his company made for this case
  
• Bill was submitted to Bentley lawyers; not the state
  
• Who's your client?  Split between law firm and state
  
• The state of FL is not listed on the bill
  
• The state is paying $150/hr for his services; the balance of fees are paid by Bentley
  
• Attny says Car Eng. works predominantly on behalf of lawyers representing car manufacturers against product liability claims (civil)
  
• Attny says every opinion given is ruled in favor of car manufacturer; witness states he does an analysis and gives an opinion
  
• Bentley was paying his expenses
  
• He did not test the brake switch in JG's car; he said it's not a part of the foundation braking system
  
• Now discussing the premature release of the car and what components were missing when he inspected it
  
• Witness can't account for what happened to that car after it was released (my note:  neither can the defense's witness)
  
• He can't verify that nothing was done to those throttle control modules before he tested them
  

• Attny is asking if he relied on info from Bentley - yes
  
• Attny tries to bring up what the Bentley manual says - objection; hearsay; sustained
  
• Witness had questions about error codes he emailed to Bentley
  
• Questions about various error codes
  
• He relied on the answers that Bentley provided
  
• He had a fundamental understanding, but wanted further clarification and confirmation from Bentley
  
• Attny wants to take this further, but State objected; judge sustained
  
• A "bad" power down is a logical explanation as to why the mileage values were not accurate; info stored in RAM memory; loss of power causes loss of data before written out
  
• The crash shut down power which caused the mileage values not to be written
  
• Attny is trying to impeach him with previous testimony (sounds like the same testimony to me); they went too fast to capture
  
• No indication that there was anything wrong with the brake switch
  
• He believes within reasonable scientific certainty that the system was working correctly
  
• Attny questioning what he could not test because ECMs were gone
  
• He couldn't run the same tests he ran on the exemplar because the ECMs were gone
  
• I think he just said that indications are that JG's foot was not on the gas (but I could be wrong; this lawyer asks questions in a roundabout way; hard to follow sometimes)
  
• Witness is reviewing photos he took
  
• Attny going over the setup of test equipment this witness used
  (I can't hear the attny at all; he stepped away from mike for quite a while)
  
• Attny seems to be arguing that his test setup is invalid, but I can't hear the details
  
• Now they are reviewing the test drive videos
  
• Attny asking why testing wasn't done in closed conditions (vs. on a public street); witness:  no need
  
• He asked specific questions of Bentley about the brake override subsystem, but Bentley did not provide answer because that information is proprietary
  
• Now onto air bag control module; makes decision about deploying airbag; by measuring a crash pulse; monitors sensors that measure acceleration; if it decides to deploy, sends signal to deploy; it doesn't store data relative to the crash
  
• Attny referring to Bentley service manual; objection; sidebar; objection sustained
  
• Going over all the functions of the air bag control module (attny says crash detection; witness had said no)
  
• Witness did not have the equipment to download data from air bag control module
  
• He did not ask the module mfgr. for that equipment
  
• Witness says the "crash" data is relative to the air bag itself, not general crash info about the car
  
• Many sidebars during this section of testimony
  
• Witness confirms he did not have access to the ECMs
  

• Good practice to have a basic understanding, but to verify with the mfgr. (each mfgr. could implement things differently)
  
• Witness said at all previous depos, he gave defense team all the data he had at the time
  
• Never heard JG claim that the brakes failed; that is why he never tested the brake switch
  
• If he had gotten any info that there was an allegation that the brakes failed, he would have tested the switch
  
• Bentley manual was over 20,000 pages!
  
• Witness focused on the throttle control system
  
• An extreme force such as a crash would be needed to damage the control cover the way it was
  
• There are a lot of redundancies in the car (duplicate sensors for ECMs, accelerator, etc.)
  
• You'd have to have multiple component failures to produce the results of the accident due to mechanical failure; failsafe mode would prevent any of those major failures from causing the accident
  

• (every question attny has asked has been objected to and sustained)
  
• Prior to previous depo, attny asked for info; witness had a lot of data, so provided a subset in digital form
  
• In Sept., attny asked if the brake override system worked (another sidebar!)
  

• Sept. 6 in third day of deposition was the first time witness heard allegation of brake failure
  

• Asking again about the brakes; witness said there was no issue with the braking system
  

• Was a traffic engineer; also worked for police as a civilian
  
• Worked for traffic accident reconstructionist
  
• Teaches classes in photography and various types of forensics, including GPS; authorized to teach lawyers about such
  
• 1500 hours of specialized training
  
• Uses GPS to identify where photos are taken
  
• GPS is a hardware and software system that navigates around the world
  
• GPS uses latitude, longitude, and altitude
  
• Self-taught GPS; later took classes
  
• He owns several GPS devices
  
• Familiar with GPS systems in marine, aircraft, construction, land surveys (I may have missed one or two other areas)
  
• Explaining how he verified the GPS device is accurate
  
• Has testified in court (didn't say how many times)
  
• Teaches to bar assocs., crime scene techs assocs., private investigation assocs.
  
• Has authored articles on GPS
  
• First contacted in January of 2014
  
• He was given a set of points which he plots and puts into a presentation
  
• His rate is $150/hr.
  
• He has worked on this case for several days (doesn't know exact #)
  
• He was given materials to review:  Excel spreadsheet of GPS points recorded by sheriff's system; aerial photo of crash scene; (he's going too fast); vehicle homicide report; summaries of depositions (deputies and their locations)
  
• He has a paper copy of Excel spreadsheet; looks like about an inch thick
  
• Spreadsheet, has time/date, x (latitude), y (longitude); he also received this in electronic format
  
• He imported the data into a GPS program that would work with Google Earth
  
• The coordinates show up as little icons on the Google Earth maps; separated out several deputies data to reduce the amount of data displayed
  
• Can now track each deputy and where they were at any time (from the data given)
  
• A "way" point is a GPS location that is saved in the memory of the GPS device
  
• Can be user-entered
  
• GPS picks up movement
  
• Attny asked about his opinion of how accurate and precise the sheriff's system is; he starts giving specific data from Sheriff's office; Objection:  back-dooring hearsay - sidebar; sustained
  
• He individually verified the GPS location of various deputies
  
• She's asking him about specific deputies; going WAY too fast to capture
  
• 3 deputies were at convenience store (didn't hear time frame)
  
• (Goodman is standing in front of the camera)
  
• Showing a map of those 3 deputies and exactly where they were
  
• Yellow marks Deputy Saxon
  
• Red - Reiger?
  
• Green - Safford
  
• After leaving store, all the points marking the 3 deputies shows all three traveling close together southbound on 441
  
• Progression of turning left on Lake Worth Rd.
  
• Then stationary at intersection of crash (1:12 a.m.?). While stationary, GPS data captured every 10 minutes, or after a certain programmed distance, if object is moving
  
• (another sidebar)
  
• Looked at Det. Snelgrove's locations
  
• Shows path Det. took to take JG to hospital
  
• He went back to the accident scene
  
• Now looking at Det. Safford's movements along 120th Ave. South
  
• From 2:17-2:57, he was at the corner of intersection
  
• From 3:07 - 3:18 side of intersection
  
• 3:23 near south side of someone's property (started with M; was blocked by exhibit); where Pembleton was?
  
• 3:33 driveway of Kampsen property
  
• 3:39 South of Indian M___ Road (view of exhibit blocked) (he says it doesn't take 6 minutes to get here from previous location)
  
• 3:44 - directly in front of Kampsen's property; in the street, not in the driveway
  
• 3:55 - Driveway toward Pembleton location
  
• Witness drove around this whole area and made records of his GPS coordinates and compared to sheriff's data to independently verify
  

• Original bill was $2997.50 (April 17, 2014)
  
• Since then, he's spent about another 24 hours; around $3600
  
• Testimony - full day today, and had to wait for 2 days - another roughly $5K if he bills for days he had to wait
  
• Total:  at least $7600
  
• Tracking GPS requires phones to be GPS enabled
  
• Cell phone has to be on to track someone; if the battery is dead or phone turned off, can't track
  
• Received data on roughly 22-25 deputies; attny asking him to pull out his list of deputy names
  
• She read them all off; 22-23
  
• He did not do in-depth analysis of most of these deputies; I think he said he was asked to do analysis of 7 of them
  
• Now talking about a different officer that went to Goodman's property
  
• Another deputy went to the hospital first (2-3 a.m.; stayed there until 6-7 a.m.)
  
• Another deputy (Noel?) arrived on scene between 2-3; was stationary until 10-11 a.m. next day
  
• Deputy Rieger stayed in intersection from time he arrived until he left around 7-8
  
• Deputy Saxon arrived between 1-2 at intersection; except for 1 trip down 120th Ave. S, and back up (around 2:03 and 2:10), he never left the intersection until the next morning
  
• Everyone else stayed in one place (except maybe for one trip)
  
• Det. Snelgrove moved, stopped, moved, stopped, 9 locations
  
• Witness says Safford arrived on scene @ 1:22 a.m.; since he was stationary, he could have arrived + or -10 minutes (like at 1:12); that would be consistent with Det's testimony if the distance was less than the programmed distance parameter which would track more frequently
  
• She is pointing out that he can't narrow down/pinpoint the time frames
  
• She's pointing out discrepancies with his data (sidebar)
  
• Assuming GPS points should have been triggered every 10 minutes (stationary) or every 900 feet, there's a way point that appears to be missing
  
• Witness disputes 900 feet; he disagrees
  
• Witness:  would you like me to tell you what they told me?  Pros:  I'd love to, but she would object, so I can't  -  
  
• (I can barely hear her again)
  
• He doesn't have enough info to say what happened movement-wise within a 10 min. period
  
• She's pointing out there's a lot of variability in his data; can't pinpoint to less than a 10-min. window; can't tell how long deputies were where they were located; witness says correct; not enough data
  
• she presented the scenario that Snelgrove testified to; his info fits within the tolerances of what this data shows; now he's saying the arrival and departure times are not accurate
  

• Witness did not drive the dirt road at a high speed; he said he didn't go over 25 there because there's a canal right there with no guard rail  
  
• He said he reviewed Det. Snelgrove's report; objection, sustained
  
• Next few questions were objected to:  back-dooring hearsay; approach; objection sustained
  

• Specialty in automotive braking systems; works for both defense and state in various cases
  
• Reviewed materials he received
  
• Went to see Bentley on Oct. 2, 2014
  
• Number of parts were gone:  ECM, lots of things gone
  
• Did a visual exam
  
• He took the cap off the brake fluid to check the fluid; he moved some other stuff in the trunk, even though he was asked not to touch anything
  
• Pressing the brake sends a signal to the ECM
  
• He would have preferred to have the original ECMs to test the brake throttle override system
  
• You could put an exemplar ECM in JG's car to test; it would "put you close"
  
• He cannot state with reasonable scientific certainty if that system was working at time of accident because he couldn't run the test
  
• He arrived last Saturday from Arizona; has been waiting to testify; he will be charging for his wait time, as well as his time testifying
  
• $230/hr. for day-to-day work; $350/hr. for testifying; total amount to be billed will be about $40K
  

• first contacted on Aug. 5 of this year; saw vehicle on Oct. 2; State did not get a chance to talk to him until Oct. 20
  
• He received some of the data from other people's inspections
  
• Brake switch was still there, as were the wires; ECMs only part missing that would affect testing this feature
  
• He didn't test the switch; he was told not to
  
• He could have; it's not a destructive test
  
• He was told not to test the wires that would have gone to the ECM; he could have
  
• His tools were the same as the original defense witness that did the first inspection (Sadar?)
  
• Doesn't like to give opinion unless he's seen all the data
  
• Nothing in service records about brakes, ECM problems; brakes were inspected a month before the accident
  
• No brake switch diagnostic codes before or after the accident
  
• No indication of any problems with any computers
  
• Saw the two codes re: throttle system
  
• No indications of any problems with brake throttle override system
  
• No technical bulletins regarding brake problems
  
• He acknowledges the redundant systems
  
• He had no information there was any problem with the brakes
  

• Can't give an opinion because he couldn't test with the ECM
  

• Who told you you couldn't test?  My client.
  

• Some discussion about further testing requiring a court order; witness was not aware
  

Freckles wrote:Thanks so much CP.
I tuned in for several hours this afternoon but no one was posting much on twitter at any of the sites. The audio was horrible. Very boring to listen to the Bentley experts testify. I know more re a throttle than I have a need to know!!!

From your post above:
"...Even if the valve was stuck, it would still have stopped the car if the brakes were applied ..."

That is all I needed! The car would not have functioned  and/or it would be registered in car listing parts IF the throttle, brakes, etc., failed PRIOR to the accident. Did they put his regular mechanic on the stand?


This is priceless!
".... Witness did not drive the dirt road at a high speed; he said he didn't go over 25 there because there's a canal right there with no guard rail  ..."

Freckles wrote:This was a poor witness. Surprised the defense was this desperate:

" ....Defense calls  Patrick Donahue, Electrical Engineer


   Specialty in automotive braking systems; works for both defense and state in various cases
   Reviewed materials he received
  Went to see Bentley on Oct. 2, 2014

   Number of parts were gone:  ECM, lots of things gone
   Did a visual exam
   He took the cap off the brake fluid to check the fluid; he moved some other stuff in the trunk, even though he was asked not to touch anything
   Pressing the brake sends a signal to the ECM
   He would have preferred to have the original ECMs to test the brake throttle override system

   You could put an exemplar ECM in JG's car to test; it would "put you close"

   He cannot state with reasonable scientific certainty if that system was working at time of accident because he couldn't run the test

   He arrived last Saturday from Arizona; has been waiting to testify; he will be charging for his wait time, as well as his time testifying

   $230/hr. for day-to-day work; $350/hr. for testifying; total amount to be billed will be about $40K....."

Weeziethm wrote:CP, thank you for your outstanding transcript summaries from Saturday... Agree it is difficult to hear and reporters don't pick up half if what is covered.
It appears obvious that the defense is desperate and spending loads of money to try and create a story which will acquit their client. Thou doth protest too much comes to mind snd I think it will backfire. IMO this case us a slam dunk for the state and I hope the Wilson's get justice

Ann - Tx wrote:
Mainstream media sites that are "Live Streaming"  the John Goodman trial and/or tweeting:


http://www.wptv.com/john-goodman-trial
WPTV - West Palm Beach, FL   -- Includes  tweets by Brian Entin, Reporter - WPTV, to the right of the video screen.


http://www.wpbf.com/news/live-retrial-of-john-goodman/28985718
WPBF - West Palm Beach, FL  


http://www.sun-sentinel.com/fl-john-goodman-live-blog-htmlstory.html
Sun Sentinel - West Palm Beach, FL   - John Goodman Trial   -  Stream and "live" blog  (Sun Sentinel's reporters - "live" notes)


http://www.mypalmbeachpost.com/goodmantrial/
Palm Beach Post - West Palm Beach, FL   ---   John Goodman Trial  - "live stream" from WPTV with "live blog" from Palm Beach Post reporters


https://twitter.com/wpbf_terri
Twitter:    WPBF - Terri Parker (Reporter)  ---   (One does not have to have a Twitter account to read Parker's tweets)


Non Mainstream Media Links:

Although this is not mainstream media, Wild About Trial is streaming the John Goodman trial "live" at this Link:

http://www.wildabouttrial.com/one_off/john-goodman-trial-live-stream/
WildAboutTrial - John Goodman Trial "Live Stream"

~~~~~~~~
If anyone knows of other sources that are streaming this trial or tweeting, please post the Link.   I will add to this list.  Thank you!

• Lawyers arguing about next witness
  
• Next witness will say JG was not wearing a seatbelt
  
• Previous witnesses (JG himself?) said he was wearing one; judge asking why they would present evidence to the contrary?
  
• State saying witness based his opinion on a picture
  
• Jury entering the courtroom
  

• He does accident analysis; accident reconstruction (90% of his job)
  
• Going over his credentials and how he got licensed
  
• He's worked on over 700 reconstructions; has testified for both sides (pros. and defense)
  
• Also works on product liablity issues/cases
  
• He analyzes the accident scene; even if cars have been removed, he looks at debris, skid marks, etc.
  
• Current bill - ~$38K; his company bills at $285/hr (he's a full-time employee)
  
• Was called the day after the accident; went to scene
  
• Starts by photographing scene; starts wide and moves closer in
  
• He saw no evidence that showed the path the Hyundai took
  
• Took about 90 photos of the entire scene (~70 of the intersection)
  
• Going through photos; showing markings he made at the scene
  
• The tire marks show him the travel of the vehicle (Bentley)
  
• He's pointing out gouges in roadway/grass, fluid marks, tire marks, ruts, etc.
  
• He uses survey tools to map out a scene; tool called Total Station
  
• Did inspections of both vehicles in Aug. 2010 at impound lot
  
• Both vehicles had been exposed to the environment (not covered)
  
• Photographed and measured both vehicles
  
• The Hyundai was "banana'ed"; he said that's the technical term
  
• Took about 90 photos of each vehicle
  
• Going over pictures, pointing out damage
  
• Both cars were about the same length; the Bentley is wider and outweighs the Hyundai by quite a bit
  
• This was a T-bone accident; 90 degree collision
  
• Two methods of doing reconstruction:  "energy" method, and conservation of linear momentum method
  
• The Hyundai was so crushed that he couldn't use the crush damage needed for doing energy method
  
• Discussing principle direction of force
  
• The Bentley could not have erased furrows created by the Hyundai
  

• Did not see any evidence of pre-impact braking
  
• There was no way JG had stopped at the stop sign (my comment:  why would their expert witness contradict their client?  That helps how?)
  
• He determined the speed of the Bentley to be between 49-58 mph
  
• Hyundai was going between 46-54
  
• Discussing two impacts
  
• Showing animation
  
• Says the Bentley did not push the car into the canal (he says the cars had separated before that)
  
• If the Bentley had pushed the Hyundai all the way to the canal, when the Hyundai went over into the canal, the Bentley would have followed and ended up in the canal
  

• Total bill will be around $40K, including today's testimony
  
• Estimates up to $5K to get the 3D animation done (he didn't pay for it)
  
• Animation only completed and finalized in the past month
  
• Bentley is significantly heavier than most cars
  
• Attny asks if the Bentley should have beat the Hyundai to the canal; asks witness if he remembers saying that previously?
  
• Witness said that would have happened had there not been a secondary impact
  
• Had Hyundai at 46 mph; 41 post-impact; witness saying the direction is changing due to accident, so it's not just the speed itself
  
• He confirmed that the Bentley was speeding (slowest it was going was 49); speed limit was 35; highest he had Bentley going at 58 mph
  

• Did you use similar weights in testimony?  Yes
  

• State is presenting statements made by JG previously (in previous trial, but they can't say that); the lawyers are role-playing the statements
  
• JG said he tried to apply the brakes; he slowed before the stop sign...
  

CuriousPortlander wrote:True to my username, I was curious   about how John Goodman appeared while testifying during the previous trial, compared to this one.  I've put both videos here, so you can see for yourself.

I'm interested to hear what you all think of his "speech impediment" for each.  Does one appear to be more pronounced than the other?

One Wonders wrote:

CuriousPortlander wrote:True to my username, I was curious   about how John Goodman appeared while testifying during the previous trial, compared to this one.  I've put both videos here, so you can see for yourself.

I'm interested to hear what you all think of his "speech impediment" for each.  Does one appear to be more pronounced than the other?

Snipped By Me 4 Space.
It seems to me he does have this affliction but I do think he played it up just a bit more on this trial.
I have a question though. How in the world has he baffoned his way in the business world. If I had to listen to him fumbling his way around words like these two trials I'd cut him off. I know that sounds really mean and maybe I just don't like him cuz I can't imagine being mean to someone else like that.