Forget the theatrics of the opening statement. Most cases are won or lost before trial.
As trial lawyers (I was an Assistant United States Attorney in Washington, DC from 1990-1994), we like to think its going to turn on our ability to charm the jury; command with the eloquence of Daniel Webster and folksiness of a young Abraham Lincoln (sans beard) appearing in a small-town courthouse somewhere in rural Illinois with a quote or two from the Bible and a story at the ready. Nope. Most cases turn on a legal ruling pre-trial. This case is no different.
Over the strenuous objections of Mr. Rajaratnam’s attorney John Dowd, Judge Howell allowed the prosecution to introduce 2700 taped conversations. Those conversations will put Mr. Rajaratnam in the center of a web of corporate corruption and arrogance that the jurors will not be able to wash from their minds. He will more than likely be found guilty of something.
Mr. Dowd and his cast of subordinates (when you represent a billionaire facing prison you can’t possibly bill enough hours) will try mightily to argue the technicalities of what constitutes criminal insider trading — but my money is on the government and its young team of prosecutors.