No sooner was the year over when they were checking me out to see if I had wrote anything on a particular Paxil birth defect case that they successfully argued. [Fig 1]
Fig 1
What's up K&S, is something niggling at you?
What possible information do you think I have that you don't have?
Great question huh? If you, as [ahem] respected attorneys had information detrimental to your defendant you'd still be obliged to hand it over, wouldn't you?
I'm left wondering who are the bad guys here, is it GSK or is it their attorneys King & Spalding?
That's a question I will ask soon.
I've wrote a 16 page blog post entitled, "Ryan, Glaxo's Non-Viable Fetus". I've been sitting on it for some time out of respect for the mother concerned.
You see I, just like King & Spalding, know how to play the game. I know the mechanics of the waiting game GSK and their lawyers play. I know that litigation isn't about justice, it's just about getting the best deal for all concerned. I know that neither GSK or King & Spalding want this particular case to go to trial again and I know they will use delay tactics to their advantage to grind the plaintiff down. I think this woman has been through quite enough but she remains strong.
As for the information I hold and how I obtained it... well, that's a story just waiting to be told.
I can wait.
Meantime, this is for King & Spalding. (Not so much of a mystery girl anymore, eh guys?)
You know how to contact me.
Bob Fiddaman
No comments: