Hi everyone... I am going to disagree with everyone here a little bit. This is just my opinion and I mean no disrespect, so please be gentle with me. I think this comes from my "hippie" days (in the 90's lol), about questioning authority, so please forgive me here.
While I do think that he and CA both went into these depos with a lot of attitude, and I agree that the attorney was being nice, I have to agree with CA and GA somewhat because I do not understand some of the questions being asked. I too don't see the relevance in some of these things, and I didn't see a need to keep pushing for answers when they clearly stated "I don't know". To me, that is a problem, and I think the attorneys were somewhat "gloating" which is unprofessional and wrong.
I am not saying I agree with or support the A's, but I can see issues on both sides with the depos today. I think I also still somewhat sympathize with them for their loss. Now here is a statement that will really get me in trouble: I DO think this lawsuit is frivolous. I think ZG should PROVE that she has been denied jobs, housing, etc. as a direct result of the A's actions and not something else.
If ZG has a poor job history, or any other issues, can she accurately say that her own actions aren't to blame? I don't really know, so I am not accusing or anything... just throwing it out there. On my soapbox for two seconds, I think there are a lot of frivolous lawsuits in this country, and I somewhat think that ZG is among all the others trying to make a quick buck over this tragedy, UNLESS she can PROVE the results. (off sopabox)
I am also concerned because the attorneys basically admitted that they are concerned with the criminal murder case as well. Aren't they hired by ZG? They shouldn't have any interest in the murder case at all. Can someone with legal knowledge answer if this is double jeopardy or in any way reflects on the criminal suit? I am reminded of the civil case against OJ, and I am wondering if these attorneys plan on filing something of that nature.