If the jury is looking at it through the plaintiff's rose-colored glasses, then the emotional testimony will have an impact and it will drive damages in favor of the plaintiff. But if [Lanier] hasn't demonstrated his case, he's not going to get these jurors.

The biggest thing is a lot of it was dealt with in the grand jury testimony. ... So I don't know how much you can talk about from there anyway. I guess I have to sit back, wait and see, but like I said, I'm not really worried about it.

The first case has a lot of impact on what comes afterward.

Merck is trying to send a very strong signal out there: 'Don't think you're going to toss you're hat in the litigation game and wait a couple months and we're going to toss you some money,' ... They're saying, 'If you're going to play the litigation game, you better be serious.'

I lean toward it's not (defamation). Some of it is opinion. (In) some parts of the state, voting with liberal Democrats is not a bad thing at all.

Frankly, their demeanor is going to mean more than what they say.