TITLE: STATE OF MINNESOTA AND BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF MINNESOTA,
PLAINTIFFS,
 

V.
 

PHILIP MORRIS, INC., ET. AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

TOPIC: TRIAL TRANSCRIPT

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

DOCKET-NUMBER: C1-94-8565

VENUE: Minnesota District Court, Second Judicial District, Ramsey County.

YEAR: March 12, 1998

JUDGE: Hon. Judge Kenneth J. Fitzpatrick, Chief Judge
 

THE CLERK: All rise. Ramsey County District Court is again in session, the Honorable Kenneth J. Fitzpatrick now presiding.

(Jury enters the courtroom.)

THE CLERK: Please be seated.

THE COURT: Good morning.

(Collective "Good morning.")

THE COURT: Counsel, would you approach, please.

THE COURT: Counsel.

MS. WALBURN: Thank you, Your Honor.

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

(Collective "Good morning.")

CHERYL L. PERRY called as a witness, being previously sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

BY MS. WALBURN:

Q. Good morning, Professor Perry.

A. Good morning.

Q. Back on Tuesday, Mr. Weber was listing a number of factors on the easel and asking you whether those factors related to the onset of smoking. Do you recall that?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Would you turn in the Surgeon General's report of 1994 to the table of contents, and could you tell us how many of the factors that were discussed on Tuesday have a separate chapter written about them in the 1994 Surgeon General's report.

A. There is only one, one of the factors.

Q. And which factor is that?

A. Tobacco advertising and promotional activities, chapter five.

Q. What's the significance of that?

A. That we thought that was important enough to warrant its own chapter.

Q. And does advertising and promotional activities affect some of the other factors that Mr. Weber was asking you about on Tuesday?

A. Yes, they do. Advertising and promotional activities can affect peers, the peer group, it can affect their perceptions of how normative smoking is, that is, how many people smoke, and it increases the attractiveness and function of smoking.

Q. Mr. Weber also asked you a number of questions about risk-taking. Based on your review of the tobacco company internal documents, were the tobacco companies aware that youth are risk- takers?

A. Yes, they were.

Q. Would you turn in book three to Exhibit 12989. This is a 1989 R. J. Reynolds document which you discussed in your direct testimony labeled "CAMEL Y&R ORIENTATION." Would you turn to page Bates numbers 1728, and do you see on this page, this page states "Personal Quality Wants," and it lists a number of attributes. Is "Risk Taker" one of those attributes listed on this page?

*2 A. Yes, it is.

Q. Would you turn then to page 1829 of the same document. At the very top of the page, it's obscured in part by the stamp, but if you go up to the top of the page, it states "CAMEL 1990 OVERVIEW, Managing The Brand Personality," and the document states, "What makes the 'Brand Personality' ownable to Camel is the utilization of the 'Smooth Character' himself, Joe Camel.

"Joe 'The Ultimate Smooth Character' Camel is:"

And then if you go down to the bullet points, "Into challenges and likes to take risks."

What's the significance of that?

A. That RJR recognized that under-age youth take risks, and they exploited that through the Joe Camel character.

Q. And the last bullet point states "Independent, yet admired and respected by peers."

A. Yes. RJR recognizes that that's part of the developmental tasks of adolescence and exploited that through the Joe Camel character.

Q. Mr. Weber also referenced part of the preface of the 1994 Surgeon General's report. Could you turn to that preface, please. And I'd first like to read a couple of the paragraphs that preceded the paragraph referenced a couple of days ago, starting in the first paragraph with the second-to-last sentence. "These current and future smokers are new recruits in the continuing epidemic of disease, disability, and death attributable to tobacco use. When young people no longer want to smoke, the epidemic itself will die.

"This report of the Surgeon General, Preventing Tobacco Use Among Young People, delineates the problem in no uncertain terms. The direct effects of tobacco use on the health of young people have been greatly underestimated. The long-term effects are, of course, well established. The addictive nature of tobacco use is also well known, but it is perhaps less appreciated that early addiction is the chief mechanism for renewing the pool of smokers. Most people who are going to smoke are hooked by the time they are 20 years old.

"Young people face enormous pressures to smoke. The tobacco industry devotes an annual budget of nearly 4 billion dollars to advertising and promoting cigarettes. As this report so well describes, there has been a continuing shift from advertising to promotion, largely because of banning cigarette ads from broadcast media. The effect of the ban is dubious, however, since the use of promotional materials, the sponsoring of sports events, and the use of logos in nontraditional venues may actually be more effective in reaching target audiences. Clearly, young people are being indoctrinated with tobacco promotion at a susceptible time in their lives."

Do you agree with those statements of the Surgeon General in 1994?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. The Surgeon General here mentions a number of nearly four billion dollars a year spent in advertising and promoting cigarettes; is that correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Do you know what has happened to that number since the Surgeon General's report was written?

*3 A. Yes, it's increased since the time of the Surgeon General's report.

Q. And you were asked some questions about the correlation between the amount of money spent on advertising and promotion and trends in smoking, and you testified that at the same time that advertising and promotion dollars were increasing, there were efforts at tobacco control and youth prevention. Do you recall that?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Can one purpose of advertising and promotion be to stop or slow a decline in sales?

MR. WEBER: Objection, Your Honor, it's a leading question.

THE COURT: It is leading.

Q. Can advertising and promotion serve different purposes?

A. Yes. Advertising and promotion can increase the market or it can slow a decreasing market. So if a market is decreasing, it can serve to slow it down, slow down that decrease.

Q. Would you turn in the defense exhibits to tab 19, Exhibit AM000596, and this is the University of Michigan Monitoring the Future Survey, 1997. Do you recall discussing this document with Mr. Weber?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Would you turn to the press release that is about three pages in to the document, and in the third paragraph -- this is quoting Lloyd Johnston, one of the University of Michigan researchers, and Mr. Johnson states, "'Cigarette smoking constitutes the largest threat to the health and longevity of this generation of young Americans,' states Johnston, 'which makes the substantial increases in their smoking rates over the past five or six years of particular concern."'

Based on this document and the numbers in this document, what's happened to the smoking rates in the last five or six years?

A. The smoking rates among under-age teens has gone up.

Q. And would you turn to the next page of the document. In the third full paragraph that starts "Finally, it should be kept in mind...," the document states, "Finally, it should be kept in mind that these surveys cover only those young people who remain in school. Based on these several facts, it is hard to escape the conclusion that an exceptional number of these young people are going to be regular smokers by the time they become young adults, and it is estimated that as many as a third of those who do become chronic smokers will die prematurely from the ravages eventually brought on by their smoking."

What's the significance of that statement?

A. That adolescents who smoke, a large percentage of them will die prematurely from smoking-related diseases that they -- that -- that began with their smoking during their under-age teen years.

MR. WEBER: Your Honor, I -- I'd object and move to strike the medical testimony. This is not a medical witness.

THE COURT: Okay. Well I think she can quote the Surgeon General's report.

Q. Would you turn in volume two of your exhibits, please, to Exhibit 26063, and this is the article which Caroline Schooler and several other authors?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Would you turn in this to page 1219. In the middle column under the section "Mail Distribution of Promotions" --

*4 A. Yes.

Q. -- these researchers state, "Seventeen percent of participants reported having received mailings such as surveys, coupons, free gifts, product catalogs, or free cigarettes addressed to themselves from cigarette companies."

What's the significance of that statement?

A. That 17 percent, nearly one in five, seventh graders, that's 12-13 years old, had received mailings from tobacco companies that were addressed to them, to them, and they're 12-13 years old.

Q. And would you turn now to another exhibit used by Mr. Weber, tab five of your book, Exhibit AT000507, and this is a Federal Register publication by the Food and Drug Administration?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. What is the FDA reporting on in this publication?

A. They're focus --

They're reporting on focus groups' discussions that they conducted with under-age teens about new warning labels that might be put on cigarettes that might be more appropriate for under-age teens.

Q. And would you look on the first page to the third column under the section "Assumptions and Basic Perceptions of Adolescent Smoking," and in the second paragraph there toward the end, in the last sentence, the FDA states that "Nonsmokers or infrequent smokers indicated that they felt most people could stop smoking at any time. The teens who said they were addicted to smoking made it clear that, for them, smoking was no longer a matter of choice but a matter of need."

What's the significance of that statement?

A. That teens themselves can become addicted to smoking, and they themselves recognize that.

Q. And would you turn in this FDA report to page 61674. In the middle column under paragraph number three, the FDA states that "Many participants expressed the belief that the Surgeon General's warnings were difficult to understand. They did not know what effect carbon monoxide would have on them, for example, and many participants did not know what emphysema was."

What's the significance of that statement?

A. Well this is just further evidence that young people, under-age teens, really can't understand the consequences of smoking.

Q. And would you turn to the proposed warning labels in this document, and would you read the first two warning labels that were being discussed in these focus groups.

A. Yes. The first one says, "About 1 out of 3 kids who become smokers will die from their smoking." And the second one says, "About 1 out of 3 kids who become smokers will die from their smoking."

Q. Counsel asked you a number of questions about cartoon characters used for other products or services. Do you know whether the products or services promoted by the following characters killed about one out of three of the kids who used the products or services:

Garfield the Cat?

MR. WEBER: I'd object to the argumentative nature of the question, use of the word "killed," Your Honor.

THE COURT: You'll have to rephrase it, counsel.

BY MS. WALBURN:

*5 Q. Do you know whether the products or services promoted by the following characters were reported to cause the death of one out of three of the people who use those products or services:

Garfield the Cat?

A. No.

Q. Snoopy?

A. No.

Q. The Michelin Man?

A. No.

Q. The Pink Panther?

A. No.

Q. The Jetsons?

A. No.

MS. WALBURN: Thank you. I have no further questions.

THE COURT: You may step down.

MR. WEBER: I just have a very few, if I might, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Well is it something new? We haven't covered anything new that I see there. We aren't going to just go over it again.

MR. WEBER: That's a fair point, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. You may step down.

THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honor.

(Witness excused.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, we're going to move to videotape depositions now. I think it may take just a couple minutes to make sure we're set up for that.

THE COURT: You want to --

MR. CIRESI: Maybe a short break.

THE COURT: -- recess? Should we do that?

Okay. Let's take a very short recess. Don't go too far.

THE CLERK: Court stands in recess.

(Recess taken.)

THE CLERK: All rise. Court is again in session.

(Jury enters the courtroom.)

THE CLERK: Please be seated.

THE COURT: Counsel.

MR. CIRESI: Thank you, Your Honor. The first videotape will be of Dr. Murray Senkus, the former director of scientific affairs for RJR, calling pursuant to Rule 611(c).

THE COURT: You may want to tell the jury what 611(c) is, counsel.

MR. CIRESI: Yes, Your Honor. It's --

We're calling for adverse examination, just as we called some of the live witnesses of the defendants, such as Mr. Bible and Mr. Schindler, Mr. Merryman and Dr. Glenn.

THE COURT: Thank you.

(Videotape played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, Exhibit -- Trial Exhibit 3305 will be referred to by Dr. Senkus in the deposition as Exhibit 1054, so this is Exhibit 3305, and we would offer that exhibit.

MR. BIERSTEKER: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Court will receive 3305.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I would interpose an objection to the question appearing on page 131, lines 17 through 18, as being vague and ambiguous.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled. You may answer.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I have the same objection to the next question at page 131, lines 23 through 25.

THE COURT: Okay. That question may be asked and the answer given.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I have an objection to the next question on page 132, lines 14 through 16, as calling for a legal conclusion.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

MR. BIERSTEKER: And I think, then, the next question I had the same objection to, that's on page 132, lines 21 through 23, Your Honor.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

MR. BIERSTEKER: And before I sit down, then, I have an objection to the next question, which appears on page 133, lines three through five, on the form of the question as vague and ambiguous.

*6 THE COURT: You may answer that.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I object to the form of the question appearing at page 134, lines one through five, as being vague and ambiguous.

THE COURT: Okay. You may answer that question.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Object to this question that started to be played, it appears at page 135, lines 18 through 22 of the transcript of the deposition, because it assumes facts not in evidence, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: I have an objection, Your Honor, to the next question appearing at page 136, lines eight through nine of the transcript, on the grounds that it's an argumentative question.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: I have an objection, Your Honor, to the question at page 136, lines 18 through 20, on the grounds that it assumes facts not in evidence.

THE COURT: Okay. The objection is sustained.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, the next exhibit is identified in the transcript as 1082, it has previously been marked and introduced into evidence in the case as 12756. It was introduced during Mr. Schindler's testimony. 12756.

THE COURT: All right, counsel.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I'd object to the question appearing on page 143 of the transcripts, lines 13 to 14, on the grounds that it's compound.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I would object to the question appearing on page 144 in the transcript, lines eight through 11, on the grounds that it's asked and answered and argumentative.

THE COURT: You may --

Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I have several objections to the next question at page 147, lines 13 through 17, that it lacks foundation and is vague and ambiguous.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I'd object to the compound nature of the question appearing at transcript page 148 through -- lines four through eleven.

THE COURT: Objection sustained.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I object to the next question at page 149 of the transcript, lines eight through 13, as being argumentative.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. BIERSTEKER: I have the same objection, Your Honor, to the next question, page 149 to 150, lines 22 through 25 on 149, and line one on 150.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I believe the next question, page 150, lines eight through 11, is argumentative.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Same objection, Your Honor, to the question appearing at page 150 of the transcript, lines 17 to 24.

*7 THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Object to the compound nature of the question on page 153 of the transcript, lines seven through 12, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Sustained.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Objection to the next question, Your Honor, page 153, lines 20 and 21 of the transcript, as having been asked and answered.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Objection to the speculative and argumentative nature of the question appearing at page 154, lines eight through 12 of the transcript, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, there are a series of questions on pages 159 through 164 of the transcript where Dr. Senkus is being questioned concerning a Philip Morris document about which he lacked personal knowledge, and I would object to those questions.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, Deposition Exhibit 1083 is Trial Exhibit 2549. 2549.

THE COURT: All right, counsel.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Object to the next question, Your Honor, on page 170 of the transcript, lines 16 through 17, as having been asked and answered.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I object to the question starting on the page 170, line 25, and continuing to page 171, line three, as having been asked and answered.

THE COURT: Sustained.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, the question in the transcript beginning at line 21 on page 171 and continuing through page 177 concerns a Philip Morris document that is beyond the scope of the personal knowledge of the witness. I object on that grounds.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, the exhibit which will be referred to in the deposition as 1084 is Trial Exhibit 2546, 2546, and it has already been admitted.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: I object to the next question, Your Honor, at page 175 of the transcript, lines 14 through 17, as assuming facts not in evidence.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: I also object to the next question, Your Honor, at page 175, lines 22 through 24, as seeking an improper opinion.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I object to the next question, page 177 of the transcript, lines 10 through 14, as calling for a legal conclusion.

THE COURT: Overruled. You may answer that.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Object on the same grounds, the question calls for a legal conclusion, to the question appearing at page 178, lines five through seven of the transcript, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

*8 MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, I object to the next question as being already asked and answered, that's at page 178 of the transcript, lines 20 through 23.

THE COURT: Sustained.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BIERSTEKER: Your Honor, for the record, Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1082, as Mr. Ciresi said earlier, is Trial Exhibit 12756.

THE COURT: All right, counsel.

MR. CIRESI: Yes, that's correct, Your Honor. We're now back to Mr. O'Fallon asking questions.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

THE COURT: Counsel, I'm afraid I just lost the --

MR. CIRESI: I misspoke. We designated this, Your Honor. It's still --

We're at page 336, it's the plaintiffs' designation, still Mr. Crist asking the questions.

THE COURT: And what line are you on?

MR. CIRESI: It starts at page 336, line four, Your Honor. Actually line two.

MR. BIERSTEKER: I think the confusion, Your Honor, was that Mr. Ciresi said that it was Mr. O'Fallon's questioning, and in fact it was still Mr. Crist continuing.

THE COURT: It was confusing.

MR. CIRESI: It's in -- it's in volume two, Your Honor.

THE COURT: I know where it's at, --

MR. CIRESI: Okay.

THE COURT: -- but it's not Mr. O'Fallon questioning; correct?

MR. CIRESI: It is our designation and Mr. Crist still asking the questions.

THE COURT: All right, fine. I'm with you.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, excuse me, I'm going to object, this is the defendants' designation and it's irrelevant, immaterial.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. CIRESI: It goes down to line two at page 367, and then Mr. O'Fallon picks up the questioning again on behalf of the plaintiffs.

THE COURT: Sustained.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: That completes Mr. Senkus's deposition, Your Honor.

THE COURT: We'll recess for lunch, reconvene at 1:30.

THE CLERK: Court stands in recess, to reconvene at 1:30.

(Recess taken.)
 

THE CLERK: All rise. Court is again in session.

(Jury enters the courtroom.)

THE CLERK: Please be seated.

THE COURT: Counsel.

MR. CIRESI: Thank you, Your Honor. The plaintiffs will next call, again by video deposition and again pursuant to Rule 611, Robert Sanford, who at the time he retired in 1985 was vice- president of products and process development at Brown & Williamson.

(Videotape played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, the next deposition is of Byron F. Price, again it's pursuant to Rule 611, that's P-r-i-c-e, Byron Price, and at the time he left American in 1995, his last job was research director, as of March 1, 1995.

(Videotape played.)

MR. BERNICK: Your Honor, could we have a brief side-bar on this, this exchange?

THE REPORTER: Can I have a citation, please, citation to the transcript?

MR. BERNICK: This is at page 45, line 11.

THE COURT: Mr. Bernick.

MR. BERNICK: Yes. As we indicated, Your Honor, we have certain objections that will appear in the -- in the tape that we are not standing on in connection with this testimony, so although objections appear in the tape, we are not lodging those objections to the testimony being offered.

THE COURT: All right. Let's proceed.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, Exhibit 1128 is Trial Exhibit 3379, and we would offer 3379.

MR. BERNICK: Your Honor, we object, this is a newspaper article, it's hearsay. If they want to play the portion of the testimony that relates to statements made by the company, we have no objection to that, but we have an objection to the article coming in because it's hearsay.

MR. CIRESI: It's offered under 901(6) for its authentication, and 801(d)(2), it's an admission, they are citing the president of American, Mr. Walker, and it's quoted within the article.

MR. BERNICK: Your Honor, only that portion that contains the quotation would be an admission and we have no objection to that. Our objection is to the balance of the article, which is hearsay.

THE COURT: Sure wish I could read it.

MR. BERNICK: I think, Your Honor, the witness does read from the relevant portions -- or is asked about the relevant portions of it, so the jury will be able to hear the statement that has been made.

THE COURT: I understand that, but --

*2 MR. BERNICK: I'm sorry.

THE COURT: -- I'd still like to read it, but the print is so bad it's hard.

Court will receive 3379.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: The next exhibit, Your Honor, is Deposition Exhibit 1129, and it is Trial Exhibit 3380, and we offer 3380.

MR. BERNICK: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Court will receive 3380.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. BERNICK: Your Honor, we'd object to the next question which appears at page 102, line one, as argumentative.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: That concludes that deposition, Your Honor.

The next deposition is of David Wilson, who is the corporate secretary for B.A.T Industries P.L.C., David Wilson, and again we'd call him pursuant to Rule 611.

MR. BERNICK: Your Honor, before we start, before we commence that, Your Honor asked for some correspondence relating to the last deposition, I can tender that up to the court now.

MR. CIRESI: Do you have copies, counsel?

MR. BERNICK: It's the February 17th letter.

(Document handed to the court.)

(Videotape played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, the Deposition Exhibit 621 is Trial Exhibit 3034, and we offer 3034.

MR. CORRIGAN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Court will receive 3034.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, the next exhibit is referenced in the transcript as 281, it is Trial Exhibit 2690.

MR. CORRIGAN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Court will receive 2690.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, the next exhibit in the transcript is 285, and that is being introduced as Trial Exhibit No. 2694, 2694.

MR. CORRIGAN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Court will receive 2694.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: The next exhibit, Your Honor, is 622 in the transcript, and that will be Trial Exhibit 3035, 3035, and we'd offer it.

MR. CORRIGAN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Court will receive 3035.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, at that point there's an objection which I think we need to deal with at side-bar.

THE COURT: We'll need to take a short recess at this time.

THE CLERK: Court stands in recess.

(Recess taken.)

THE CLERK: All rise. Court is again in session.

(Jury enters the courtroom.)

THE CLERK: Please be seated.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, the next exhibit is referenced in the tape as Exhibit 317, and it is Trial Exhibit 2726, and we would offer that, Your Honor.

MR. CORRIGAN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Court will receive 2726.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, the next exhibit referenced in the transcript is Exhibit 623, and that will be admitted as Trial Exhibit 3036, 3036.

MR. CORRIGAN: No objection, Your Honor.

*3 THE COURT: Court will receive 3036.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: Your Honor, the next exhibit is referenced in the transcript tape as 624, and it is being introduced as Exhibit 3037, Trial Exhibit 3037.

MR. CORRIGAN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Court will receive 3037.

(Videotape continued to be played.)

MR. CIRESI: That concludes Mr. Wilson's deposition, Your Honor.

The last deposition is of Roger R. Black. I believe, Your Honor, we need to -- Mr. Bernick would like to address an issue on this deposition.

THE COURT: Sorry for the delay.

We have a deposition that's going to be read and seen, as we have for the last few depositions, but there are some questions that the court needs to resolve before we proceed with the deposition, so we will start that deposition and Monday morning when we return to testimony. And as a reward for your patience the last 15 minutes, we'll let you out 10 minutes early. Okay?

Tomorrow is document day, you recall. Okay.

THE CLERK: Court stands in recess to reconvene tomorrow morning at 9:30.

(Recess taken.)
 

Return to tobacco index
 
Return to The Putnam Pit