Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
He will testify it was like that .You have to produce evidence that it wasn't like that. If the DOJ can't, then game over.
|
Well, no, not exactly. Sargeant's account of what happened is admissible evidence, but a finder of fact is free to conclude it is very self-serving, and find it totally not credible.
Quote:
|
So far I've heard no evidence whatsover that Sargent sat down with anybody and entered into a scheme to challenge Amazon over the agency model in order to raise prices
|
The fact that all of the publishers somehow came to this conclusion at almost exactly the same time is very strong circumstantial evidence that collusion was involved. Circumstantial evidence is perfectly good evidence in court, if the finder of fact chooses to believe it. It can outweigh direct evidence. Happens all the time, in fact.