3 ms·
If he is looking to protect his reputation, AND he is actually innocent, even at the expense of the money he should be wanting to tell his side of the story des
by jbigelow76 9y ago
If he is looking to protect his reputation, AND he is actually innocent, even at the expense of the money he should be wanting to tell his side of the story despite a lawyer telling him not to talk.
My, admittedly cynical, take is much simpler, his lawyer sat him down and said something along the lines of: "screw the 250 million, keep your damn mouth shut if you want to stay out of prison".
- stouset 9y agoHe should want to, perhaps, but being innocent does not inherently make saying anything a good legal idea given a potential future criminal case.
- jbigelow76 9y agoSure, people get railroaded by the justice system all to often. But more often than not those are usually unfortunate souls with little ability to defend themselves accused of crimes far more heinous than stealing trade secrets. For what Levandowski is accused of and how he is accused of doing it, there should be plenty of either incriminating or exculpatory evidence, if the parties involved want to divulge it. Google isn't some district attorney trying to look tough on crime for the voters, nobody outside of Google and Uber really care all that much about the case really care or which way it goes. Levandowski, by pleading the 5th has already been found guilty in the court of public opinion (yes, yes, shame on all of us) so he can't be clinging to whatever shreds of his reputation are left for future jobs. It's not impossible that he is innocent and his lawyer thinks the best strategy is to plead the 5th anyway, I just don't happen to buy it myself.
- CPLX 9y agoThere's nothing shameful about making inferences from his behavior in this case. It's reasonable and proper to assume someone taking the 5th in a civil case has something to hide.