We seem to disagree about the seeking extreme clarity issue -- I believe he was intentionally obfuscating, or at least have that suspicion. As for suspicion, f

We seem to disagree about the seeking extreme clarity issue -- I believe he was intentionally obfuscating, or at least have that suspicion. As for suspicion, from the article: --- At one point, Thomas Penfield Jackson, the judge hearing the case, chuckled, too. When Microsoft lawyers argued during a closed-door session that the deposition was turning into a side show and government lawyers should be barred from showing any more segments during the trial, the judge denied the motion, saying: "If anything, I think your problem is with your witness, not with the way in which his testimony is being presented." Jackson continued: "I think it's evident to every spectator that, for whatever reasons, in many respects Mr. Gates has not been particularly responsive to his deposition interrogation. Everybody at your table has reflected skepticism as the testimony is presented." --- I'm characterizing the "whatever reasons" as suspicions. I suspect the judges did come to a conclusion on those reasons when it came time to deliver their opinion, and those reasons were damaging.