He said the
Holy Gr ail would be to get a senior partner from one of
the country’s premier firms who would be personallycommitted to your case alone. Randy had turned out to
be that Holy Grail. Now, against his doctor’s advice,
Randy was seriously consi dering risking his life by
waiting until the trial was over before starting his
treatment. I assured him I w ould have none of that, but
he decided to wait and see  how fast the tumor was
progressing before making his decision. Randy was like a
Samurai warrior who had finally been given a battle that
was about Honor, Truth, and Justice. He was not about
to lay down his sword for a tiny tumor. Unfortunately, it only took a month for the tumor to
progress to the point that there was no longer a decision. We kne w Judg e Blatt was ad amant that there would not
be a ny extensions of the trial  date. Though it was a long
shot, Randy requested a three-month extension so that
he coul d represent me at tr ial. Once again, it was the
Constitution that took care of me. The motion filed
invoked my Sixth Amend ment right to have the
assistance of counsel of my choice. Though the
government opposed the motion for an extension, it was
granted by the judge under the condition that I begin
working with another lead attorney in case Randy did
not reco ver in time. With the new trial date set for May
4, 2009, just five months away, Randy began his
treatment. I had been working with Randy for more than five
years by then. He had not o nly been my lead attorney
and goo d friend, but he was also the chief legal strategist
for the entire joint defense group. There was no replacing
him. Having promised the j udge that I would do just
that, at least as a backup, I took a deep breath and
surrendered to the reality before me: I would have to
start working with a new lead attorney.5 5 . D i v i n e  I n t e r v e n t i o n
T he workload increased significantly as we moved
toward trial. In February, we started a very interesting
and imp ortant phase of the pretrial hearings—motions in
limine. These were pretrial motions that gave us the
opportunity to challenge whether the evidence the
government pr osecutors inten ded to present at trial was,
in fact, trustworthy from a legal perspective. They had
taken document after document and defined them in a
way that seemed to support  their version of events. I
knew fo r a fact that many of the documents didn’t say
what they were being twiste d to say. But taken out of
context, they would influenc e a jury. I was pleased to
learn th at the courts had int erpreted our constitutional
right to a fair  trial to mean  that a jury could not be
prejudiced with evidence that did not meet a reasonable
standard of trustworthiness. In other words, we had the
right to  petition the judge to exclude some of this
material from the trial altogether. Motion by motion we challen ged the relevance and/or
trustworthiness of what the government intended to
present to the jury. In many cases, the judge agreed with
us. This judge was finally reining in the unbridled
attempts to create evidence by arbitrarily assigning
meaning to documents and events. I was not attending
any of the pretrial hearings, but I was reviewing all the
motions and following with great interest as they had
their day in court. With Randy out, the associate
attorney, Alex Walsh, would give me the daily updates. I
was rea lly impressed with her and could see how Randy’s
absence afforded tremendous opportunity for theyounger attorneys. I loved seeing that out of this
darkness, something great was being forged. Randy c ompleted his chemotherapy and tried to come
back to work right away. B ut though the therapy was
successful, it would take a fe w months before he got his
full strength back. In late M arch, just one month from
trial, we learned that Randy’s recovery period was not
our only concern. On March 27, 2009, Judge Blatt
announced tha t because of his age and his health, he was
stepping down from the case. We had lost our judge. The saber rattling began immediately. The government
sent ou t word to all defense counsel that they had better
come in  and negotiate a plea  because they were going to
be d estroyed in trial with a n ew judge. Needless to say,
given h ow well Judge Blatt h ad come to know the case
over th e last three and half years, and how fair he had
been, the prospect of a new judge at the eleventh hour
was disheartening. In the midst of the most dangerous
situation of my life, the two  forces in this world I had
come to have the most con fidence in to protect me,
Randy and Judge Blatt, were both taken away. This
amazing sequence of events was so completely out of my
control that I h ad no choice but to surrender at an even
deeper level. It seemed like li fe was finally unfolding in a
way that would assure the de mise of whatever was left of
my personal self—just what I had asked it to do so many
years ago. No one knew w hat was going to happen next. The trial
date would almost certainly h ave to be reset, but no one
had any idea of a new date or who the judge would be. All
we could do was continue to make sure we were ready,
just in case. The chief distric t judge, Judge Norton, took
charge of finding a federal judge who could handle a
four-month-long trial on short notice. In the meantime,
Judge Blatt continued to hold pretrial hearings, and we
continued to do very well with our motions in limine. Finally, unabl e to find a replacement judge, JudgeNorton decided  to take the case himself. At a hearing in
July, we were given the new trial date of January 18,
2010, w hich was five months away. So now t he chief U.S.
district judge of South Carolina was going to hear the
case. Everything just kept getting bigger and bigger.4
Judge N orton took over the pretrial hearings around
August 2009. By then Randy was fully back in the
saddle, and he found Judge  Norton to be very bright,
knowledgeable, and impartial. It turned out that Judge
Norton’s rulings were very similar to Judge Blatt’s. We
continued to tear down the government’s case in pretrial
motions throughout the months leading up to trial. It
certainly appea red that the n ew judge, like the old, saw
the weakness of the case being brought against us. By O ctober, we were three months from trial, and the
time had come to reserve housing in Charleston. Years
earlier I  had asked Randy wh at the probability was of the
government catching on that I didn’t do anything wrong
and just dropping the charges. He told me that he
expected the government to drop charges against
everyone except me, John Kang, and John Sessions—the
CEO, the president, and th e chief operations officer. Randy would have included  the chief financial officer,
but he had previously died of cancer. I wanted to be sure of my odds, so I pushed Randy by
asking i f it would literally take divine intervention for me
to a void a tria l and just walk free. He pondered for a
moment and said, “Yes, it w ould take an act of divine
intervention.” With that in mind, Donna and I headed to
Charleston to rent a place to  live for four months. We
made it an adv enture. We had both lived at the Temple
for mor e than thirty-five years. We had never been away
for muc h more  than a few weeks at a time. This trial is
what it would take to force us to relocate for such an
extended perio d. There was, of course, the possibility
that my departure would be much longer.As we approached the trial date, things unfolded in
accordance to  Randy’s predictions. The government
called in the second tier of indicted executives one by one
and tried to get something useful before dropping
charges. Of course, there was nothing to get, and we were
all g lad to see  our colleagues taken out of harm’s way. That left the three senior exe cutives headed for trial on
January 18, 2010. I received a call from Randy mid-December. He had
gotten an indication thro ugh back channels that
suddenly the government was interested in discussing a
settlement. After checking it out, Randy said it seemed
prosecutors had had enough, and they wanted me out of
the case. We were feeling pretty confident about my
position given the successes we had in the pretrial
hearings. I told Randy that I wanted the charges dropped
with no thing on my record. If  they wanted a statement of
facts, I would state that I had always believed that
everything was  being done in  accordance with standard
accounting principles, but I now saw that Bobby had
been doing some things improperly. In other words, I
would tell the truth and nothing else. Somehow, just four weeks before trial, and six years
since t he rai d, light was dispelling darkness. The
government insisted that I voluntarily give up a portion
of a twelve-ye ar-old stock sale, just in case the share
price had been affected by Bobby’s accounting
inaccuracies. I doubted that the share price would have
been af fected, but if it had been, that was money I didn’t
want or need. Then, as suddenly as the whole nightmare
had begun—it was over. The government agreed to drop
all charges against me. I didn’t feel joy, and I didn’t feel relief. What I felt was
a d eep sense of appreciation that in the end, truth
triumphed. It may have taken divine intervention, but
the truth won. Tempering this feeling, however, was the
fact tha t John Kang and John Sessions were still headedfor trial . I had been exposed to all the documents in the
case, and the o nly things I ever saw being done willfully
wrong w ere the actions of Bo bby Davids and his group. I
knew th at John Kang and John Sessions had both just
done their jobs to the best of  their ability. I worked with
Randy s o that he and his team  could do all they could to
provide support during the trial. They couldn’t
participate directly, but they were present and wrote up
most of  the summaries, mot ions, and other documents
needed during and after the proceedings. The trial went extremely well. John Kang’s attorney
turned out to be an excelle nt litigator, and he pretty
much handled all the cross-examination of the
government witnesses, including Bobby and his
paramour from  the accounting department, Caroline. By
the time the government rested its case, the defense
attorneys felt that almost every government witness had
been turned into a favorable witness for the defense. That being the case, the defe nse also rested. Given what
had taken place in that cour troom over the past month
and a half, no one coul d possibly feel that the
government h ad proven its case beyond a reasonable
doubt. With both sides havin g rested, the case went to
the jury. The jurors did not deliberate  very long. After only five
or s ix hours, t hey announce d that they had reached a
unanimous verdict. Given what had transpired during
the trial, that seemed like a reasonable amount of
deliberation. On March 1, 2010, the jury gathered back in
the courtroom and read the verdict: guilty as charged. The defense was stunned. The judge dropped his head
into h is hands. What had happened? Post-trial
interviews with the jurors showed that the case was
pretty much over after opening arguments. The
government had presented such a simplistic,
overwhelming view of what had been done wrong in the
company that most jurors had  made their minds up rightthen. Just hearing the govern ment tell its story had been
enough for most of the jurors. It was very sad. Our legal
system had not worked. The truth had not been
uncovered, and John Kang and John Sessions awaited
sentencing. Only one glimmer of hope was still burning. The
defense had filed a motion for dismissal based on the
statute of limitations, and the judge had not yet ruled on
that motion. On May 27, 2010, almost three months after
trial, Judge Norton issued his ruling and dismissed the
entire case against John Kang and John Sessions. In that
ruling, the judge took the opportunity to again and again
chastise the government for what had happened in this
case. Among his other comp laints, he questioned why
the government would kee p so many people under
indictment for five years and then drop all charges just
before trial. Judge Norton pointed out that this had
helped drive the pretrial defense cost of the case to more
than $190 million. I wa s p leased t hat John Kang and John Sessions were
free with nothing on their rec ords. I was also encouraged
that at least so meone had noticed the absurdity of what
had taken place. But it wasn’t necessarily over: the
government had the right to appeal the judge’s dismissal. In c ase that ha ppened, the defense had filed a motion for
retrial. This motion was based  on the bold argument that
the jury had been mistaken—the weight of the evidence
presented at trial did not support the verdict. On
January 19, 2011, almost a year after trial, the whole
truth and nothing but the tru th finally broke through. On
that day, when Judge Norton signed his ruling regarding
the retrial motion, Jefferson,  Mason, and Madison must
have breathed a sigh of relief. After two hundred years of
interpretations of what they  had intended—the system
had worked. Truth and Justic e would have the final word
after all.It ha d b een mo re than seven years since Bobby Davids
had walked into the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Charleston
and beg un telling his lies. That web of illusion gained
momentum and ensnarled everything in its way. But it
did not make it past the chief U.S. judge of South
Carolina. Judge Norton had sat through the entire trial
and heard all the evidence. The jury may have been
willing to accept the government’s story at face value—
without holdin g prosecutors  to a reasonable burden of
proof—but the  judge was not. In case his dismissal order
was overruled , Judge Norton not only approved the
defendants’ m otion for a ne w trial, but in a nineteen-
page opinion he tore the gove rnment’s case to shreds. He
stated that the government had not proven that there
was any conspiracy among the executives, but to the
contrary, the evidence supported that the executives at
Medical Manag er believed that the accounting was being
done p roperly. He went on to state that he found the
government’s chief witnesses, Bobby and Caroline, to be
noncredible, and that Caroline appeared to just be
parroting Bobby’s words. I r ead Judge N orton’s ruling  with a sense of awe and
relief. N ow it was over. In  the end, the person who
mattered most had seen through the noise and
recognized the  truth. I didn’t know that a judge could put
aside th e jury’s verdict because he believed it was not
supported by the weight of the evidence. Judge Norton
made it  clear that he not onl y had the right to put aside
the verdict, he had the obligation. This was the
Constitution in its finest hour. It was framed to protect
the citiz ens from their government. But, alas, it is just a
piece of paper. The judge is th e only agent through which
that protection  can come to life. In my eyes, both of the
judges in this case are heroes. They showed why our
separate bran ches of government create important
checks and balances against one another. These judges
had tak en a vow to protect the Constitution, and they
selflessly did just that.54  It is worth noting that years earlier the federal prosecutor in South
Carolina who originally filed the charges had resigned, and the
Department of Justice in Washington had pretty much taken over the case. 5  For those interested, the government chose not to appeal Judge
Norton’s dismissal of the case. In the end, all the indicted Medical
Manager executives walked away free.5 6 . R e t u r n i n g  t o  t h e  B e g i n n i n g
W hen the smoke cleared, the whirlwind of life had
dropped me off exactly whe re she had picked me up. After forty years, I still lived j ust down the field from the
house I had built when I  moved to the woods to
meditate. I was still meeting with people every morning
and evening for services in the Temple, including the
large Sunday morning gathe rings started back in 1972. But the original ten acres the Temple sat on was now
surrounded by nine hundred acres of rolling fields and
beautiful forests over which life had made us steward. The foundatio ns of my life  had remained completely
undisturbed throughout this entire dance with the
Universal Flow. The legal ordeal quickly became a distant memory,
almost a dream. It had c ome and gone, just like
everything else . I could clea rly see that because I had
inwardly surre ndered each step of the way, no scars were
left on my psyc he. It had bee n like writing on water—the
impressions only lasted while the events were actually
taking place. Yet in the moment of actual experience,
each twist and turn had re ached deep inside me and
forced me past foundatio nal fears and personal
boundaries. A s long as I was willing to accept the
purification po wer of life’s flow, I kept coming out on the
other side a transformed person. How could I consider
this a bad experience when it created such beauty and
freedom within me? To the co ntrary, I stand in awe of all
that has happened since I started this amazing
experiment of acceptance and surrender.One thi ng is for certain: he who left on this journey—
never returned. The flow of life had served as sandpaper
that, to  a great extent, freed  me of myself. Unable to
unbind myself from the incessant pull of my psyche, in
an act of sheer  desperation, I had thrown myself into the
arms of life. F rom that point forward, all I did was my
very be st to serve what was put in front of me and let go
of what  it stirred up within me. Joy and pain, success
and failure, praise and blame—they all had pulled at
what was so de eply rooted within me. The more I let go,
the freer I bec ame. It was not my responsibility to find
what was binding me; that was life’s job. My
responsibility was to willingly let go of whatever was
brought up within me. After seeing all I’d seen ove r the years, surrender to
the flow of life was all that wa s left of me. No longer busy
making other plans, I sett led into the quiet life of
increased solitude in which I once again found myself. It
soon became obvious that life had provided me the ideal
environment in  which to write this book. The moment I
sat down, the inspiration flowed in like a tidal wave. I
began writing what I always knew I would have to write
—what happened when I let go. People often ask me how I look at things now that I’ve
gone through the life-changing experiences of these past
forty years. I te ll them to read  The Untethered Soul. How
could I possibly explain the great freedom that comes
from realizing to the depth o f your being that life knows
what it’s doing? Only direct experience can take you
there. A t some  point there’s no more struggle, just the
deep peace that comes from surrendering to a perfection
that is beyond your comprehe nsion. Eventually, even the
mind stops resisting, and the heart loses the tendency to
close. The joy, excitement, and freedom are simply too
beautiful to give up. Once you are ready to let go of
yourself, life becomes your friend, your teacher, yoursecret l over. W hen life’s way becomes your way, all the
noise stops, and there is a great peace. In eternal gratitude for all the experiences we call
Life…
MAS, March 2015ABOUT THE AUTHOR
M ICHAEL  A. S INGER  is the author of the #1 New
York Times  bestseller The Untethered Soul. He
had a deep i nner awakeni ng in 1971 while
working on his doctorate in economics and
went in to sec lusion to focus on yoga and
meditation. In  1975, he foun ded Temple of the
Universe, a now long-esta blished yoga and
meditation cen ter where people of any religion
or set of beliefs can come together to experience
inner peace. He is also the cr eator of a leading-
edge software  package that transformed the
medical practice management industry, and
founding CEO of a billion-dollar public
company whose achievements are archived in
the Smithsoni an Institution. Along with his
more than four decades of spiritual teaching,
Michael has made major contributions in the
areas of business, education, health care, and
environmental protection.MORE BY THE AUTHOR
Audio Lectures:  A  number o f Michael A.
Singer’s talks on spiritual gr owth are available
in audio format. Visit www.untetheredsoul.com
for more information. Books:  In addition to The Untethered Soul,
Michael A. Singer has previo usly authored two
books on the integration of Eastern and
Western philosophy: The Sea rch for  Truth  and
Three Essays on Universal Law: Karma, Will,
and Love. Available on www.amazon.com . Music:  Songs of the Untethered Soul. Eight
inspiring song s, written by Michael A. Singer
and sung by musician Kathy Zavada, meant to
still the mind and open the heart. Visit www. songsof theunte theredsoul. comALSO BY MICHAEL A. SINGER
The #1 New York Times  bestseller
T h e  U n t e t h e r e d  S o u l
The Journey Beyond Yourself
What would it be like to free yourself from
limitations and soar beyond  your boundaries? What can you do each day to discover inner
peace a nd sere nity? The Untethered Soul  offers
simple yet profound answers to these questions. By tapping into traditions of meditation and
mindfulness, M ichael A. Singer shows how the
development o f consciousnes s can enable us all
to dwel l in the present moment and let go of
painful though ts and memories that keep us
from achieving happiness and self-realization. AVAILABLE IN PAPERBACK , HARDCOVER , EBOOK , AND
ON AUDIO
 newharbingerpublications
The-Surrender-Experiment-by-Michael-a-Singer.txt
Summarize the following text section accurately and concisely. Maintain specific details and numerical information, and use anti-repetition mechanisms:

        He said the
Holy Gr ail would be to get a senior partner from one of
the country’s premier firms who would be personallycommitted to your case alone. Randy had turned out to
be that Holy Grail. Now, against his doctor’s advice,
Randy was seriously consi dering risking his life by
waiting until the trial was over before starting his
treatment. I assured him I w ould have none of that, but
he decided to wait and see  how fast the tumor was
progressing before making his decision. Randy was like a
Samurai warrior who had finally been given a battle that
was about Honor, Truth, and Justice. He was not about
to lay down his sword for a tiny tumor. Unfortunately, it only took a month for the tumor to
progress to the point that there was no longer a decision. We kne w Judg e Blatt was ad amant that there would not
be a ny extensions of the trial  date. Though it was a long
shot, Randy requested a three-month extension so that
he coul d represent me at tr ial. Once again, it was the
Constitution that took care of me. The motion filed
invoked my Sixth Amend ment right to have the
assistance of counsel of my choice. Though the
government opposed the motion for an extension, it was
granted by the judge under the condition that I begin
working with another lead attorney in case Randy did
not reco ver in time. With the new trial date set for May
4, 2009, just five months away, Randy began his
treatment. I had been working with Randy for more than five
years by then. He had not o nly been my lead attorney
and goo d friend, but he was also the chief legal strategist
for the entire joint defense group. There was no replacing
him. Having promised the j udge that I would do just
that, at least as a backup, I took a deep breath and
surrendered to the reality before me: I would have to
start working with a new lead attorney. 5 5. D i v i n e  I n t e r v e n t i o n
T he workload increased significantly as we moved
toward trial. In February, we started a very interesting
and imp ortant phase of the pretrial hearings—motions in
limine. These were pretrial motions that gave us the
opportunity to challenge whether the evidence the
government pr osecutors inten ded to present at trial was,
in fact, trustworthy from a legal perspective. They had
taken document after document and defined them in a
way that seemed to support  their version of events. I
knew fo r a fact that many of the documents didn’t say
what they were being twiste d to say. But taken out of
context, they would influenc e a jury. I was pleased to
learn th at the courts had int erpreted our constitutional
right to a fair  trial to mean  that a jury could not be
prejudiced with evidence that did not meet a reasonable
standard of trustworthiness. In other words, we had the
right to  petition the judge to exclude some of this
material from the trial altogether. Motion by motion we challen ged the relevance and/or
trustworthiness of what the government intended to
present to the jury. In many cases, the judge agreed with
us. This judge was finally reining in the unbridled
attempts to create evidence by arbitrarily assigning
meaning to documents and events. I was not attending
any of the pretrial hearings, but I was reviewing all the
motions and following with great interest as they had
their day in court. With Randy out, the associate
attorney, Alex Walsh, would give me the daily updates. I
was rea lly impressed with her and could see how Randy’s
absence afforded tremendous opportunity for theyounger attorneys. I loved seeing that out of this
darkness, something great was being forged. Randy c ompleted his chemotherapy and tried to come
back to work right away. B ut though the therapy was
successful, it would take a fe w months before he got his
full strength back. In late M arch, just one month from
trial, we learned that Randy’s recovery period was not
our only concern. On March 27, 2009, Judge Blatt
announced tha t because of his age and his health, he was
stepping down from the case. We had lost our judge. The saber rattling began immediately. The government
sent ou t word to all defense counsel that they had better
come in  and negotiate a plea  because they were going to
be d estroyed in trial with a n ew judge. Needless to say,
given h ow well Judge Blatt h ad come to know the case
over th e last three and half years, and how fair he had
been, the prospect of a new judge at the eleventh hour
was disheartening. In the midst of the most dangerous
situation of my life, the two  forces in this world I had
come to have the most con fidence in to protect me,
Randy and Judge Blatt, were both taken away. This
amazing sequence of events was so completely out of my
control that I h ad no choice but to surrender at an even
deeper level. It seemed like li fe was finally unfolding in a
way that would assure the de mise of whatever was left of
my personal self—just what I had asked it to do so many
years ago. No one knew w hat was going to happen next. The trial
date would almost certainly h ave to be reset, but no one
had any idea of a new date or who the judge would be. All
we could do was continue to make sure we were ready,
just in case. The chief distric t judge, Judge Norton, took
charge of finding a federal judge who could handle a
four-month-long trial on short notice. In the meantime,
Judge Blatt continued to hold pretrial hearings, and we
continued to do very well with our motions in limine. Finally, unabl e to find a replacement judge, JudgeNorton decided  to take the case himself. At a hearing in
July, we were given the new trial date of January 18,
2010, w hich was five months away. So now t he chief U. S. district judge of South Carolina was going to hear the
case. Everything just kept getting bigger and bigger. 4
Judge N orton took over the pretrial hearings around
August 2009. By then Randy was fully back in the
saddle, and he found Judge  Norton to be very bright,
knowledgeable, and impartial. It turned out that Judge
Norton’s rulings were very similar to Judge Blatt’s. We
continued to tear down the government’s case in pretrial
motions throughout the months leading up to trial. It
certainly appea red that the n ew judge, like the old, saw
the weakness of the case being brought against us. By O ctober, we were three months from trial, and the
time had come to reserve housing in Charleston. Years
earlier I  had asked Randy wh at the probability was of the
government catching on that I didn’t do anything wrong
and just dropping the charges. He told me that he
expected the government to drop charges against
everyone except me, John Kang, and John Sessions—the
CEO, the president, and th e chief operations officer. Randy would have included  the chief financial officer,
but he had previously died of cancer. I wanted to be sure of my odds, so I pushed Randy by
asking i f it would literally take divine intervention for me
to a void a tria l and just walk free. He pondered for a
moment and said, “Yes, it w ould take an act of divine
intervention. ” With that in mind, Donna and I headed to
Charleston to rent a place to  live for four months. We
made it an adv enture. We had both lived at the Temple
for mor e than thirty-five years. We had never been away
for muc h more  than a few weeks at a time. This trial is
what it would take to force us to relocate for such an
extended perio d. There was, of course, the possibility
that my departure would be much longer. As we approached the trial date, things unfolded in
accordance to  Randy’s predictions. The government
called in the second tier of indicted executives one by one
and tried to get something useful before dropping
charges. Of course, there was nothing to get, and we were
all g lad to see  our colleagues taken out of harm’s way. That left the three senior exe cutives headed for trial on
January 18, 2010. I received a call from Randy mid-December. He had
gotten an indication thro ugh back channels that
suddenly the government was interested in discussing a
settlement. After checking it out, Randy said it seemed
prosecutors had had enough, and they wanted me out of
the case. We were feeling pretty confident about my
position given the successes we had in the pretrial
hearings. I told Randy that I wanted the charges dropped
with no thing on my record. If  they wanted a statement of
facts, I would state that I had always believed that
everything was  being done in  accordance with standard
accounting principles, but I now saw that Bobby had
been doing some things improperly. In other words, I
would tell the truth and nothing else. Somehow, just four weeks before trial, and six years
since t he rai d, light was dispelling darkness. The
government insisted that I voluntarily give up a portion
of a twelve-ye ar-old stock sale, just in case the share
price had been affected by Bobby’s accounting
inaccuracies. I doubted that the share price would have
been af fected, but if it had been, that was money I didn’t
want or need. Then, as suddenly as the whole nightmare
had begun—it was over. The government agreed to drop
all charges against me. I didn’t feel joy, and I didn’t feel relief. What I felt was
a d eep sense of appreciation that in the end, truth
triumphed. It may have taken divine intervention, but
the truth won. Tempering this feeling, however, was the
fact tha t John Kang and John Sessions were still headedfor trial. I had been exposed to all the documents in the
case, and the o nly things I ever saw being done willfully
wrong w ere the actions of Bo bby Davids and his group. I
knew th at John Kang and John Sessions had both just
done their jobs to the best of  their ability. I worked with
Randy s o that he and his team  could do all they could to
provide support during the trial. They couldn’t
participate directly, but they were present and wrote up
most of  the summaries, mot ions, and other documents
needed during and after the proceedings. The trial went extremely well. John Kang’s attorney
turned out to be an excelle nt litigator, and he pretty
much handled all the cross-examination of the
government witnesses, including Bobby and his
paramour from  the accounting department, Caroline. By
the time the government rested its case, the defense
attorneys felt that almost every government witness had
been turned into a favorable witness for the defense. That being the case, the defe nse also rested. Given what
had taken place in that cour troom over the past month
and a half, no one coul d possibly feel that the
government h ad proven its case beyond a reasonable
doubt. With both sides havin g rested, the case went to
the jury. The jurors did not deliberate  very long. After only five
or s ix hours, t hey announce d that they had reached a
unanimous verdict. Given what had transpired during
the trial, that seemed like a reasonable amount of
deliberation. On March 1, 2010, the jury gathered back in
the courtroom and read the verdict: guilty as charged. The defense was stunned. The judge dropped his head
into h is hands. What had happened. Post-trial
interviews with the jurors showed that the case was
pretty much over after opening arguments. The
government had presented such a simplistic,
overwhelming view of what had been done wrong in the
company that most jurors had  made their minds up rightthen. Just hearing the govern ment tell its story had been
enough for most of the jurors. It was very sad. Our legal
system had not worked. The truth had not been
uncovered, and John Kang and John Sessions awaited
sentencing. Only one glimmer of hope was still burning. The
defense had filed a motion for dismissal based on the
statute of limitations, and the judge had not yet ruled on
that motion. On May 27, 2010, almost three months after
trial, Judge Norton issued his ruling and dismissed the
entire case against John Kang and John Sessions. In that
ruling, the judge took the opportunity to again and again
chastise the government for what had happened in this
case. Among his other comp laints, he questioned why
the government would kee p so many people under
indictment for five years and then drop all charges just
before trial. Judge Norton pointed out that this had
helped drive the pretrial defense cost of the case to more
than $190 million. I wa s p leased t hat John Kang and John Sessions were
free with nothing on their rec ords. I was also encouraged
that at least so meone had noticed the absurdity of what
had taken place. But it wasn’t necessarily over: the
government had the right to appeal the judge’s dismissal. In c ase that ha ppened, the defense had filed a motion for
retrial. This motion was based  on the bold argument that
the jury had been mistaken—the weight of the evidence
presented at trial did not support the verdict. On
January 19, 2011, almost a year after trial, the whole
truth and nothing but the tru th finally broke through. On
that day, when Judge Norton signed his ruling regarding
the retrial motion, Jefferson,  Mason, and Madison must
have breathed a sigh of relief. After two hundred years of
interpretations of what they  had intended—the system
had worked. Truth and Justic e would have the final word
after all. It ha d b een mo re than seven years since Bobby Davids
had walked into the U.
Randy, a senior partner from a premier firm.
Who did the author recommend as a senior partner to handle his case?
Randy had a tumor and was undergoing treatment, which made it difficult for him to work on the case.
What was Randy's health condition, and how did it affect the trial?
Judge Norton, the chief district judge.
Who took over the case after Judge Blatt stepped down?
The government dropped all charges against the author, and he felt a deep sense of appreciation and awe at the outcome, but not joy or relief.
What was the outcome of the trial, and how did the author feel about it?
He realized that the legal system is imperfect and that it's up to the judge to ensure justice, as seen in Judge Norton's ruling.
What did the author realize about the legal system after his experience?