“Fair enough. How many clinical trials were conducted here in the United States?”
“None.”
“How many Varrick drugs are in clinical trials as of today?”
Nadine Karros rose and said, “Objection, Your Honor, on the grounds of irrelevance. Other drugs are not at issue here.”
Judge Seawright paused and scratched his chin. “Overruled. Let’s see where this is going.”
David wasn’t sure where it was going, but he had just won a tiny victory over Ms. Karros. Emboldened, he pressed on. “You may answer the question, Dr. Ulander. How many Varrick drugs are in clinical trials today?”
“Approximately twenty. I could name them all if given a moment or two.”
“Twenty sounds good. Let’s save some time. How much money will Varrick spend this year on clinical trials for all of its drugs in development?”
“Roughly $2 billion.”
“Last year, 2010, what percentage of Varrick’s gross sales came from foreign markets?”
Dr. Ulander shrugged and looked perplexed. “Well, I’d have to check the financial statements.”
“You’re a vice president of the company, aren’t you? And you have been for the past sixteen years, right?”
“That’s true.”
David picked up a thin binder, flipped a page, and said, “This is last year’s financial report, and it plainly states that 82 percent of Varrick’s gross sales were in the U.S. market. Have you seen this?”
“Of course.”
Ms. Karros stood and said, “Objection, Your Honor. My client’s financial records are not at issue here.”
“Overruled. Your client’s financial records are a matter of public record.”
Another tiny victory, and for the second time David got a taste of courtroom excitement. “Does 82 percent sound right, Dr. Ulander?”
“If you say so.”
“I’m not saying so, sir. It’s right here in the published report.”
“Okay, so it’s 82 percent.”
“Thank you. Of the twenty drugs you’re testing today, how many of their clinical trials are being conducted in the United States?”
The witness gritted his teeth, clenched his jaw, and said, “None.”
“None,” David repeated dramatically and looked at the jury. Several of the faces were engaged. He paused a few seconds, then continued: “So Varrick derives 82 percent of its income in this country, yet it tests its drugs in such places as Nicaragua, Cambodia, and Mongolia. Why is that, Dr. Ulander?”
“It’s very simple, Mr. Zinc. The regulatory environment in this country stifles the research and development of new drugs, devices, and procedures.”
“That’s great. So you’re blaming the government for your routine practice of testing drugs on people in faraway places?”
Ms. Karros was back on her feet. “Objection, Your Honor. That’s mischaracterization of what the witness said.”
“Overruled. The jury heard what the witness said. Continue, Mr. Zinc.”
“Thank you, Your Honor. You may answer the question, Dr. Ulander.”
“I’m sorry, what was the question?”
“Is it your testimony that the reason your company runs its clinical trials in other countries is that there is too much regulation in this country?”
“Yes, that’s the reason.”
“Isn’t it true that Varrick tests its drugs in developing countries because it can avoid the threat of litigation if things go badly?”
“Not at all.”
“Isn’t it true that Varrick tests its drugs in developing countries because there is virtually no regulation?”
“No, that’s not true.”
“Isn’t it true that Varrick tests its drugs in developing countries because it’s much easier to find human guinea pigs who need a few bucks?”
There was a scramble over David’s left shoulder as the defense horde reacted. Ms. Karros sprang to her feet and said firmly, “Objection, Your Honor.”
Judge Seawright, who was leaning forward on his elbows, calmly said, “State your objection.”
For the first time all week Nadine struggled for words. “Well, first, I object to this line of questioning on the grounds of irrelevance. What my client does with other drugs is not relevant to this case.”
“I’ve already overruled that objection, Ms. Karros.”
“And so I object to counsel’s use of the term ‘human guinea pigs.’ ”
The term was clearly objectionable, but it was also commonly used and seemed to fit the situation. Judge Seawright thought about it for a while as everyone stared at him. David glanced at the jury and saw some amused faces.
“Overruled. Continue, Mr. Zinc.”
“Were you supervising all of Varrick’s research in 1998?”
Dr. Ulander replied, “Yes, as I’ve said, that has been my role for the past twenty-two years.”
“Thank you. Now, in 1998, did Varrick run clinical trials for a drug called Amoxitrol?”
Ulander shot a look of panic at the defense table, where several of the Varrick lawyers were sporting their own looks of panic. Ms. Karros jumped up again and forcefully announced, “Objection, Your Honor! That drug is not in question here. Its history is totally irrelevant.”
“Mr. Zinc?”
“Your Honor, that drug has an ugly history and I don’t blame Varrick for trying to keep it quiet.”
“Why should we talk about other drugs, Mr. Zinc?”
“Well, Judge, it seems to me as if this witness has placed the company’s reputation into issue. He testified for sixty-four minutes and spent most of his time trying to convince the jury that his company places great importance on safe testing procedures. Why can’t I explore this? It seems quite relevant to me, and I think the jury would find it interesting.”
To which Nadine quickly replied, “Your Honor, this trial is about a drug called Krayoxx, nothing more. Anything else is a fishing expedition.”
“But as Mr. Zinc correctly pointed out, you placed the company’s reputation into issue, Ms. Karros. You weren’t required to do this, but that door is now open. Objection overruled. Continue, Mr. Zinc.”
The door was indeed open, and Varrick’s history was fair game. David wasn’t certain how it had happened, but he was thrilled nonetheless. His self-doubt was gone. The gnawing fear had disappeared. He was on his feet, all alone against the big boys, and he was scoring points. It was showtime.
“I asked about Amoxitrol, Dr. Ulander. Surely you remember it.”
“I do.”
With a bit of flair, David waved his arm at the jury and said, “Well, tell the jury about that drug. What was it intended to do?”
Ulander sank a few inches in the witness chair and again looked at the defense table for help. Grudgingly, he began talking, but in very short sentences. “Amoxitrol was developed as an abortion pill.”
To help him along, David asked, “An abortion pill that could be taken up to one month after conception, sort of an expanded version of the morning-after pill, right, Doctor?”
“Something like that.”
“Was that a yes or a no?”
“Yes.”
“The pill would basically dissolve the fetus, and its remains would eventually be flushed out with other bodily waste, is that correct, Doctor?”