Paul Burks' criminal trial is three days away, and objections are flying over proposed expert witnesses. Burks is challenging Tucker Greer of Price Waterhouse Coopers, while the Department of Justice objects to John White and Morris Aaron. Greer, identified as a "computer examiner," faces scrutiny regarding the scope of his anticipated testimony.
Burks' legal team argues that Greer's background does not extend to finance, mathematics, or predictions. Despite this, the government intends for Greer to analyze program inflows and testify on the number of "victim-investors." The prosecution may also seek his testimony on "modeling/forecasting" for the ZeekRewards program. Burks contends these financial and mathematical analyses fall outside Greer's stated expertise as a computer examiner tasked with reconstructing company databases.
The defense is requesting the court to limit Greer's testimony strictly to his role as a computer examiner. Burks' motion also seeks a pre-trial written summary of Greer's testimony. The defense states that charts and graphs provided by the prosecution lack Greer's actual opinions, a deficiency they argue violates Rule 16. If Greer is to testify on matters beyond locating and recreating evidence, Burks' counsel wants the court to compel the prosecution to produce Greer's opinions, their bases, and any supporting background information.
Burks is also pushing to prohibit Greer from using terms like "investment" and "interest." These words, the defense argues, are not found in the company data Greer analyzed. Similarly, Burks wants "victim-investors," "winners," and "losers" barred from Greer's testimony. These labels, according to the defense, are interpretations applied by the prosecution, not objective findings from the data itself, and are matters for the jury to decide.