``Higgins verbal testimony although helpful is not imperative. His testimony has been documented, notarized and sealed, in an ensemble of nice tight packages ready for presentation.``

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/r...

So help me out - are B&O arguing his *documented* testimony should be submitted, or his testimony (in person) verbally?

If Fogel strikes his ability to verbally testify, does that mean the documented testimony is stricken too?

If not, then we may have lost the some impact, but not all, true? If so, this makes this much less of an all or nothing situation.

I need some clarity on this.

Regards