Yоur neighbоr аttended а recent triаl cоncerning mail fraud as people are stealing and tampering with checks taken from the blue post office mailboxes. During the conversation about the trial, she described the cross-examination of the witness as follows: After his lawyer's questioning was complete, expert witness Micah Gordon was composed and I perceived him as very confident. However, when the defendant's lawyer questioned him about a comment he made earlier, he began to argue with the questioning attorney. The attorney continued to reiterate that the testimony Micah was giving deviated from the facts of the case. Micah subsequently seemed to lose his temper. The court had a brief recess as Micah asked for a break. After the break and once back on the stand, Micah resumed his testimony. He refused to answer some questions when he said something about it not being his area of expertise. I was impressed that he answered other questions about mail fraud with much more than a yes/no answer. I could tell he was knowledgeable about mail fraud and also understood things as he explained them. Having had this discussion with your neighbor, comment on the positives and negatives of Micah's expert witness behavior.