I thought the prosecution's opening arguments got bogged down by tough financial concepts. Then I heard Herbert Stern for the defense.

Stern noted the burden of proof is on the prosecution by exclaiming, "We don't have to say anything." Then he actually took longer than the prosecution, requiring a brief recess before wrapping up.

Stern spent a huge amount of time going through chart after chart of Joe Nacchio's stock sales and option ownership. It looked as if he'd raided a folder of spreadsheets on my computer. And that can't be good for the jury.

Stern used all these numbers to argue that Nacchio's stock sales were reasonable and sometimes necessary.

In early 2001, Nacchio launched a plan to sell 11,500 shares a day, every trading day, for more than two years in order to get rid of a huge block of stock options.

But he abandoned it 10 days later, blaming market volatility. He said he would go back to selling as he saw fit.

This is where the prosecution took out the knives. They noted Nacchio sold 1,422,000 shares worth $55.4 million from Feb. 20 through May 29. The original plan would have called for 793,500 shares worth $29.5 million.

The other half of the prosecution's case, Qwest failing to meet its revenue targets, will be a little complex. But Stern's defense is even harder to understand, as he argued Tuesday that most of the executive debate at Qwest was actually about an internal budget number.

All in all, if the defense's case is based on confusing the jury, it's off to a good start.

Comment on David Milstead's blog at RockyMountainNews.com.