It wasn't what Kerkorian wanted to hear.
The 86-year-old Las Vegas billionaire wants to prove that Daimler meant to dominate Chrysler from the beginning. He alleges that Daimler promised shareholders a "merger of equals," in which Chrysler executives would share power within DaimlerChrysler's top management and board.
What transpired was a charade, Kerkorian claims. Shortly after the ink dried on the merger deal, Chrysler's senior managers departed en masse. Thus the deal was a takeover - not a merger. If so, Kerkorian argues, DaimlerChrysler should have paid him more than the 28 percent premium offered.
But Kerkorian had difficulty demonstrating that he was a victim of deception. Kerkorian, a casino and hotel developer who owned 89 million shares of Chrysler in 1998, made as much as $3 billion profit on the stock, according to DaimlerChrysler's law firm.
Kerkorian also had trouble demonstrating that a takeover had occurred. Kerkorian's lawyers cited Chrysler managers who had been bumped aside or passed over.
But when called to discuss it, former Chrysler executives chalked it up to fate - not the malice of scheming Germans.
Tony Cervone, Chrysler's former director of internal communications and a third-generation Chrysler employee, testified by videotape about his dismissal at the hands of DaimlerChrysler CEO Dieter Zetsche.
On Zetsche's first morning on the job in Chrysler's Auburn Hills, Mich., headquarters, the executive summoned Cervone to his office and fired him.
"Do you know why you were terminated?" one of Kerkorian's lawyers asked Cervone.
"It's fairly common in communications," Cervone explained matter of factly. "If you have the top job (of) chief public relations officer, the CEO would choose (his own spokesman). So it's not uncommon."
Even Tom Stallkamp, the no-nonsense Chrysler president who was fired after expressing his frustration with DaimlerChrysler's tedious meetings, had no regrets.
As a witness, Stallkamp acknowledged that he had butted heads with his new colleagues, but he assured the court that the merger was good for Chrysler.
Stallkamp took heat on the witness stand last week over his book, Getting Bigger by Growing Smaller. Published last year, the book criticizes the DaimlerChrysler deal as a failure. The reason, it suggests, was because Chrysler lost its voice in the merger.
Christensen seized on the book as proof that the merger really was a takeover. But Stallkamp resisted. He said DaimlerChrysler's postmerger troubles should not taint the motives of those who worked out the deal.
"Your opinion," Christensen insisted, as though Stallkamp were close to proving Kerkorian's case, "is that Daimler-Benz acquired Chrysler. And that the power and the authority went to the company who paid for the acquisition. That's your opinion, isn't it?"
Stallkamp answered irritably: "That was not the intent when we formed the company."