Jodi Godoy

So the plaintiffs in this case brought evidence in the form of internal documents from Meta, internal chats and emails.

One striking piece of evidence was an Instagram presentation that said, quote, if we want to win big with teens, we must bring them in as tweens.

And it made it pretty clear that they were eyeing the retention power of bringing users onto the service at a younger age.

He was very much pushing back against the framing of the questions.

You know, he was saying, I disagree with you.

He was saying you're mischaracterizing what I said.

And the way he cast it was that Meta has always banned users under the age of 13, but it had at certain points in its history looked at potentially adding services aimed at those younger users, but it never did so in his telling.

I mean, he was pretty unflappable.

I've seen him on the stand before.

He doesn't tend to raise his voice or get angry.

It did seem he was a bit irritated with some of the questions.

Sometimes he looked towards the jury, sometimes he looked towards the judge a bit, but mostly he was sitting straight on and answering the questions in a straightforward way.