Authored by: Chromatix on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 08:09 PM EDT |
Which is precisely why the good Judge has quoted and analysed so much
precedent
in his ruling.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: mexaly on Thursday, May 31 2012 @ 10:43 PM EDT |
There is a broad, fuzzy line somewhere between expert knowledge and common
knowledge. I think coding is somewhere in the middle of that fuzz now, or it
will be soon.
---
IANAL, but I watch actors play lawyers on high-definition television.
Thanks to our hosts and the legal experts that make Groklaw great.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: xtifr on Friday, June 01 2012 @ 11:35 AM EDT |
Judges, unlike juries, are allowed to know stuff, and even to do their own
independent research. If he'd wanted to, he probably could have put the trial on
hold, while he took some quick crash courses in Java at a local school.
Judges are expected to know the law, and to know what constitutes evidence and
what doesn't, and to know how to weigh things properly, and not be improperly
influenced by what they hear outside of the courtroom. (They are, however,
allowed to be *properly* influenced--because they know how to tell the
difference.)
Heck, the judge could even have spent his evenings during the trial reading
Groklaw, and even if BSF could prove this, it wouldn't help their appeal one
bit.
---
Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for it makes them soggy and hard to
light.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|