|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 05 2012 @ 02:25 PM EDT |
Check your server logs for the time period shortly after the
article was posted: you'll find plenty of 404s from people
clicking the link looking for the PDF of 1242.
I don't recall exactly when the link started working; it
might have been half an hour later. I was too lazy to post
again to point out what everybody could see - that it was
working again.
Where would I find 1242 as text? The order on costs was
included as text in the article, but not the order on JML
and retrial. You included one sentence, but I have no way
of knowing that that was everything he said relevant to the
"shills" order, and even if you'd been clearer about that, I
would have wanted to check the context, to see how/whether
it fit into the order.
And even if you'd included the whole order as text, would
you take me to task for checking the PDF?
My main point is that if I were the judge, I'd hesitate to
issue a standalone order that was essentially a null order.
If I did combine it with another order, I'd combine it with
a small, obvious one, like the JML order, not the costs
order.
You may be right that combining it with the JML order is a
hint about why the judge was thinking about shills in the
first place, but I'm not sure. If the previous standalone
orders were in response to the JML order, why didn't he say
so in those orders?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
