|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 12 2013 @ 01:07 PM EDT |
I think the Judge is more than aware of all this.
This isn't a jury trial, is it?
Also, getting the judge to ask more questions here is not looking like a bad
thing.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 12 2013 @ 01:48 PM EDT |
There was no need to put the witness under oath, although the judge could have
done that. You could paraphrase the conversation as:
Spectator: The witness is lying.
Judge: I could tell because his lips were moving.
Spectator: I've known that for 3 years.
So the information wasn't anything knew to the judge. Except maybe the 3 year
part, which wasn't the least bit relevant, but was funny.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: albert on Tuesday, March 12 2013 @ 01:48 PM EDT |
IANAL, but it was a 'show cause' hearing, not a trial. Is it possible that the
judge could ask someone to take the stand and testify?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: hardmath on Tuesday, March 12 2013 @ 03:28 PM EDT |
If the lawyers had to be sworn every time they speak in
court, things would pretty much grind to a halt.
---
Recursion is the opprobrium of the mathists. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: DannyB on Wednesday, March 13 2013 @ 01:20 PM EDT |
Whoever is representing the lawyers of Prenda Law and/or Gibbs can object in
writing. (No speaking objections.)
---
The price of freedom is eternal litigation.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
