Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: combjelly who wrote (363478)	12/18/2007 4:41:06 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) of 1574262

CJ, > She didn't rule that it was inadmissible. She ruled that it didn't affect the case. a) Link or it didn't happen. b) "Material matter" means that it could affect the case. Even if a judge later determines that the testimony wasn't admissible (or in your "nuance," didn't affect the case), the fact is that it's still a "material matter" with regards to perjury. > You need to tell the judge. She felt differently. Since you are undoubtedly right, why not let her know? Not the first time you used that escape tactic: Message 23276828 Tenchusatsu

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next