SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: jlallen who wrote (3169)9/16/1998 1:15:00 PM
From: dougjn  Read Replies (1) of 67261
 
His lawyers did try to have the Lewinsky and similar lines of questioning excluded as not sufficiently material. The judge decided to let the depositions go forward, but to decide their relevance and admissability later, before the actual trial. She figured the testimony was under her strict seal, so their would be no harm in proceeding in that way. (Which is the traditional, but not required, way admissability is handled in most civil cases.)

She figured wrong. Very, very wrong.

Subsequently, when the Lewinsky furor became a bother to HER, she threw out the whole line of questions as not being essential to the case. Although she still sidestepped ruling on its possible (marginal) materiality.

Doug
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News