Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mozek who wrote (46510)	6/13/2000 1:34:00 AM
From: Charles Tutt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Are you talking about the offer of proof during the remedies phase, or something else?

To: mozek who wrote (46510)	6/13/2000 9:05:00 AM
From: David	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

"The implication that he rendered a decision after hearing all evidence and seeing all the witnesses prior is inaccurate." Judges are charged with determining what testimony gets in the record, and what witnesses testify, based on relevance (among other things). Let me draw you an analogy to baseball: It's the umpire who gets to decide what is a strike and what is a ball. The pitcher doesn't get to decide that. You are assuming that Microsoft determines what all the relevant evidence is and who all the witnesses are. No. It's the judge, like it is in every single trial in the United States. That fact that MSFT may have had some material excluded from the record, or proffered witnesses rejected does not mean they didn't have their day in court. (And, of course, lost.)