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 : Identix (IDNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: brad greene who wrote (19302)	11/29/2000 4:38:49 PM
From: David	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26039

They definitely don't get written down by the court reporter, especially if the judge is being quoted. A war story: Many years ago, I participated in a trial in your State in front of a very hostile (and very old) judge. The rule for attorneys is, if they object, they must state their reasons so that if an appeal is taken the reviewing court can make a ruling on whether the trial court's rejection of the appeal was allowable. Funny thing was, in this case whenever the attorney on our side made an objection ("Objection. Irrelevant") the court reporter only wrote "Objection." When the other side made an objection ("Objection. Leading the witness.") it was recorded faithfully. The capper was when our lead attorney was cross-examining the defendant and the other side objected (no grounds given). The court ruled, "Objection sustained. Mr. ____, you're trying to trap the witness." Duh. It was cross-examination (I had written it). This nice little judicial explanation was also missing from the court reporter's record of the proceeding. The scary thing was, this was federal court. Oh, and we lost in spite of my getting their expert to admit that his client had violated federal regulations. The judge just didn't like the federal regulations. Nice little State you have there, Brad.