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: Charles Tutt who wrote (60447)	8/8/2001 12:42:35 PM
From: margie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

"If a judge's bias disqualifies him on day 100 of a case, how can his findings in the preceding 99 days be allowed to stand?" said Legal Expert, Professor Leonard Orland quote.bloomberg.com It can only be allowed to stand if you are as mentally challenged as you and Dave give the appearance of... Now maybe you guys are not really mentally challenged, but just SEEM to be. That leads some of us here to assume you have a limited capacity to understand many issues, whether or not that is true. I would not want anyone who gives that appearance involved in making important decisions and I don't think the public would either. Do you think there is a difference between a mentally challenged person and one who just appears to be mentally challenged? Or one like Gary Condit who appears guilty but may not be guilty? Or between a biased judge and one who appears to be biased? Of course there are differences, but the Law says that if a judge gives the appearance of bias, he must recuse him(her)self or be recused. The only way to get rid of these negative appearances which cause the public to lack confidence in the judge is to find someone who appears neutral. Microsoft is not asking for a reversal. They are asking for vacatur. which means throw out all Jackson's rulings and start from scratch with a new judge. Blame Judge Jackson for not acting like a judge should act. Blame the appeals Court judges for not doing the proper thing months ago and causing needless expense and waste of more time. But don't blame Microsoft. Maybe a new judge will find the same violations. Maybe not. I don't know if the testimony or evidence submitted will remain. Why don't you read the petition for a writ of certiori (26 pages or so) or the motion for a stay which is only 6 pages long? Or do you get your information from the mindless media's two-second bytes, sponsored by AOL-Time Warner? The facts don't seem to be important to you.