Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
Actually, pointing out that Judge Cote appointed a long time friend of hers (what else would you call it when she says that after working with him for two years, she stayed in touch with him for eight years after he left?) might be a conflict of interest isn't an ad hominem attack. Nor is pointing out that many lawyers have reported that she tends to pre-judge cases.
|
So you never keep in touch with former colleagues? You've never recommended a former coworker for a job? You've never known a manager who has hired a former coworker or subordinate? Sure, she wrote a recommendation for him, but how do you know he didn't approach his supervisors at all of his previous jobs and asked them all for recommendations? I call it an ad hominem attack because it's attempting to cast aspersions on her for what I see as a normal case of someone hiring someone she's worked with in the past.
If the lawyers reported that she tends to pre-judge cases are from
The Robing Room, I'd also like to point out that there are several other lawyers reporting that she's a fair-minded no-nonsense judge who reads all the material and means business. Again, you're arguing unsubstantiated, unquantifiable claims which are attacking her, not the evidence, case law, etc. stated as the justification for her decision in the case.