View Single Post
Old 06-19-2014, 06:06 AM   #81
Sil_liS
Wizard
Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8 View Post
Probably he wouldn't, however he doesn't have to bring to light evidence of the defendant's guilt.
So your argument here is that the judge didn't see all the evidence of Apple's guilt at the pretrial?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8 View Post
The big thing that neither party presents before the actual trial is the basic tact and legal theories that they will be using in the trial. They want to give the other side as little time as possible to come up with and present counter arguments. Most cases only last a day or so, which means that if you can present a novel legal theory and convince the judge of it's worth, then the other side basically has to shot holes in that theory on the fly rather than do in depth research.
The reason why most cases last a day or so is because the in depth research is done during the pretrial.
Sil_liS is offline   Reply With Quote