Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil_liS
Actually the statement doesn't indicate that she believed that the DoJ would be able to prove their case, just that there there is enough evidence to justify the trial.
No case goes to trial if the plaintiffs don't present evidence to the judge before the trial at the preliminary hearings that justifies having a trial to begin with. You would find statements like the ones that this judge made from any judges before every trial unless the defendants' have waived their right to this preliminary hearing.
|
Sorry, I messed up somehow and the link to the full Reuters article wasn't working. I've added it in now.
www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/23/us-usa-apple-ebooks-idUSBRE94M19A20130523
I was talking about other sections in the article which said:
Quote:
|
In an unusual move before a trial, a federal judge expressed a tentative view that the U.S. Justice Department will be able to show evidence that Apple Inc engaged in a conspiracy with publishers to increase e-book prices.
|
Quote:
|
"I believe that the government will be able to show at trial direct evidence that Apple knowingly participated in and facilitated a conspiracy to raise prices of e-books, and that the circumstantial evidence in this case, including the terms of the agreements, will confirm that," Cote said.
|