Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
Here is the footnote in full:
It is perfectly clear that the draft opinion referred to is Judge Cote's preliminary thoughts based on the evidence submitted pre-trial and not a reference to writing a draft of the final judgement before the main trial.
Graham
|
Eyes of the beholder. You draw one conclusion from it and many others draw a different conclusion. I think that it's equally valid to draw the conclusion that clear language of what she says means that she was writing a draft of her final opinion, rather than some sort of summary notes of the evidence like you seem to imply. Some of the analysis of the opinion that I have seen says that only a small part of the opinion refers to evidence presented in the trial rather than pre-trial and most of that is simply her rebuttal of Apple's final argument, which supports the idea that much was written prior to the trial. Both are supportable opinions, but I find the later more likely.
Just to expand on this a bit more, there is an interesting book by Johan Lehrer, "How We Decide" which goes into the brain activity that goes on when we make decisions. One of the things discussed in the book is that people have a tendency to decide something quickly, and then start looking for justifications for that decision. For example, I might choose a car because I like it's look, then point to all the features the car has to justify buying the car. For all practical purposes, I think this reality is why those who question Judge Cote, do so. I have also found that once people put something in writing, they are much more resistant to throwing it away and starting a fresh.