Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
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.
|
The difference is that I am taking it to mean exactly what she is saying within the context that she is saying it.
You are taking it to mean something outside of the context in which it is presented, and are taking the word 'opinion' to mean something considerably more, along the order of 'text of the final judgement'.
And even if she
is referring to a draft laid out in detailed text form here, there is absolutely no evidence that proves it formed the majority of the text she presented after the trial, and in particular the final 40 pages of her reasoning for her judgement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
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.
|
I would like to see that analysis too. Please can you supply links?
Graham