View Single Post
Old 08-29-2018, 08:44 PM   #29
darryl
Wizard
darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.darryl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
darryl's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,108
Karma: 60231510
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Device: Kobo Aura H2O, Kindle Oasis, Huwei Ascend Mate 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcentros View Post
If you've got facts on your side, "emotional language" is not necessary. The only place where emotional language is useful is for swaying public opinion and that should have nothing to do with a court case.
If only this was the case. Personally I would prefer a lawyer who lives in the real world. Defamation claims often incorporate fairly emotional language, particularly if malice or aggravated damages are claimed. If Mr Riggio did blaime Parneros for the sale falling through and acted as claimed, the pleading is very relevant as is. And, in the US, I expect at least the defamation part of the trial will be before a jury. So much for "emotional language" not being used. Cases indeed should be decided on their merits in a courtroom. Sadly, this is not always the case. Courts are very sensitive to publicity about cases before the Court, but they cannot control it perfectly.
darryl is offline   Reply With Quote