• cybersandwich@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      It does feel that way. If he actually believes what he’s saying, he could have issued the order to the jury to treat all the evidence like it proves Google sucks.

      But he didn’t. I wonder if any Lemmy lawyers could explain why he might not have gone to that point when he’s obviously upset about it.

      • hoshikarakitaridia@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        IANAL

        Usually judges don’t issue such extreme orders only because of the fact that they don’t want to be hammered on appeal.

        Now this one is different. I have 2 theories: either the judge thinks the mandatory negative inference is not needed because there’s a good chance the jury will do that anyway, or the judge is gonna advise the government to make this a separate case.

        It honestly doesn’t sound to me like he’s just saying one thing and doing the other. He sounds rightly agitated and usually agitated judges will give you a low blow sooner or later if you fuck around.