Quote:
Originally posted by Not Me
Why is the judge not allowing that testimony in? In hypertechnical legal terms not just because the judge doesn't want the case in his courtroom.
|
CNN reports that it was expert testimony that wasn't being let in. The experts were wall st. analysts, and they were to testify as to whether Stewart's denials caused them to change their ratings/valuations of her company.
So, I read that to mean the evidence was likely excluded on a two possible grounds.
1) Daubert
2) Relevance to teh charge
3) relevance to the specific fact sought to be proven
Clearly it's relevant,lso long as the charge stands. If the charge were that weak, the judge would have dismissed it. So, I see it that the judge dismissed these analysts' testimony on Daubert grounds, or on specific relevance: that they do not represent and cannot testify about the "reasonable" investor because they are analysts, not every-day investors.
