In article ,
Jan C. Vorbruggen wrote:

You are making blanket assertions that don't hold up to serious
analysis. (Not to mention the implied comment that judges are capable
of adjudicating compmlicated technical issues; just how much litigation
and trial experience do YOU have?)

Enough.

Sure. As a jurist? Juror? Counsel? Witness?

Hereabouts, there are specialised groups of judges who handle certain
classes of cases exclusively; they usually are well respected by their
"customers".

Tell me again how that would work in a country of 260 million people
(plus no doubt several million illegal residents), comprised of 51
semi-sovereign jurisdictions (including D.C. but not including any U.S.
territories or protectorates), each with about four hundred years of
jurisprudential precedent to rely on/depend on/comply with, not to
mention various state and federal Constitutional guarantees of right to
trial by jury in nearly all matters. (And the very reason such
provisions were placed in those Constitutions was to prevent historical
abuses of power by judges).

And surely Lipobay (or whatever it was called in the US) is an example
of this in action.

Baycol? The medical evidence is pretty compelling, your insinuation to
the contrary notwithstanding. And I don't see Bayer planning bankruptcy
any time soon (which just belies your rationale for bringing it up in
the first place).

Or the alledged "poisoning" of apples by Alar.

How many apple growers/distributors/retailers were financially ruined or
bankrupted? None? Gee, what a surprise. And how many manufacturers of
alar (or any other apple pesticide) were bankrupted by the public hue
and cry? You need to come up with some better examples.


Jan

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
"Heisenberg might have been here."
~ Anonymous