The Off Topic Topic

[Sheilbh]

And this one - useful for Ukraine (I am very much on the journalists side in terms of understanding ):

[crazy canuck]

The war effort needs more Volvo Tanks

[The Minsky Moment]

I haven't been following the Depp-Heard trial that carefully.  I had simply assumed that the accusations against Depp had substantial merit based on what I assumed was a very thorough review of the evidence by a British court during the Sun trial.  Last weekend I looked up that judgment out of curiosity.  I was rather surprised to see how flimsy the analysis was. 

As one example, Heard submitted sworn court papers with a very vivid accusation about Depp burning a painting and hitting her on the lip.  The story completely fell apart when the evidence was taken, and instead the hitting incident was said to occur 3 weeks later and had nothing to do with the painting.  No person other than Heard witnessed the assault.  Heard said she told her assistant about it but the assistant didn't testify (she did in the US case and apparently denied the incident).  Heard said she told her parents and indeed there was a cotemporaneous email - where Heard said Depp did not hit her.  Several photos during that time frame were introduced, none of which showed any evidence of the split lip. The judge reviewed this evidence and concluded the assault occurred. He did so as he did in multiple other instances based almost exclusively on what can at best be charitably described as a "pop psych" theory without the benefit of any expert psychological testimony.

Reading that judgment undermined my personal confidence that the Heard allegations had been thoroughly reviewed in The Sun case.

[crazy canuck]

I haven't been following the Depp-Heard trial that carefully.  I had simply assumed that the accusations against Depp had substantial merit based on what I assumed was a very thorough review of the evidence by a British court during the Sun trial.  Last weekend I looked up that judgment out of curiosity.  I was rather surprised to see how flimsy the analysis was. 

As one example, Heard submitted sworn court papers with a very vivid accusation about Depp burning a painting and hitting her on the lip.  The story completely fell apart when the evidence was taken, and instead the hitting incident was said to occur 3 weeks later and had nothing to do with the painting.  No person other than Heard witnessed the assault.  Heard said she told her assistant about it but the assistant didn't testify (she did in the US case and apparently denied the incident).  Heard said she told her parents and indeed there was a cotemporaneous email - where Heard said Depp did not hit her.  Several photos during that time frame were introduced, none of which showed any evidence of the split lip. The judge reviewed this evidence and concluded the assault occurred. He did so as he did in multiple other instances based almost exclusively on what can at best be charitably described as a "pop psych" theory without the benefit of any expert psychological testimony.

Reading that judgment undermined my personal confidence that the Heard allegations had been thoroughly reviewed in The Sun case.

Interesting, I have not been paying any attention except that I heard this second action was proceeding.  I wondered why no one had argued the was res judicata.  And your summary might provide part of the answer.

[Syt]

And this one - useful for Ukraine (I am very much on the journalists side in terms of understanding ):

I saw German military experts comment on that on Twitter. They say most journalists try to understand better, and that it's a learning process. During the Cold War, people were familiar with what tank divisions are, the difference between main battle tanks, self propelled artillery and infantry fighting vehicles, but that a lot of that has atrophied since the 90s, because it wasn't needed in regular coverage anymore. Let's face it, outside of certain nerdy circles, the differentiation is not particularly clear.

[Barrister]

Interesting, I have not been paying any attention except that I heard this second action was proceeding.  I wondered why no one had argued the was res judicata.  And your summary might provide part of the answer.

Parties are not the same.  Trial in UK was against the newspaper.  Trial in US is against Heard personally.

[Sheilbh]

Interesting, I have not been paying any attention except that I heard this second action was proceeding.  I wondered why no one had argued the was res judicata.  And your summary might provide part of the answer.

Also isn't this between Depp and Heard? In the UK it was Depp suing the Sun/News Group and Heard was just a witness.

Separately I wasn't following but I'm 90% sure Heard's assistant did testify here. I remember seeing news about her that seemed very damaging to Heard. But I've no idea about it all to be honest I didn't and haven't followd it closely - my general impression was that it's all very messy and no-one comes out of it well.

[grumbler]

I haven't been following the Depp-Heard trial that carefully.  I had simply assumed that the accusations against Depp had substantial merit based on what I assumed was a very thorough review of the evidence by a British court during the Sun trial.  Last weekend I looked up that judgment out of curiosity.  I was rather surprised to see how flimsy the analysis was. 

As one example, Heard submitted sworn court papers with a very vivid accusation about Depp burning a painting and hitting her on the lip.  The story completely fell apart when the evidence was taken, and instead the hitting incident was said to occur 3 weeks later and had nothing to do with the painting.  No person other than Heard witnessed the assault.  Heard said she told her assistant about it but the assistant didn't testify (she did in the US case and apparently denied the incident).  Heard said she told her parents and indeed there was a cotemporaneous email - where Heard said Depp did not hit her.  Several photos during that time frame were introduced, none of which showed any evidence of the split lip. The judge reviewed this evidence and concluded the assault occurred. He did so as he did in multiple other instances based almost exclusively on what can at best be charitably described as a "pop psych" theory without the benefit of any expert psychological testimony.

Reading that judgment undermined my personal confidence that the Heard allegations had been thoroughly reviewed in The Sun case.

Wasn't it true, though, that the case was between Depp and the Sun (and it's editor)?  Why would the judge evaluate the "truth" of Heard's accusations except in the light of whether the Sun was reasonable in believing them?  Heard herself was not a party in the suit.

[Sheilbh]

Wasn't it true, though, that the case was between Depp and the Sun (and it's editor)?  Why would the judge evaluate the "truth" of Heard's accusations except in the light of whether the Sun was reasonable in believing them?  Heard herself was not a party in the suit.

I think they went for the statutory defence that it was substantially true - which is probably the most difficult.

But it's also probably the only one that could work. It wasn't a statement of opinion, so honest opinion would apply and I really struggle to see how they could demonstrate that it was in the public interest.

I think reasonable belief is only really relevant if your defence is public interest - that you have a reasonable belief something publishing something is in the public interest.

[Malthus]

I just discovered there is a whole subreddit devoted to Ea-Nasir, an Iraqi copper merchant circa 1750 BC, who was (apparently) really rude and sold bad quality copper - as noted in a famous cuneiform "letter" complaining to him about these things.

It's r/reallyshittycopper

What's even more bizarre - recently, another letter was translated, apparently by mr. Ea-Nasir, reassuring some customers (including one "Mr Shorty") that some dispute or other will be resolved ...

As a lawyer, this is hilarious - that files relating to some commercial dispute are among the earliest writings preserved.

Ea-Nasir's name lives on!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-nasir

[The Larch]

I just discovered there is a whole subreddit devoted to Ea-Nasir, an Iraqi copper merchant circa 1750 BC, who was (apparently) really rude and sold bad quality copper - as noted in a famous cuneiform "letter" complaining to him about these things.

It's r/reallyshittycopper

What's even more bizarre - recently, another letter was translated, apparently by mr. Ea-Nasir, reassuring some customers (including one "Mr Shorty") that some dispute or other will be resolved ...

As a lawyer, this is hilarious - that files relating to some commercial dispute are among the earliest writings preserved.

Ea-Nasir's name lives on!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-nasir

Yeah, it's a bit of a joke/meme in certain nerdy communities. That a shitty Sumerian merchant's name is still remembered several millenia after his time is certainly something. 

And the guy seems to have enjoyed collecting these complaints!

Other tablets have been found in the ruins believed to be Ea-nasir's dwelling. These include a letter from a man named Arbituram who complained he had not received his copper yet, while another says he was tired of receiving bad copper.

[Malthus]

I just discovered there is a whole subreddit devoted to Ea-Nasir, an Iraqi copper merchant circa 1750 BC, who was (apparently) really rude and sold bad quality copper - as noted in a famous cuneiform "letter" complaining to him about these things.

It's r/reallyshittycopper

What's even more bizarre - recently, another letter was translated, apparently by mr. Ea-Nasir, reassuring some customers (including one "Mr Shorty") that some dispute or other will be resolved ...

As a lawyer, this is hilarious - that files relating to some commercial dispute are among the earliest writings preserved.

Ea-Nasir's name lives on!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-nasir

Yeah, it's a bit of a joke/meme in certain nerdy communities. That a shitty Sumerian merchant's name is still remembered several millenia after his time is certainly something. 

And the guy seems to have enjoyed collecting these complaints!

Other tablets have been found in the ruins believed to be Ea-nasir's dwelling. These include a letter from a man named Arbituram who complained he had not received his copper yet, while another says he was tired of receiving bad copper.

The fact that his house was abandoned and his correspondence preserved by the drifting sand is interesting - maybe "Mr. Shorty" paid him a little visit ... 

[The Larch]

I just discovered there is a whole subreddit devoted to Ea-Nasir, an Iraqi copper merchant circa 1750 BC, who was (apparently) really rude and sold bad quality copper - as noted in a famous cuneiform "letter" complaining to him about these things.

It's r/reallyshittycopper

What's even more bizarre - recently, another letter was translated, apparently by mr. Ea-Nasir, reassuring some customers (including one "Mr Shorty") that some dispute or other will be resolved ...

As a lawyer, this is hilarious - that files relating to some commercial dispute are among the earliest writings preserved.

Ea-Nasir's name lives on!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-nasir

Yeah, it's a bit of a joke/meme in certain nerdy communities. That a shitty Sumerian merchant's name is still remembered several millenia after his time is certainly something. 

And the guy seems to have enjoyed collecting these complaints!

Other tablets have been found in the ruins believed to be Ea-nasir's dwelling. These include a letter from a man named Arbituram who complained he had not received his copper yet, while another says he was tired of receiving bad copper.

The fact that his house was abandoned and his correspondence preserved by the drifting sand is interesting - maybe "Mr. Shorty" paid him a little visit ... 

Fate wanted his name to be remembered for eternity. 

[grumbler]

Fate wanted his name to be remembered for eternity. 

Fate didn't strike me as the kind of poster who cared about this kind of thing.

[ulmont]

Ea-Nasir's name lives on!