Rossi’s past legal problems in Italy are probably not admissible in this case, that is true… although otherwise inadmissible evidence which shows a “pattern of conduct” can be admissible for that purpose… but that is not what I am talking about.
Let’s focus on a dismissal of the complaint. The judge in this case will have access to historical and background material which is all over the internet – and to letters and complaints from interested parties. If he believes that negative information is valid, he can dismiss the case on a technicality which he otherwise might let slide. Part of his action may be completely off the record. This kind of trial could take weeks and cost the taxpayer tens of thousands, A judge might never admit to doing his own research on the personalities involved, or having his clerk do it, but he is human and his time is valuable. If the judge becomes convinced that Rossi is dishonest, or even if he doesn’t - he is fully empowered to dismiss the complaint on a valid technicality, such as lack of signatures – yet part of his complete rationale for the dismissal may not ever be disclosed. From: Jed Rothwell I know little about the law, but based on a jury I once sat on, I do not think that would be admissible. It is not relevant to the case. Rossi is not the defendant.
