On Mon, 12 May 2008, Ian Kelly wrote: > I do not see how a "reasonable disinterested observer" could fail to > come to the conclusion that the judgement was equitable.
I do not see how a reasonable disinterested observer, upon seeing a clear-cut case of judicial bribery, can fail to have "serious doubts" as to the equity of the overall situation. -Goethe ps. Saying "I don't know about the 10 cents you're owed, but OMG POINES! JUDICIAL POINES for EVERYONE!" doesn't fit either "1 a: justice according to natural law or right; specifically : freedom from bias or favoritism" or our own legal version (the legal definition referring to an entire system from which we make our own custom).
