Microsoft Judge Takes His Case to the Public

An anonymous reader writes "The Washington Post reports: "About 15 months after the Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit rebuked U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson for talking to the media in the Microsoft antitrust case, Jackson has formally filed his rebuttal.""

Here's a

[oever]

more convenient link [washingtonpost.com]

The Island of Doctor Moureau

[mccalli]

And what is he, a scrabble champion or something? Do Judges REALLY talk like that?

In The Island of Doctor Moureau (the original book, not the film interpretations), there is a human/orang-utan cross which speaks in what he calls "Big Thinks". The Orang-utan's idea is that if he uses big enough words, he'll seem really intelligent.

When the book's protaganist flees home, he can't help noticing that most of the establishment (particularly his local vicar, as far as I recall), seems to be speaking purely in Big Thinks. I suspect our friend Mr Jackson is suffering from precisely the same syndrome.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Legal Times article?

[maharg]

here I think - http://www.law.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename= OpenMarket/Xcelerate/View&t=PubArticleDC&c=PubArti cle&cid=1032128635760&live=true&cst=1&pc=0&pa= 0 [law.com]

Re:So, the rules are bad?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hence the unqualified use of esoteric terms like omerta is just as justified as a reference to "snrtRNA" in Natrure or even "M$" on these pages.

It's closer to M$ than to snrtRNA. Indeed, snrtRNA is a value-neutral word, whereas both M$ and omerta are derogatory. Indeed, usually omerta refer's to the Mafia's "law" of silence (enforced by death...), so Jackson is indeed comparing the judicial establishment to a criminal organization.

Jackson's full article at law.com

[Anonymous Coward]

here [law.com]

Re:Microsoft case?

[jacquesm]

In theory, no.
In practice: YES
check out google on the myth of the good corporate citizen [google.com]
basically what it boils down to is that corporations in theory have less rights than a 'regular' citizen, but that in practice with all the legal power that they can buy they enjoy considerably more rights than ordinary people and that they are not ashamed (because of a lack of personal ethics) to abuse these rights

A Little Known Fact

[edward.virtually@pob]

One of the most interesting "little known facts" about Jackson and the MS case is that Jackson was the judge who overruled Stanley Sporkin, who felt the FIRST Department of Justice settlement (over MS's illegal crushing of competition in the DOS and GUI shell markets) was far too lenient, and allowed MS to avoid any real punishment for the illegal basis for its monopoly position. Now Jackson is in Sporkin's shoes and probably wishes he'd not helped MS get away the first time.

Re:What joke?

[Anonymous Coward]

A two-by-four (2x4) is a piece of lumber (wood) that is slightly less than 2 inches (~5cm) wide and slightly less than four inches (~10cm) tall. The reference is also sometimes accompanied with the length in feet. Ex: 2x4x8

Re:Mis-judged

[toopc]

I can't find the source so quickly, but I seem to remember that Judge Jackson did not express any bias prior to the trial. At worst he expressed bias during, but I seem to remember he gave only interviews after the trial.

He gave interviews during the trial. Actually the trial is ongoing, so even if he gave a interview today he would be giving an interview during the trial. What he did was even worse, Jackson gave an interview while he was still hearing the case - that is the reason his impartiality is suspect.

Microsoft Appeal Panel Blasts Judge Jackson [newsfactor.com]

In speeches and interviews with reporters after his historic ruling, Jackson made a number of remarks directed at Gates and Microsoft, but the interviews he granted during the trial left government lawyers scrambling to counteract the charge that Jackson was biased against the company and over-eager to punish it.

The interviews Jackson gave during the trial were embargoed, meaning they were not to be published until the trial's conclusion.

"The system would be a sham if all judges went around doing this," Edwards said. "The public has something at stake, it's the integrity of the system."

Kollar-Kotelly fights abuse of civil rights....

[jerryasher]

Judge Kollar-Kotelly is presiding over our secret FISA court -- the one that recently said no to expanding the Justice Department's powers since they have lied to the court on too many prior occasions. [washingtonpost.com] Perhaps she is busy these days fighting the war on terrorism, AND fighting Ashcroft's war on civil liberties.

For more info on the FISA court, see the FAS page on FISA [fas.org]

The

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 [cornell.edu] prescribes procedures for requesting judicial authorization for electronic surveillance and physical search of persons engaged in espionage or international terrorism against the United States on behalf of a foreign power.

Requests are adjudicated by a special eleven member court called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.