Thomas' Testimony and the RIAA's Near-Fatal Error 283
eldavojohn writes "The long and torrid trial of Jammie Thomas is in its second stage and in full swing. Yesterday, two major events took place: Thomas gave her surprising testimony and the RIAA was threatened for not disclosing new information to the opposing counsel. Thomas claimed she didn't know what KaZaA was before the trial started. She also admitted that the hard drive handed over to investigators was different than the one that was in her computer during the time of infringement. Her testimony from the first trial was that 'the hard drive replacement had taken place in 2004 and that the drive had not been swapped again since.' This is problematic because the new hard drive had a manufacturing date of 2005. The RIAA had its own troubles, almost losing all evidence from a particular witness when they added an additional log file to evidence without the defense being notified of it. The judge mercifully only removed that new evidence from the trial. It was related to whether or not an external hard drive was ever connected to the computer."
Are you aware of what "Fatal" means? (Score:2, Funny)
Sheesh.
Re:Are you aware of what "Fatal" means? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Are you aware of what "Fatal" means? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:innocent until proven? (Score:5, Funny)
The RIAA (not the "state")
I thought they were the same thing now.
Re:innocent until proven? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:And the evidence is compelling... (Score:3, Funny)
then they brought suit against the juror who started humming along.
Re:And the evidence is compelling... (Score:2, Funny)
Oh yeah, I can see that. Her high school yearbook photo shows her picture and the caption Jammie "xogirl423" Thomas.