On Jan 14, 2008 5:44 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't see how you jump to that conclusion. SLIPPERY is not appropriate > if an appeals court rejects the decision. It has.
SLIPPERY is, by definition, "appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act". REASSIGN is, by definition, "appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement". So without a definite statement from the panel that the prior judgement was absolutely inappropriate, all REASSIGN tells you is that its appropriateness is dubious. That falls squarely under the rubric of SLIPPERY. Ok, so the panel did say that the prior judge's ruling was "clearly wrong", which was too strong a phrasing in retrospect. The arguments used to support that statement indicated that the prior judge's arguments were "clearly wrong", not necessarily eir ruling. -root
