On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Charles Reiss<woggl...@gmail.com> wrote: > I judge TRUE. The deputised report incorrectly listed allispaul as > active, and this was not corrected. Relevant precedent: CFJ 2392.
This has already been appealed, but I'd like to point out that CFJ2392 deals with intentionally incorrect reports and explicitly doesn't claim to cover unintentional mistakes.
