#expert evidence

[reallyimpossibledetective]

A Disjointed and Somewhat Incoherent Discrimination Case.

The discrimination law case of Giggle -v- Tickle For Girls (No 2) [2024] FCA 960 agitated some interesting issues.

Relevantly, the Court looked at Dr Helen Joyce and found: • She has a PhD in mathematics and is also a journalist and author • but does not have any formal education or qualifications even in biology, let alone in gender, sex or law, being the topics which her report purports to address. • She has no recognised expertise in any of the areas in which she purports to express an expert opinion. • What was proffered as an expert report, was received as nothing more than submissions [Paragraph 145]. • Her opinion was of no assistance to the case of the Respondents or to the Court [Paragraph 147].

The Court also found that case of the Respondents was run in a disjointed and somewhat incoherent way [Paragraph 215].

I find it extraordinary that a litigant (represented by experienced lawyers) seeking to be taken seriously, would endeavour to lead evidence from someone with no recognised expertise in any of the areas in which they purport to express an expert opinion.

Similarly, running your case in a disjointed and incoherent way is hardly a recipe for success and does little to enhance a reputation as capable and credible lawyers.

This critique informs the capacity of those litigants and lawyers to subsequently credibly comment upon the strengths and weaknesses of the case.

Credibility and coherence are crucial in legal proceedings. Sometimes, the passion to win can overshadow critical self-assessment, leading to disjointed arguments and reliance on unqualified witnesses who are proffered as experts.

Offering a non-expert as an expert and presenting a disjointed case can stem from a few key issues: • Overconfidence: The litigants or their lawyers might believe that the credibility of the individual or the strength of their arguments will prevail, regardless of expertise. • Desperation: Sometimes, a lack of strong, qualified experts can lead parties to lean on anyone with relevant-sounding credentials, even if they do not have recognised expertise. • Zealous Advocacy: A passionate belief in the righteousness of their cause can blind lawyers to the weaknesses in their approach. They become so focussed on winning, that they overlook the importance of coherence and credible evidence.

These missteps often result in weakened cases and can undermine the credibility of those involved. A successful strategy requires a clear, coherent presentation and expert testimony that stands up to scrutiny. Not always easy to acquire, but necessary.

It is quite telling when those who were ill-prepared lament their loss. Running a case in such a way and then decrying the outcome, shows a glaring lack of self-awareness and accountability. Preparing thoroughly and presenting a coherent, well-supported argument is foundational for credibility.

Presenting a non-expert as an expert is a sure-fire way to erode trust and credibility. It is astonishing that experienced lawyers would risk the attendant diminution of their reputation. This not only weakens their case, but also makes them look laughably under-prepared.

When you are too invested, sometimes your own biases and emotions cloud your judgment.

In the subject case the legislation was the problem and the judgment of the Court clearly stated that biology was not a relevant issue. Subsequently dealing with the problematic legislation has more utility than endlessly crying about biology.

If the legislation is flawed, that is the root issue to tackle. Getting bogged down in irrelevant debates only distracts from meaningful progress. Addressing the problematic legislation directly is the way forward, rather than fixating on ancillary issues.

[aiolegalservices]

Pre-Action Protocols, Expert Evidence, and Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Guide to Efficient Legal Dispute Management

  Paragraph 6 of the Pre-action Conduct of all proceedings confirms that if a relevant pre-action protocol exists, parties are required to follow it before initiating legal action. This ensures that both sides take certain preliminary steps, such as sharing information and exploring potential settlements, to possibly resolve the dispute without court intervention. If no specific protocol applies,…

[hotvintagepoll]

recently discovered some fascinating hobbies for a few of the older tv men ive been submitting for the vintage tv polls and that got me wondering what (if any) strange/niche/unique hobbies have you ever encountered among classic film actors?

I think my favorite is Danny Kaye, who was apparently the type of guy who would fall in love with something and fall hard—he wanted to learn how to fly a plane, so he did; he conducted orchestras with 0 ability to read sheet music; he became so riveted by the art of Asian cuisine he started studying under master chefs Johnny Kan and Cecilia Chiang in their San Francisco restaurants, eventually building a separate kitchen into his house to support his obsession, which lasted the rest of his life. I just think that's neat.

[antaripirate]

apologies for the random ass personal post but i graduated!!!!

having finished a degree feels incredibly fucking weird, but i now have a BSc. and the fact that i have a full scholarship for my research MSc in a couple of months is still insane to me. i’m also going to be working with the British Antarctic Survey which has always been a fucking dream for me.

anyway. successfully collected my first set of letters and i wanted to post something even though i’ll delete it.

this is a sappy ass post but i’m working class, disabled and first gen and so for me this is fucking huge.

anyway. i’m very proud of this :)

[sandymybeloved]

an incomplete guide to UNIT Dating

I recently made and gave this presentation, so the information isn't entirely complete, but here. Basically I looked at every story the Brigadier appeared in and (with the help of this TARDIS wiki article) tried to put a date to all of them. some slides are missing to fit this into a single post, but not many and none essential

[bananonbinary]

god i miss when the internet wasn't garbage. you can't google anything these days without whatever answer you're looking for getting lost under a deluge of seo ai bullshit. cannot wait until the bubble pops and we might get useable search engines again.

[wonder-worker]

"Among their complaints [in 1460, the Yorkists] specifically blamed the earls of Wiltshire and Shrewsbury and Viscount Beaumont for ‘stirring’ the king [Henry VI] to hold a parliament at Coventry that would attaint them and for keeping them from the king’s presence and likely mercy, asserting that this was done against [the king's] will. To this they added the charge that these evil counselors were also tyrannizing other true men* without the king’s knowledge. Such claims of malfeasance obliquely raised the question of Henry’s fitness as a king, for how could he be deemed competent if such things happened without his knowledge and against his wishes? They also tied in rumors circulating somewhat earlier in the southern counties and likely to have originated in Calais that Henry was really ‘good and gracious Lord to the [Yorkists] since, it was alleged, he had not known of or assented to their attainders. On 11 June the king was compelled to issue a proclamation stating that they were indeed traitors and that assertions to the contrary were to be ignored." - Helen Maurer, "Margaret of Anjou: "Queenship and Power in Late Medieval England"

Three things that we can surmise from this:

We know where the "Henry was an innocent helpless king being controlled and manipulated by his Evil™ advisors" rhetoric came from**.

The Yorkists were deliberately trying to downplay Henry VI's actual role and involvement in politics and the Wars of the Roses. They cast him as a "statue of a king", blamed all royal policies and decisions on others*** (claiming that Henry wasn't even aware of them), and framed themselves as righteous and misunderstood counselors who remained loyal to the crown. We should keep this in mind when we look at chronicles' comments of Henry's alleged passivity and the so-called "role reversal" between him and Margaret.

Henry VI's actual agency and involvement is nevertheless proven by his own actions. We know what he thought of the Yorkists, and we know he took the effort to publicly counter their claims through a proclamation of his own. That speaks louder than the politically motivated narrative of his enemies, don't you think?

*There was some truth to these criticisms. For example, Wiltshire (ie: one of the men named in the pamphlet) was reportedly involved in a horrible situation in June which included hangings and imprisonments for tax resistance in Newbury. The best propagandists always contain a degree of truth, etc. **I've seen some theories on why Margaret of Anjou wasn't mentioned in these pamphlets alongside the others even though she was clearly being vilified during that time as well, and honestly, I think those speculations are mostly unnecessary. Margaret was absent because it was regarded as very unseemly to target queens in such an officially public manner. We see a similar situation a decade later: Elizabeth Woodville was vilified and her whole family - popularly and administratively known as "the queen's kin" - was disparaged in Warwick and Clarence's pamphlets. This would have inevitably associated her with their official complaints far more than Margaret had been, but she was also not directly mentioned. It was simply not considered appropriate. ***This narrative was begun by the Duke of York & Warwick and was - demonstrably - already widespread by the end of 1460. When Edward IV came to power, there seems to have been a slight shift in how he spoke of Henry (he referred to Henry as their "great enemy and adversary"; his envoys were clearly willing to acknowledge Henry's role in Lancastrian resistance to Yorkist rule; etc), but he nevertheless continued the former narrative for the most part. I think this was because 1) it was already well-established and widespread by his father, and 2) downplaying Henry's authority would have served to emphasize Edward's own kingship, which was probably advantageous for a usurper whose deposed rival was still alive and out of reach. In some sense, the Lancastrians did the same thing with their own propaganda across the 1460s, which was clearly not as effective in terms of garnering support and is too long to get into right now, but was still very relevant when it came to emphasizing their own right to the throne while disparaging the Yorkists' claim.

[hello-delicious-tea]

Mary Pope Osborn has redeemed herself with Dragon of the Red Dawn. Night of the Ninjas was such absolute crap - clearly she was still properly feeling her way into her whole “history lesson thinly disguised as adventure story” schtick, and in this second trip to Japan, we’re doing MUCH better. Very pleased that Teaschooler is learning about Bashō and historical firefighting methods. However, he was not pleased when I tried to read The Narrow Road to Oku to him.

[advisortotheadvisor]

nothing worse than a YouTube video that's kind of wrong about a subject you know about

[gayinternetsideways]

I think cybertron in the idw comics has some sort of feudalism type economy

[wernerherzogs]

billie hasnt been tinkering with her face? if u see images of her from her teenager years she looks the same except ya know older cause shes 42 now

kindly disagree! as someone who has steadily watcher her career for years now, she's clearly had her share of Beauty Procedures, with the last two years in particular becoming Worrying to me

[angelmush]

ugh ur recipe posts motivate me to feed myself better, i love seeing them whenever u post! how do you manage to like grocery shop and cook ur meals in a productive way? i find myself wanting to try recipes but end up getting the same few ingredients and making the same things 😭

i just answered a really similar ask you can refer to if this doesn't feel helpful, but the way i grocery shop and meal plan is hinged on the fact that i consume a wild amount of cooking content on the internet LOL . my process is basically that i'll pick 3-4 meals and a baked good/dessert to make throughout the week. i either come up with them myself or i'll choose a recipe to try from videos i've seen on instagram or posts from tumblr or youtube. i will try to coordinate these choices so they share some of the same ingredients to stretch my dollar and finish the things in my fridge for the week. idk if that is useful but that's the way i do it!! i also make lists of the meals i'm planning on so i don't forget and i try to plan which days i want to make them based on my work schedule and decide if/when i need to prep things ahead of time (dry brines, sauces, marinades etc) and i keep a little schedule in my notes app

[surprisinglydomestickakashi]

My favorite part about being still into Naruto is the way I'm into it means I frequently have to tell algorithms that I don't actually want to consume Naruto like they want me to. Don't give me bland voice over theories from people who need to be reminded of minor characters. I need my clinically not-normal girls, gays, and theys to talk with about the little side guys they have entire lives mapped out for, the interpretations that include their favorite filler episode because they like it and above all else people who don't shit on the women characters or only consider them, annoying and useless or waifu material.

[cave-monkey]

It dawns on me that the journey to the west took 5,040 days exactly, right, and while the book goes from tribulation to tribulation, there were still only 81 of those. And they were missing one when they got there. And some of the tribulations Tripitaka went through happened before the journey even started.

So, even being generous and saying that most of the tribulations that occurred during the actual journey could be said to have taken a few days to handle each, that's still only about 10% of the journey. A tribulation was anything that happened that put Tripitaka in danger or presented any sort of obstacle to him. Anything even remotely exciting would have fallen into that ~10%, and nothing else could have happened, because otherwise they wouldn't have gotten west one moderate inconvenience and/or major trauma short of the prize. (I mean, unless the thing that happened managed to not involve Tripitaka at all in any way, but that's very hard to do when you are all attached at the hip.)

Holy cow they really were just walking. ALL THAT TIME. No wonder Zhu Bajie was stirring the pot at any given opportunity. It was literally the only thing to do.

[himalayaan-flowers]

mental health experts are not a thing

[jakeperalta]

in honour of grammys weekend being here, these are what I'm rooting for:

rolling up the welcome mat for best country album. probably a total long shot but I would literally sacrifice all my other hopes for this one to win

anti hero for song of the year (+ record of the year would be nice, but I'm mostly hoping for soty)

I think I'd like guts for album of the year, although obviously would be happy for it to go to midnights

noah kahan for best new artist

as usual, jack antonoff for producer of the year

ballad of a homeschooled girl for best rock song (I know nothing about rock I just think it would be fun for a song about being an awkward teenage girl to win this category)

in your love by tyler childers for best music video (also country song or country solo)