Slashdot Mirror
Prosecutor Loses Case For Citing Wikipedia
Hugh Pickens writes "The Philippine Daily Inquirer reports on a recent case where the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) lost an appeal after seeking to impeach the testimony of a defendant's expert witness by citing an article from Wikipedia. In her brief, the defendant said 'the authority, alluded to by oppositor-appellant, the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders DSM-IV-TR," was taken from an Internet website commonly known as Wikipedia,' and argued that Wikipedia itself contains a disclaimer saying it 'makes no guarantee of validity.' The court in finding for the defendant said in its decision that it found 'incredible ... if not a haphazard attempt, on the part of the (OSG) to impeach an expert witness, with, as pointed out by (the defendant) unreliable information. This is certainly unacceptable evidence, nothing short of a mere allegation totally unsupported by authority.'"
The judge proclaimed "[citation needed]"
I wouldn't have challenged the reference to Wikipedia at all.
I'd have edited the artical to add the phrase, "Defendant did nothing illegal.", then showed the entry to the judge and asked for a dismissal with prejudice.
Oh...I'd also add "neener, neener, neener Mr. Prosecutor." to it as well.
Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
Well then he'd better be careful. I certainly wouldn't want any bets to get loose!
I don't care why you're posting AC
I'd be more inclined to beat the prosecutor with a wet noodle
You Italians sure have weird and delicious forms of punishment.
I suggest a new standard:
Std. English "lose" : New Slashdotese: "loose"
Std. English "loose" : New Slashdotese: "looose"
This is obviously a recursive transformation that can be applied as many times as necessary to effectively lose the reader in the dust. Or should that be loose. Or maybe loooooooooose.
> Where the hell is THEIR original citation?
Professional journalists don't bother with such things. And remember, they are experts in their field, so you should trust them. Unlike Wikipedia, newspapers are authorities.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
If I add the comment "I guess this was a self-fulfilling prophesy, so to speak?", will I get "Score:5, Funny"?
...the prosecutors made reference to the DSM.
Diving Spaghetti Monster? What powers can he _not_ obtain?
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.