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]"
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 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.
If I add the comment "I guess this was a self-fulfilling prophesy, so to speak?", will I get "Score:5, Funny"?