• PonyOfWar
      link
      fedilink
      476 months ago

      On the other hand I don’t see why being there in person has to be required for anyone. He can say exactly the same things remotely.

    • @Kaijobu@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      246 months ago

      A court room with stale air and only him with his mask on. Surely, what could go wrong? I see no risks at all.

      Just let him join remotely. What is the big deal here?

      • @AutomaticJack@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        56 months ago

        It states everyone else will wear a mask too and he will remove his during his deposition. Like it or not, the courts require in-person attendance.

        • @MJBrune@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          136 months ago

          Why do the courts require an in person attendance? How is it okay for our government services to ignore technology? Imagine we still went with God’s will as proof of a crime. This is just the ignorance of the judge making someone take a day to come down and give their side. This whole thing could be done via text message. We just have a government that isn’t utilizing technology.

          • @PenguinTD@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            66 months ago

            cause you would then have to dispatch a 3rd party audit to make sure Gabe isn’t reading from a teleprompter that his lawyers prep to answer any questions on the fly. You can prep your script “before” but not during, once you are on the stand you are on your own, subject to the court rules, etc.

            • @MJBrune@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              36 months ago

              Anything they haven’t been prepped on is just answered with I don’t know. So the end result is just who is the better actor? Who memorized their lines the best.

              • @PenguinTD@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                36 months ago

                They will have to face the consequence because then the lawyer will bring up stuff that shows:

                • you know and you are lying
                • you said/did/wrote something and you forget but here is the internal email etc.
                • use that to their advantage when possible.

                Target is to make the case, through Gabe is just a attacking vector.

                • @MJBrune@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  36 months ago

                  It would be impossible to prove that you remembered something while in the stand which is why many people use that as a defense.

                  • @PenguinTD@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    16 months ago

                    Did you followed the Debb vs Heard one? I know it’s kinda special case with lots of video and court recorded footage etc. Gabe isn’t exactly a celebrity that expose their private life, but if internal emails is on the table for discovery then it can also be very different. Cause they will just tell you “you said/wrote make a decision here from this email” then start off that. Like you said who is a better actor? Can you suddenly remember details with which “partial” quote are referenced without context from email 6 months ago for your argument? And then suddenly don’t remember any details making a decision 2~3 weeks ago? From neuroscience, our memory is pretty unreliable as we can fill the gap all we want. But it’s court case just how the judge/jury believed what part they saw/hear.

        • @GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          56 months ago

          It’s not even a valid excuse any more at this point. People can get vaccinated at their leisure against the current variants no problem, and other fat old dudes don’t get to bail on an uncomfortable situation either, this is just special treatment for the rich. Also all the accommodations that are already being made with everyone wearing masks. Also I’m sure they can open a fucking window or so for some fresh air

          • @Abnorc@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            166 months ago

            I might be more inclined to agree if there was some benefit to having him show up in person, but I don’t see why he can’t just attend this remotely. People get sick after being vaccinated too. Maybe is a minimal risk, but it seems like a pointless risk nonetheless.

            • @GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              36 months ago

              It’s a court of law. People appear in person to ensure they are who they are, their answers are theirs and they fully own them, they aren’t being coerced or manipulated, and so on. FaceTimeing in from the bathroom at his home isn’t cutting it.

    • @MJBrune@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      176 months ago

      He’s required to wear a mask. He can’t wear one while giving the deposition though. A remote deposition isn’t different than an in person one. So this argument falls flat. Why require a person to travel if we have the technology to not? Why did we even do all of this Internet building if our government services won’t use it? Technology is supposed to make our lives easier. The 80 year old judge is clearly behind the technical times and doesn’t want to learn a skill that should be required at this point.