LogFAQs > #979077353

Tyranthraxus posted...

Should just be "objection hearsay" and be done with it

The reason they're not doing that is presumably because if they do then they're saying "you're not allowed to use that," which - while rendering it inadmissible in the court and thus technically solving the issue - still leaves the notion out there for people to disingenuously use to taint public opinion afterwards. Whereas the current strategy literally forces Merchant to say that these things aren't true in court.

While legally speaking the end result would be the same, there's actually far more strength in forcing your opponent to openly admit in the courtroom that they've been lying about everything, as opposed to just not letting them lie about anything.

Of course, this train of logic assumes that the usuals weren't always going to be disingenuous in their reporting no matter what happened, and the State legal team are essentially trying to play chess against people who are trying to play hopscotch, but hey ho.