Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Feb 2026, 3:19 pm

Because it is so rare that this imbecile stops running to actually answer a question put to him, I  thought we might celebrate the occasion with another JuCo roast..

First, the searing heat of Objective Fact.

He was the presiding judge, as such it was his obligation to respond to all post verdict petitions.

Such a petition was filed by Team Grifty, for reasons which matter to Grifty.

Not exactly.....because this was a civil procedure it was not subject to criminal.law...the criminal definition was only used for the purpose of "finding" as opposed to verdict - as "rape" was not what informed the request for damages. Damages were sought specifically for "Defamation" and "Sexual Battery"

What you keep insisting is not the jury's verdict...to resolve that question, Judge Kaplan's decision says as follows

Both parties submitted proposed “special verdict” forms to distribute to the jury. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 49, which governs jury verdict forms and questions, “[t]he court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding on each issue of fact.”40 A special verdict stands in contrast to a general verdict form, which typically asks jurors to answer only the ultimate questions of liability and the damages amounts

As Presiding Judge he musr respond. In responding to the petition, he must respond directly to the questions therein.

Having established the facts of the matter, we will next move on to what makes people like Rog62 so **** g'ddammned stupid...