• AutomaticJack@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year 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
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year 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
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year 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
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year 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
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year 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
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year 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
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year 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.

                • MJBrune@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I mean the internal emails and things speak for themselves. You don’t need the CEO to comment on them.

                  • PenguinTD@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I hope you understand the principle of putting down names and/or title in email for paper trails is a thing, you don’t really think Valve is a “flat” structure as marketed, right? I’ve consider myself lucky that I didn’t run into much political or ethical drama thing for my career, but simply put names down and confirm the decision in writing dodge me quite a couple big bullets.

    • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year 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
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year 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
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year 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.