Expat: it was really good to see you again too.
I'm not sure that I could be much very much assistance in this case - this is an area of law that I do not normally practise - but I will do what I can if I am asked.
Unfortunately, I was not in court when the issue of Penton and Anderson's potential vidence was argued and decided, so I can't say much more than I have already said. I am hopeful that the decision to admit written statements rather than oral evidence resulted from the defendants' counsel agreeing to a deal to resolve the issue of admitting any evidence from Penton and Anderson - but I am just speculating at this point. If such a deal was struck, they will not have grounds for appeal. But if the defense argued against any evidence from Penton and Anderson being admitted, and no deal was made, and the Judge decided to resolve the issue by admitting written testimony against the objections of defense counsel, then I am a little worried that grounds for appeal may exist.
You should know, however, that even if the worst case scenario actually occurrred, and the defendants have grounds for appeal, this does not necessarily mean that a victory by Vickie would be overturned on appeal. The defendants would have to establish on appeal that if not for the Judge's error the result might have been different. If the appeal court finds that the other (properly admitted) evidence strongly supports the result, it will not be overturned. Grounds for appeal does not necessarily = successul appeal.
Finally, please remember everyone, this case is far from over - Vickie Boers seems to be a good, strong, intelligent woman, and she has a good case, and certainly deserves to win - but the defendants have not yet presented any of their evidence. I sincerely hope Vickie wins this case - it is important - but there is still a long way to go.
Edited by - commie chris on 13 September 2002 23:41:51