IS ORLY TAITZ “CONTROLLED OPPOSITION”?

Judge Malihi says:

“The credibility of witnesses is within the sole discretion of the trier of fact. In non-jury cases, that discretion lies with the Judge.”

Malihi said that Taitz didn’t properly qualify her witnesses as “experts”.

He said that Taitz simply put on 8 witnesses who provided testimony that he couldn’t properly evaluate.

He said “this court cannot make an objective threshold determination of these witnesses’ testimony without adequate knowledge of their qualifications….for the testimony of an expert witness to be received, his or her qualifications must first be proved”.

ORLY SCREWS THE POOCH

Interestingly, this gross “oversight” by Orly Taitz in not properly qualifying her witnesses as “experts” will probably render all of the evidence that they provided as moot upon appeal because appellate courts don’t generally find “fact” – they revue procedure.

It looks like an appeals court will only be able to view Orly’s “evidence” the way Malihi did.

CONTROLLED OPPOSITION?

Did Taitz intentionally do this?