So cute!
A gentle chiding by the judge in this case I'm reading:
The contaminant TCDD is one of the most toxic chemicals known to man. One witness described it as 'exquisitely toxic'. Much has been written on TCDD and its effects. It has been indicated that there are upwards of 40,000 different articles on the subject. A great number of those were submitted to the Court. It is not my intention to summarise those, nor is it necessary, as almost every scientific witness as well as the regulatory agencies has already done that. While there are opposing views, and the whole field is not without some uncertainty, there is no dearth of writings. So there can be no doubt that everything submitted was considered by me, I have read every article submitted to me, a formidable task in itself, and I now join the group who has reviewed all the relevant literature, although I am far from convinced that this volume of documents was necessary for this case.
Nunn, J. Palmer v Nova Scotia Forest Industries (1983), 60 N.S.R. (2d) 271.
It reminds me of primary four, when we were taught how to separate paragraphs. Each paragraph should be about one critical point and all the other stuff would be supporting the point or leading up to it. In my quoted paragraph, the judge's point: "Okay I get that it's toxic. Stop bombarding me with extraneous documents, that I have been so gracious to read anyway. Argh. So now you'd better congratulate me!"
The contaminant TCDD is one of the most toxic chemicals known to man. One witness described it as 'exquisitely toxic'. Much has been written on TCDD and its effects. It has been indicated that there are upwards of 40,000 different articles on the subject. A great number of those were submitted to the Court. It is not my intention to summarise those, nor is it necessary, as almost every scientific witness as well as the regulatory agencies has already done that. While there are opposing views, and the whole field is not without some uncertainty, there is no dearth of writings. So there can be no doubt that everything submitted was considered by me, I have read every article submitted to me, a formidable task in itself, and I now join the group who has reviewed all the relevant literature, although I am far from convinced that this volume of documents was necessary for this case.
Nunn, J. Palmer v Nova Scotia Forest Industries (1983), 60 N.S.R. (2d) 271.
It reminds me of primary four, when we were taught how to separate paragraphs. Each paragraph should be about one critical point and all the other stuff would be supporting the point or leading up to it. In my quoted paragraph, the judge's point: "Okay I get that it's toxic. Stop bombarding me with extraneous documents, that I have been so gracious to read anyway. Argh. So now you'd better congratulate me!"
Post a Comment