OK, sorry for using French spelling.
I know you have some odd views regarding Ms Palin, so I leave it there, except for posting a comment from another site where the actual case is discussed:
“In Britain, judges sum up the evidence in the case for the jury, and give them some views they might or might not take. In America, the rule is generally judges are not to comment on the evidence.
If there was enough evidence to go the jury in the first place, then the judge ought to leave it alone until verdict. If there wasn’t sufficient evidence at the close of plaintiff’s case, then the judge should have tossed the case at that point, before it ever got to the jury.
By announcing this ruling while the jury is still deliberating, and not being sequestered, jurors will doubtlessly know of the ruling before resuming deliberations, the judge has overstepped and clearly tainted the jury’s deliberations. Reversible error? I think it should be.”
Or maybe she started screeching and pissed off the judge.