[TheAngryClam]

Findings of fact are reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard, and judicial decisions either on a de novo (really low) or abuse of discretion standard.

If a third of the wild-eyed accusations of the Terri Troopers were true, any of these standards of review would be satisfied.

[HiTech RedNeck]

So where does "as fishy as hell" fall on that continuum, clam?

[supercat]

Findings of fact are reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard, and judicial decisions either on a de novo (really low) or abuse of discretion standard.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but for a finding of fact to be thrown out by an appeals court without a remand, it must be contradicted by 100% of the available evidence; if it's only contradicted by 99.44% of the evidence and there's 0.56% that supports it, an appeals court will respect the trial court's judgement regardless of whether or not any reasonable person would agree with it.

[UCANSEE2]

You ignore the fact that the Judge may have allowed greed to overcome his sense of the law. There are such things as corrupt judges, child-molesting priests, and corrupt politicians, or had you forgotten?

And you still haven't answered any questions.