Analogies are not reason. They are just a case of one thing reminding you of another.
Which is different from logic. The legal system is a social agreement on what works best for society, and precedents do that so long as they are in the ballpark of reasonableness. The emphasis is on credibility and predictability. Logic is just one of the variables.
-
-
I'm on board here. But precedent only controls when facts are 100% the same. In almost all cases the facts are partially the same to cases that said YES, and partially the same to cases that said NO. The lawyer who can analogize these cases better wins that argument. Every time
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.