[nickcarraway]

I tried to follow the case as I could. The simple fact though is he lost. And though Mr. Steyn is very smart, people who represent themselves have a very poor track record. Do you really think he should have lost his case?

[StAnDeliver]

"I tried to follow the case as I could. The simple fact though is he lost. And though Mr. Steyn is very smart, people who represent themselves have a very poor track record. Do you really think he should have lost his case?"

And Mann receive $1 in compensatory damages which will cause the $1M punitive to be vastly reduced, possibly to the point where Mann will lose money.

There wasn't any 'winning' this case, his co-defendant compared Mann to Sandusky, and Mark re-attributed it, thus both overcame Sullivan.

Yet for Steyn to be able to ably pillory Mann in open court, to exponentiate Mann's humiliation with not just the facts but Mark's extraordinary displays of oratory, do you actually believe for one millisecond that a courthouse gun-for-hire would have accomplished that?

[hecticskeptic]

That’s crazy. He should have had an attorney….. Do you really think he should have lost his case?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Really? Having his own attorney would have made a difference? The idea that it would have made a difference reminds one of past lost elections where folks are ignoring the total fraud they witnessed and are instead spouting off stuff like “well, we did this wrong, we did that wrong, if only we had a better candidate…woulda/coulda/shoulda etc. etc.”. No, it was lost because it was rigged PERIOD and absolutely nothing would or could change that. Similarly, the verdict has nothing to do with “Steyn paying the price for the stupid Sandusky comments by the other defendant” that montag813 suggested. The comments weren’t stupid but it doesn’t matter one bit…. Yeah sure, let’s go barrelling down field one more time on Lucy holding that football…

Post 3 by Astrike says what is going on in the fewest words and frankly, there really is nothing else to say. This fact (which is simply recognition and acceptance that the tyrants have control) explains it perfectly and until that is incorporated as reality into one’s thinking, there is no moving ahead on anything. Post 8 by dadfly has an excellent example of cases similar to Mark’s and there are of course endless others. See the link about Jeff Clark in post 25 by ScaniaBoy.

[Dr. Sivana]

And though Mr. Steyn is very smart, people who represent themselves have a very poor track record.

Simberg had an excellent attorney, Victoria Weatherford, and lost as well. Steyn just had more punitive damages. He paid attorneys for over ten years, and paid a lot of money and couldn't swing any more, especially when they were not shy for charging a lot for minor and sometimes shoddy work.

[dadfly]

imho, you should go and look more closely at the trial transcripts or reenactments.

the DC jury just ignored the clear evidence presented, and the relevant civil law that favored the defendants. forget about mann himself who presented nothing but lies (impeached by other witnesses and his own contractions) and false evidence in court. surely you’ve encountered the leftist mindset. they simply issued the verdict they had decided on before the trial: all based on their pre-conditioned and pre-conceived political support for globull warming (aka climate ‘science’). the trial had little to do with the guilty verdict, which was expected.

i don’t know if Mark can do it given his health, but the real action and outcome here will be up the chain to the USSC. yes, not much hope against the left there either but it’s worth it to just document the wickedness of these lawfare thieves and charlatans.