Those are all potentially interesting topics (if they involved you directly or you have an obsessive disorder) but have nothing to do with what I was talking about. I was talking about using a court verdict as proof of guilt or innocence.
Law IS interpretation these days; what the letters on the page actually say is of lesser importance. (IMHO, and only from what little I've read of the case, the "letters on the page" would not have convicted everyone's favorite whipping boy).
For example, there was a recent local case where a gentleman was charged with two counts of first degree murder - because two firemen were killed trying to extinguish his home. Preposterous? Of course. But the DA "interpreted" things because the fire was caused by the cord on a lamp the homeowner was using to grow a marijuana plant. Fortunately, the judge kicked those charges; but believe me, DA's don't file 'em unless they think they can win.
So bitch all you want about Irvine or anyone else - you may even be right. but not because a court said so.