Your reasoning is just very strange to me. What does the burden of proof have to do with whether someone is a trier of fact?
A judge is a trier of fact in equity proceedings when he hears evidence and assigns weight to it. The burden is usually a preponderance of evidence. Same with a jury in civil case.
So he got the standard of proof wrong: Why is that cause to call him a fucking idiot ?
Dolic, esq.
|