alt Hacker NewsYeah but that means that the “court said I’m right ” rhetoric is invalid. It’s as if you said that a no bill or dismissal proved your innocence: it doesn’t.
Now although I have only superficial understanding of the case at stake I believe the author nonetheless (but with a weak certainty until I hear the other side).
I think it is imprecise to say that the facts were not argued - they were! As the judge writes in paragraph 58,
> The authorship or control of these accounts has consistently been strenuously denied by Dr Garrett. I have no evidence from the Defendants to support it. Instead, they necessarily rely on an inferential case built on a limited number of pleaded facts, some of which are undisputed. I consider them in turn.
There were not _witness statements_ presented by the defense in support of myriad facts, but it's not like the case for the defense wasn't made at all.