Except. when you read reports of the trial, Dish had no real defense against the ruling that they destroyed key documents. And it isn't opinion, they did not turn over the documents he ordered them to turn over.
I get it if you have spent months making out AMC and their boss to be the bad guy, and defending Dish, but so far these haven't been controversial rulings. Yeah, you can say Jerry Sandusky has been accused and convicted of abusing a lot of young kids but, hey, that doesn't really mean anything since courts can be wrong, but sometimes you really have to be biased to ignore what's going on. Dish destroyed documents that were pertinent to the case, and said, oh, sorry. And they have refused to turn over documents the judge has repeatedly ordered them to turn over. It's not a matter of whether the glove fits.
You're clearly biased towards AMC... so you're taking things as fact that can't possibly be proven as fact.
As I understand things... Dish deleted some emails, Voom says those were important evidence that Dish destroyed... Dish says no, they are not, and that they were accidentally deleted by an automated process and they had no reason to save them.
The judge ruled that Dish "should have known" to save them, and as such is issuing instruction to the jury that Dish has been ruled to have destroyed evidence.
Those are the facts as I know them pertaining to the case.
HOWEVER... in terms of the real-world... since Dish destroyed the emails, and admits to doing so... and Voom apparently does not have copies of these emails... it is pure conjecture as to what they may or may not have contained relevant to the case! So... we don't know if Dish truly destroyed any evidence or not, there is no way to know this factually.
Hence... the judge made a ruling relevant to the court case... but it in no way means factually that Dish actually destroyed evidence.
That was the point I was making... just like why we say things like "allegedly" even if we feel confident that someone did something.
The ruling of a judge, jury, or court does not have to be a statement of fact. It is merely a decision of the judge, jury, and court... People win cases without evidence and lose cases with evidence all the time.
There is no bias here... You're seeing bias where there is none. In fact, that you are even bringing up the Voom lawsuit in this thread shows you are biased towards the AMC camp trying to convince everyone that the only reason Dish isn't carrying their channels is the unrelated lawsuit.
The lawsuit is the lawsuit... AMC carriage today (or lack thereof) is a horse of a different color.
Yes, one probably colors the conversation of the other... but don't forget... Dish carried AMC channels long after the Voom lawsuit... and Dish added AMC-HD during the Voom lawsuit as well. IF it was truly about the Voom lawsuit, we would have lost these channels years ago!
So... they surely play a part... but if AMC had made what Dish felt was a fair offer, we probably would still have the channels today.
Thus... the Voom lawsuit really has nothing to do with AMC at this point... and you show your bias by bringing it up.
All I was pointing out was that whether Dish did anything wrong or not related to that lawsuit, the judge's ruling doesn't say anything except he ruled that way. This would still be 100% my position if the same judge had instead ruled that Dish did not destroy documents relevant to the case. It would still be just a ruling, not a statement of fact, either way...
For that matter, Dish will likely have rulings go their way that do not necessarily reflect fact. That's the way our court system works, unfortunately.