The depth of the criticism about her approach has me wondering if she could be simply scholarly suspect rather than acting under personal bias. It's one or the other.
Scholarly is a thought. However she has made too many rulings that have been configured strictly to assist the defense. She was reversed once and warned again not long ago. Because she showed an obvious bias toward the defense.
The scholarly unfortunately she can use for an excuse to cover her shittypants leanings.
That's what bothers me about the mcaffe judge, he's done his own interpretations of the rules. He's supposed to follow the existing rules of law, not recreate them. He made a bigger stink by far about willis and wade than anything he's mentioned about shittypants. macffe is operating like a supreme court judge who thinks he can change laws as he sees fit. Hopefully willis will appeal like orangefatass does with every single case.
I'm also hoping there's a mechanism to go after mcaffe himself.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
