Sentences with phrase «cases without bias»

In a human rights court, litigants from religious communities have a right to think the judges will treat them fairly and, to the extent possible, decide cases without bias.

We pride ourselves on our high quality of medicine, dentistry and surgery, and the practice of an attentive approach to each case without a bias towards conventional or alternative.

Not exact matches

In either case, you can't make a blanket statement of the media like that without coming across bias yourself.

I think this case she said something without thinking based on pre-existing bias about the label «atheist» and demonstrated honesty (at least in terms of how she views the term) more than many of the things she says to be inclusive.

John W. Bailey, Abelove's attorney, said their case focused on the fact that Cuomo, when he signed the executive order two years ago, stated that while he believed district attorneys would appropriately handle fatal police incidents, he wanted to alleviate «public concerns... that such incidents can not be prosecuted at the local level without conflict or bias, or the public perception of conflict or bias.»

The use of surrogate information for controls in etiologic case - control studies of Alzheimer's disease may be useful without unacceptable loss of information or systematic biases.

But the worst bias against Florida's popular school scholarship programs runs throughout an new Orlando Sentinel series («Schools Without Rules,» which debuted Wednesday) that seeks to relitigate the questionable case against well - proven private schools: weak oversight, underqualified staff, falsified records and more.

The package includes a 1 - inch suspension lift with or without the available four - corner air suspension; 32 - inch tires on 18 - inch or available 20 - inch wheels; hill descent control; an off - road — biased rear suspension geometry; unique off - road — calibrated shocks; additional skidplate (transfer case, steering, engine and gas tank); towhooks; special 4x4 Off - Road Package identification; and off - road — calibrated dual - valve shocks for 4x4 Off - Road Package trucks fitted with the standard coil spring suspension.

This praise did not come with any measure of bias, as Chin was the same judge who rejected the 2011 settlement terms between Google and a number of publishers, stating that the settlement would be «rewarding [Google] for engaging in wholesale copying of copyrighted works without permission, while releasing claims well beyond those presented in the case.»

I tend to agree — granted, a family member may give a biased review, but if the trolls who are out there who slam books for the sake of slamming them (without reading the books in many cases), then family members and friends should be allowed.

It seems equally arguable that there is a bias towards presenting something close to the worst posssible case, and then using this to argue that «something must be done» without attempting to account for how unlikely this worst case is.

So what we have is someone who is clearly identified with an in - group (in your case «skeptics») and who asserts an asymmetry in the climate change domain that qualitatively elevates his own identity group over the out - group («realists»), asserting a cultural cognition bias in someone that he feels is identified with that out - group (without even an attempt to explain the basis for such a determination *), even those that person isn't asserting such a qualitative elevation of his own in - group.

Back in the day when science was not questioned because sciences asked questions instead of as the case for AGW where science just supplies answeres without even a question being asked, data physical measurement, and strict adherence to the scientific method were what drove science and there was no political or ideological influences biasing whart was done.

The reasons could just as easily be read as saying an arbitrator can not act as an advocate in other similar cases without running a risk of being accused of bias.

Without an overview of open case files, prosecutorial strategies including the prioritisation or selection of cases (according to criteria such as gravity, seriousness etc.) can unwittingly incur selective bias.

The judge must hear your case, your evidence and all that you and the other lawyer or the other party have to say without bias and without favouring either you or the other party.

AIDWYC contends that Canadian cases of alleged wrongful convictions should «not [be] examined from the adversarial perspective of trying to show that the convicted person was rightfully treated by the court system» as occurs at present through the Minister of Justice's current practice under section 696.1147 Rather, AIDWYC argues that an independent review board like CCRC should «undertake a fresh review without bias.»

Some jurisdictions, like California, allow you to strike a judge once per case without establishing bias.

Judges are human, and a lot of them will be biased in some way without being so biased that someone else needs to hear the case.

(correct test for Barrister appeals; whether outside the ex improviso rule, prosecutor may call evidence after prosecution and defence case closed; use of debarring orders against prosecutor; whether tribunal may «enter the arena» and strongly request the attendance of a prosecution witness; whether BSB has power to summons witnesses; whether prosecutor may communicate with disciplinary judge behind the back of the defence; whether such communication redolent of actual bias of judge where judge wishes prosecutor good luck on appeal; whether apparent bias doctrine can be engaged by post-trial conduct of judge; legal effect of serving BSB prosecutions department officer being 1 of 4 appointing members of the COIC «Tribunals Appointments Body» (TAB); whether TAB ultra vires the Bar's Constitutions; whether open - ended power of removal of member of COIC pool without cause, unlawful given position of BSB Chair and senior staff on COIC; whether ECHR Article 6 guarantees against pressure on disciplinary judges to conform with a prosecutorial mentality; whether disciplinary judges Art. 6 «independent» within Findlay v United Kingdom given key role of BSB prosecutions department in appointing disciplinary judges; serious non-disclosure by BSB of notes of secret meeting between BSB and disciplinary judge until day before appeal and despite requests and application for disclosure by defence)

Without a hint of hometown bias, the Washington State Patent Law Blog applauds the Texas court's decision: «This certainly sounds like the sort of case where an injunction is appropriate.

So far from these topics being off - limits, any MHP seeking appointment in a court case needs to fully inform the parties prior to their consent [123], of information about the following kinds of potentials for bias and agenda: whether the MHP has been married or divorced, and how many times, and under what kinds of circumstances, and how the MHP currently feels about those events; whether, if divorced, the MHP went through litigation over custody or property, and such details as whether the MHP had problems paying or receiving child support, as well as the custody arrangements of the MHP's own children and how these worked out and everyone's feelings about them; the MHP's own personal experience taking care of and spending time with children, within and without the scope of «parenting», and with regard to parenting, whether that was parenting as a primary caregiver, married or single parent, with or without household and third party help, or as a working parent or stay - home parent, and for how many children, and for how long, and the outcomes from all of that; i.e. how much time has this person actually spent caring for children on his or her own, and how well did this person's own family systems function, and is this person in fact an «expert» in creating a functioning family and raising happy, healthy, successful children with good outcomes, nay «best» outcomes, thoroughly well - adjusted and having reached the very pinnacles of their innate potential.

By creating a climate of state controlled equality, at the «bottom» of the barrell, no one entity can be allowed rise to exceptionalism without the at - arm's - length - from - the - elected - representatives» czar - run agency (C.B. in this case) interferring via its biased agenda designed to kill well established, successful enterprises that do not meet «its» definition of struggling, thus, so - called «efficient», free - market ventures.

In the latter case, a few bureaucrats exercise their bias without personal accountability for what unforseen (to their minds) negative consequences could develop for consumers financially / legally.