Sentences with phrase «not credible»

At the Order of Protection trial, Gus cross-examined the accuser and the accuser's witnesses, showing the judge that the accuser's testimony was not credible.

«I have rejected Mr. Dastani's testimony as not credible, and since he is the principal source of evidence that Mr. James knew that the ephedrine received was for exportation I have a reasonable doubt on this charge [conspiracy to export ephedrine].»

Ergo, ultimately the EC's threat is not credible.

The trial judge found that while the plaintiff suffered some injuries, many of her claims about both her physical and psychological injuries were fabricated and she was not a credible witness.

2013), the Court of Appeals reversed a family court's contempt finding that was based, in part, by the family court's determination that the mother was not credible.

The Court determined that the complainant was not credible or reliable and thus found S.P. not guilty of all charges.

Had this basis formed the entirety of the judgment's assessment that Charging Party was not credible the ruling likely would have been upheld on appeal.

The ALJ recommended dismissal of the complaint after concluding Charging Party's testimony was not credible.

The judgment of the court found that the complainant was not a credible witness and in fact had lied in her family court affidavit.

At the end of the preliminary hearing, the presiding Judge commented that there was a clear motive for the complainant to fabricate his evidence and that the complainant was not a credible witness.

In fact, the Court accepted the defence argument in finding both complainants not credible.

Direction Legal argued that Yuen's claim in that regard was not credible given that he is actively involved with SOGIC and has practised law in British Columbia for the past eight years.

The ruling follows a Law Society court action to secure an injunction against the «Solicitors from Hell» website to protect its members and the public, on the grounds the site was not a credible source of reliable information about solicitors.

Another commenter, Katherine Darmer, a former U.S. Attorney quoted in this MLB article opined that Clemens «simply was not credible» and that he ought to prepare himself for the likelihood of perjury charges.

Typically at trial I will cross examine the opposing party regarding interrogatory answers I can show are false or I believe are ridiculous to show that party to be not credible or not reasonable.

So any analysis which overstates the cost of borrowing by a factor of more than 2 is, prima facie, not credible.

If they can not find you on the web, they may think you do not exist or that you are not a credible lawyer, and they will move on to the next name.

He claimed persistent low back and shoulder pain, but the judge, on the basis of surveillance evidence, found that he was not a credible witness.

Further the points we wished to establish were much more effectively proven when they came from the testimony of the other's side's witnesses — as the other side can't really argue her own witnesses are not credible.

For example, an open - web search will yield mostly finding aids: sources that lead to legal authority, but which are not credible enough to be authority on their own.

While it may be true that «Not a day goes by without a legal professional telling us that he or she relies almost entirely (or entirely) on CanLII for his or her primary law needs», and that it is a «practice enabler» for small firm or solo practitioner, it is not credible as a vehicle for serious legal research other than a source of recent cases.

2) The tactics of deniers are not credible.

This is not credible since the week represented is one in which there are more or less average solar and wind energy resources every day.

Caldwell regarded a proposed emergent constraint as not credible if it lacks an identifiable physical mechanism; is not robust to change of model ensemble; or if its correlation with ECS is not due to its proposed physical mechanism.

According to an analysis by climate scientist Benjamin Santer (PDF), Michaels» testimony that human GHG emissions caused less than half of the warming since 1950 was not credible.

We believe this is not credible given the overall warming trend both in SST and TLT (Table 1).

Either way, the main point is that the IPCC catastrophic warming models due to increased anthropogenic CO2 are just not credible.

Short answer: because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.

Anyone that advocates intermittent renewables as an effective alternative to fossil fuel is not credible.

# 298 That analysis not credible.

The pro-CAGW studies are therefore not credible.

I don't want to quibble about semantics or seem argumentative, but just to observe that if a prediction is not credible, it's not a prediction.

Given this size of error, both the size and the precision of his claimed imbalance (0.85 W / m2) are simply not credible.

You see, when the Greenpeace spokesman says it, it's not credible because they've been promising that the end is nigh for decades.

• This makes future climate projections not credible.

To make claims that we can use proxies with unknown response curves to tell temperatures to within a degree spanning back 2,000 years is simply not credible..

I've not called anyone dishonest; I merely claimed a particular analysis was not credible.

Zorita writes: «Short answer: Because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.»

This makes future climate projections at the examined locations not credible.»

Obama is not credible as the people he uses to obtain and skew it are part of the «agenda»..

Gavin, albeit mealy - mouthed, seems to have realised that the idea that scientists channel uncontaminated, noise - free truth from objectivity itself, is not credible.

A post at DeSmog blog — Climate Denier Tim Ball: Trump Approved, But Not Credible Enough to Stand Accountable For Libel — makes an interesting point that is the main focus of my comments:

Satirists and comedians can mock people and even fake defame them, but their arguments are not credible to a reasonable person who knows they are not expert enough to be trusted on the subject, and therefore they can't defame.

Taking a neutral stance at this point on rehashed work from «NIPCC» (Fred Singer and friends), well known for serial, serious errors in overall interpretation, analysis and communication of the science and transparent but largely unexamined ideological bias at play in their playground «reports» — never mind suggesting that this kind of effort «competes» with the work of the world's climate scientists and the 2,500 multidisciplinary specialists contributing to IPCC reports combined with the tens of thousands of additional scientists and many others who raise real questions that result from reading, reviewing, evaluating and evolving the information in both IPCC summaries and domestic science and discussion of the science, knowledgeably and in good faith and with open identification of the nature of the social and political issues — is just not credible.

«IPCC reports combined with the tens of thousands of additional scientists and many others who raise real questions that result from reading, reviewing, evaluating and evolving the information in both IPCC summaries and domestic science and discussion of the science, knowledgeably and in good faith and with open identification of the nature of the social and political issues — is just not credible.»

Simply put, everyone the judge now thinks is credible would no longer be such, and those now not credible would be the «mainstream climatologists» whose opinions would carry weight.

Andrew Montford has been proven to be not credible.

Taking a neutral stance at this point on work from «NIPCC» (Fred Singer et al.), suggesting that this kind of effort «competes» with the work of several of the world's climate scientists and a large number of multidisciplinary specialists contributing to IPCC reports combined with the additional scientists and many others who raise real questions that result from reading, reviewing, evaluating and evolving the information in both IPCC summaries and domestic science and discussion of the science, is just not credible, in my humble opinion.

We must recognise the critical contribution to the debate of the CCA's dismissal of 5 % cuts as «inadequate» and «not credible».

The mainstream media needs to realize that Mörner is simply not a credible source of information about sea level rise or climate science in general.