On 5 April 2011 18:32, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > On Tue, 5 Apr 2011, Charles Walker wrote: >> NoV: Yally violated Rule 1504 (a Power 2 Rule) by becoming active >> during eir timeout period. >> > Gratuitous argument: The suspension, even if it didn't make > em active, suspended the SHALL NOT allegedly violated above. > > Currently two justices have Affirmed the verdict/sentence.
I think you have missed omd's post: all three justices have published their opinions. The judgement on sentencing was reassigned when omd published eir AFFIRM, which was before Yally became active, so when e did it was in contravention of R1504. -- Charles Walker
