One of the things I have thought about since the hearing, which began after reading SS's 10 page report, was how the judge feels about the "credibility" and testimony of/by Norris vs Mirham. How much weight does credibilty carry in a hearing like this? How convincing is one over the other? Does the background of both of them play a part, even if small to the judge?

If you have ever seen a presentation by Norris, I have regarding his invention/products of Parametric Sound (PAMT), he is a great public speaker, and in the demo of products, he can explain it to a person of little or no knowledge in the field, with ease. Add that to the number of patents he holds, his resume, industry rewards etc, and he makes a lasting impression.

I recall in SS's report, how defense counsel reacted to some of Mirham's answers during cross examination, such as "their eyes rolled, looking up at the ceiling"...something like that, with the judge showing no emotion/body language. The other gent who was there that reported to us, I think said something similar.

Anyway, just a thought as we wait for the ruling.