If they were, then she's protected by free speech.
Freedom of Speech has NOTHING to do with this case. Freedom of Speech applies only to the governments ability to restrict speech and doesn't apply to what you can say in an online forum. If what she said is in fact true then libel doesn't apply because truth is an absolute defense against libel and slander.
The column browser is gone, just gone inside a playlist. I have some very large playlists. I want to be able to use the column browser within that playlist. I now have to go outside the playlist to the library view and use that, hoping I remember correctly the criteria that form the smart playlists.
I just tried this and if you select a playlist, you can still go into View / Column Browser / Show Column Browser
Fair enough. What then would a layman call "introduction of testimony from experience(s) outside of the trial to the jury, to directly affect the outcome of the jury's decision" and does that term change if the person responsible for this is the jury foreman?
There is no definition for this because this type of 'evidence' does not exist. Evidence must be presented in court and the introduction of said evidence must follow rules regarding its admission.
At the very least he ignored the judge's orders and should be held in contempt.
"Hello again, Peabody here..." -- Mister Peabody