[Zenst]

That is why I asked as I'm not aware of any non-paywall sites that allow such lookups and neither it seems are you.

Maybe somebody else knows one, but as I stated, I have personally used this law in comparable circumstances and aware others have. But without the ability to lookup such cases on a non-paywall site then alas we have hit an enpass.

[jacquesm]

What he means is that if you are going around claiming all kinds of things then you should be the one to provide the evidence to go with the claims.

[Zenst]

I'm fully aware of what he asked for and as I have made clear, unless somebody can link a site that allows such lookup of past cases (including SCC) then there is nothing further I can do beyond express my personal experience, and link to the law in question (which I did).

So unless you are able to link such a site then your not helping at all.

[metricodus]

> So unless you are able to link such a site then your not helping at all.

You are right, we are not helping at all with proving your unsubstantiated claim.

[kbenson]

Well, part of the claim is a personal experience, so evidence isn't strictly required, since the source is making the statement. At that point, you have to determine how well you trust the source.

More evidence would be preferred, and would definitely raise my trust that there wasn't some mistake of memory, but it seems a bit extreme to dogpile on someone who is stating what they believe as fact from personal experience, and when asked for verification seems willing to try to find that but without the knowledge or ability to do so and asking for pointers on how to do that.

[metricodus]

..yes. Thanks for clarifying :).