[ Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: KMC
Date: 19 Dec 2001
Time: 11:10:10
The idea is that we don't want to let the loser complain that too much truth came out. Imagine in particular if the privilege holder was a third person. Would we want to let the loser complain that too much truth came out and somebody else's privilege rights were offended? It is true that this stance endangers the privilege. But there are ways in other settings to uphold the privilege (e.g., the privilege holder could refuse to testify and be cited for contempt), so that we can protect the privilege without letting appeals overturn correct judgments.