On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:16:25 -0700, Mike Murray
wrote:


I agree. We need transparency and full disclosure of the expert's
credentials and the reason for picking that expert over others, and
some view of the report.

And we shouldn't forget that the expert's report can't send someone to
jail or force anyone to pay damages -- that next step would be up to
the courts.

And I would also think that after the report is presented to the
appropriate group in the USCF, before any final Federation judgment is
rendered, it seems only fair that people accused in the report would
have rights of rebuttal, the right to present their own expert to
that group, and probably the right to some sort of appeal.