Being a blow against the jury system in this type of trial is no argument against the judge's move. Yes it totally is. He is explaining why someone might thin

Being a blow against the jury system in this type of trial is no argument against the judge's move. Yes it totally is. He is explaining why someone might think hiring an expert seems reasonable in this one case, and then extrapolating how that precedent might get interpreted to undermine the legal system in general. I also think his fear is pretty understandable: the jury system, although obviously far from perfect, is a hallmark of our culture's concept of justice, and allowing a court to appoint an expert, especially in a technology related case, is a big step towards consolidating power into the judge's hands.