> While Cavanaugh delivered his opening statement, Mehta even appeared briefly confused by some of the references to today's tech, unable to keep straight if Mo

> While Cavanaugh delivered his opening statement, Mehta even appeared briefly confused by some of the references to today's tech, unable to keep straight if Mozilla was a browser or a search engine. This is the only line in the link that supports the headline, and - seeing as how it includes the author's judgment about the facts but does not include any of the actual facts - I find it extremely unconvincing. That doesn't mean the headline is wrong, but it's bad journalism to skip facts and just substitute your own judgments instead. I normally expect better from Ars. Did the judge interrupt opening to ask a question? If so, what was the question? If not, what does it mean to "appear[] briefly confused"? Did he have a particular look on his face? Don't bother looking in the linked article for the answer to these questions, because you won't find it.