I interpret the order and the amended order to mean that Your Honor, in a sense, has addressed them as fact witnesses. I don't think you actually come out and use the word "fact witnesses," but as one reads the order, that's the implication. And you initially had indicated that you did not feel that the reporter's privilege stood in this kind of a case.
I don't think you actually come out and use the word "fat witnesses," but as one reads the order, that's the implication.
It's definitely incorrect because the text says "fact witnesses", not "fat witnesses". It's difficult for the system because they are very similar textually.
( z1 contrast :ARG1 ( z2 think :polarity - :ARG0 ( z3 i ) :ARG1 ( z4 and :op ( z5 come-out :ARG0 ( z6 you ) ) :op ( z7 use :ARG0 z6 :ARG1 ( z8 word :ARG0 z6 :ARG1 ( z9 fat :domain ( z10 person :ARG0-of ( z11 witness ) ) ) ) ) :ARG1-of ( z12 actual ) ) ) )