ABSTRACT
Shanks as a defendant, not as a perpetrator of the plagiarism, did what any defendant would do: try to prove his innocence and to adduce all the legal and procedural arguments he could invoke in support of his case. Whatever the case, it is evident that the Qimron vs. Shanks litigation became an epoch-making precedent that has been watched, examined, analyzed, debated, and emotion-laden. One thing was certain: the emotions run so high on all parts that many of the involved personalities, otherwise people of culture and reason, would use obscene language and swear words that are not fit for academe. More substantial and crucial are his explanations of the issue of authorship, which was the centerpiece of the assault by Shanks, the other defendants and those who stood behind them. The Supreme Court found that it was impossible to distinguish between those three parts as the work proceeded.
