You might ask George Costanza ~ he's a lawyer.
For myself, I believe that "Technically Correct" IS correct,
but because our judicial system is so focused on INTERPRETATION,
that the judge couldn't just tell you, straight-up, you're right ~
it will have to depend on how any lawyers can make any judge SEE the thang in a different light.
Sad, but true.
Whenever anyone connected with the legal profession (judges very much included) uses the word, "technically," it generally means the point is well taken but the speaker does not agree with it personally.
The defense is making a motion to suppress evidence based on an illegal traffic stop followed by finding drugs in the car. The judge is ruling against the defense because the police claim the suspect vehicle weaved over the line and that was the reason for the stop. "Counsel, I am overruling your motion to suppress because, technically, good cause existed for the officers to stop the car in the first instance." Translation: "I don't believe the lying bastards any more than you do, counsel, but I'm not about to call members of our local police force liars. They say the car weaved, it weaved. I hate to have to do this but, on the outside chance they are telling the truth, it was a good stop."
That may not be the best example. Probably a better one is the very common situation where a defendant is found not guilty and the person talking about the verdict says, "he got off on a technicality." Translation: "It's a damn shame when obviously guilty jerks like that can escape justice on some stupid, legal technicality."
In both cases, the speakers are recognizing the validity of the ruling, but expressing personal disagreement with it.
