I’ll wager the forensic technicians identified the leaker within a matter of weeks. You haven’t heard anything because (1) it was a common-and-garden staff member and dealt with by dismissal without public announcement or (2) it was an influential personage or someone on the patronage of an influential personage, and was dealt with through intramural deal-making.

That was the first thing that struck me about the Schenck case.
Jordan had a tape and a transcript – IIRC Court proceedings are public records.
Even if not something the general public can obtain, they are available without too much difficulty to a lot of lawyers and judges.
Same thing in your example.
Did these people think that no one would ever look at what actually happened?

Obviously, up to now, no one was interested enough in Schenck’s lies to check them, in which case my second question is, why the lack of curiosity on the part of people who have no reason to support the Schencks’ version of events?

Excellent observation.
We know the Democrat’s usual MO is to try to pre-empt negative news about their side with a “what-about-the-Republicans” justification.
Much of the time, they are able to find something that can be spun the way they want, even though their interpretation is not really true.
But they will always point to some event that justifies their claims, even if they have to invent one.

If a progressive justice is about to be outed as the Dobbs leaker, this accusation would give progressives the opportunity to claim that Alito did it first.

Yup. Apple’s lawyers tried to rehab the witness. Hopeless.

Plaintiff’s verdict.

The idea, of course, was to discredit Justice Alito.

My sense (admittedly incomplete) is that the underlying charge against Justice Alito is that he leaked his own draft of the Dobbs decision? Is this not correct?

How is it that the leak itself has not been settled as yet?

And how — supposing the high improbability Justice Alito was the leaker — how can the charge against him be brought without direct and irrefutable proof in hand?

Where is the Court in all this? Does the Court stand by in silence as its member Justice is thus slandered by implication? What the living hell is going on here?

You mean that the plaintiff’s engineer/lawyer had “made the sale” so thoroughly that the jurors no longer needed to pay much attention?