Being persuaded by technical jargon is not the same thing as simply attacking someone for having technical skills, as was the original implication.
And for better or worse, juries are tasked all the time with coming to conclusions in problem domains that might be beyond their understanding. This is not unique to the technical realm nor is it a new phenomenon. A jury in a complex insurance or securities dispute is going to need things explained to them just as much as in a computer hacking case. Indeed, I'd argue it's much easier to explain to someone what MAC address spoofing is than to explain to them what the LIBOR manipulation entailed.
And for better or worse, juries are tasked all the time with coming to conclusions in problem domains that might be beyond their understanding. This is not unique to the technical realm nor is it a new phenomenon. A jury in a complex insurance or securities dispute is going to need things explained to them just as much as in a computer hacking case. Indeed, I'd argue it's much easier to explain to someone what MAC address spoofing is than to explain to them what the LIBOR manipulation entailed.