It was funny that as ardent as Stover was in his defence of Lucas, he could make no coherent argument against the notion that the execution of the prequels (dialogue, acting/directing etc.) was very poor. The main prosecutor made the mistake of lumping all six movies together in the same category of being "Star Wars", making criticisms against all the movies on the basis of his quibbles with only the later ones. Later chapters brought up the original vs. SE debate and several participants made it clear they considered the earlier films, particularly in their unaltered states, to be entirely separate from the decisions of 90's Lucas and ought not to be criticised in the same manner (I agreed with this argument).
Ultimately no verdict was delivered, leaving it up to the reader to decide for themselves what they thought. I had a good time reading it.