Mooted

So.  I am looking over my off-brief argument for moot court.  For those who don't know, some moot courts require contestants to argue the case they're given both ways.  That is, everyone is required to turn in a brief of their argument and then during the oral argument phase, they are required to argue for their brief (the "on-brief argument") and later against the position of their brief (the "off-brief argument").  It's designed to make you better at oral arguments, because you're looking at both sides of the argument and can then prepare for what the other side will say.  But, because I was writing a brief on one side, that side got much more attention and was better researched.
This hadn't been much of a problem until two weeks ago when I was last giving my off-brief argument.  And I got completely destroyed by a professor.  I mean destroyed.  He decided that my reading of a convention was not correct and, after us going back and forth (me respectfully, him less so*), he just happened to have the convention with him and read it out--looking straight at the convention and reading it out slowly and methodically.  And where I contended the language was "as such," he read out "such as," which changes the meaning of everything I was saying and pretty much killed me.  It was embarrassing and humiliating.  It was beyond discouraging.  It meant I needed to re-do all the research I had put into that argument, and given the fact that we're so close to the competition date, it meant I had wasted the prior time and I had to get my shit together.
This professor and I have a history.  I took a class with him last semester and ended up really respecting him.  He's sharp, articulate, and prepared.  He was the smartest guy in the room, and I couldn't blame him for enjoying that.  We didn't always agree on the subject matter, but I received good feedback throughout the class with him.  I also did a writing project with him that further showed me that he was a great guy.  He was not always happy with what I had written and had a tendency to be very dismissive when I was on the wrong track, but I always thought it came from a place of helpfulness.  I thought he really wanted me to succeed and do better work than I had.
So.  Fast forward to today when I am doing my research.  I looked at the convention as it was reprinted in our packet for the competition.  And it says "as such," as I contended.  Okay.  No biggie, we're supposed to be using live legal precedents and such, so it's probably just a misprint.  I mean, this professor was looking right at the friggin' thing.  And this at least explains my problem.  I hadn't researched this as thoroughly as I should have.
So.  I look it up from a reliable source that does not make misprints.  And it says "as such," as I fucking contended it did.  I've checked 5 different and very reliable sources.  They all agree that the conventions says "as such," which means either this professor of law didn't read it correctly when he was stridently reading out the convention to me, or it means he lied for some reason.  I can't help but think he lied.  I don't want to delve into the possible reasons, but he was reading it very carefully and very slowly and looking specifically for whether it said "as such," or "such as."  And I wouldn't mind so much if after we were done, he didn't look at me and say, "Well, I got you on that point."
I guess I have to chalk it up as a lesson.  I'm not exactly sure what that lesson is, beyond you can't take anyone's word for it, even if they're reading from the book.

*Note 1.  Which he explained as preparing us for the judges who are likely to be less than patient with us.