decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
"if the jury is technical" | 248 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
"if the jury is technical"
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 23 2012 @ 05:47 AM EDT

There is a set of legal criteria that make it so that a potential juror legally must be excused (vacation that has already been paid for with non-refundable tickets, caregiver for young children or shut-in sick people, a few others).
When I was called up to serve in a Jury in the UK, I was not excused, but had the service delayed (a week) when I could not attend on the date of call up: a prepaid, non-refundable expense is reasonable for a delay, not reasonable to be excused.

The best method I can think of is:

  • Randomly pick 12 members from the pool.
  • Before they swear in, they may excuse themselves if they have a very good reason (eg they feel they have connections with any party) by requesting it of the judge with the reason.
  • A legal representative of either party may request any juror not self-excusing, to be excused but only with a very-very good reason. (eg as above, but not, eg, because they have a Samsung phone1)
  • When swear in, the oath should include that they are not connected to the parties.
  • If later found to be connected, they would be guilty of perjury.
Simples.

1Who knows, they may have bought it thinking it an apple product.

Which reminds me...I just purchased an MP3 player as the one in my phone is using far too much of the memory I need for other things and my wife could also borrow it; my wife referred to it as an iPod even though (1) it is a shop own brand one and she was there when it was bought, and (2) looks nothing like an iPod. Pity that she believes that MP3 player == iPod.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

"if the jury is technical"
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 23 2012 @ 05:56 AM EDT
A perfect unbiased jury is a paradox like a perfect sequence of random numbers:
the more a sequence of numbers fits the tests for randomness, the greater the
likelihood of being able to accurately predict the next number in the sequence!

How about having three totally randomly selected juries of say 9 or 11 members
each who deliberate separately and take the majority verdict of the three juries
as the verdict of the trial?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )