|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 29 2012 @ 09:52 AM EDT |
only judge Koh. And for her this would be, how should I say,
"difficult" to overturn. Hope I'm wrong.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 29 2012 @ 09:53 AM EDT |
I'm not saying he's a shining beacon of reasoning. Nor am I saying his arguments
make even a bit of sense to me. I realize rulings can be vacated, but is what
they say or what they do in the deliberations chamber able to be applied by the
judge as the reason to do so? For that matter, given they were read the
instructions, doesn't that mean they "knew" them so implicitly they
followed them in general legal view? Regardless of what those of us living in a
universe not composed of legal briefs experience?
I'm asking here, I'd like to be pointed to some kind of legal analysis for this
since I'm genuinely curious as to whether this is the case or not.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 29 2012 @ 10:00 AM EDT |
When Samsung files to overturn the jury, can it use statements
(such as these) from jury members made after the trial that
clearly indicate (as these do, at least to me) that the jury's
reasoning is flawed?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
