|
|
|
| Authored by: cricketjeff on Wednesday, September 05 2012 @ 05:12 PM EDT |
Instruction 1
Of course you must only use the judges instructions as to the law, if you can
use your own why have the trial and rules at all? If the jury cannot follow the
judges interpretation they must send a question out to the judge and if the
judge doesn't clarify sufficiently the correct answer is for the jury to state
on their reply "The judge's instructions are insufficiently clear to allow
us to reach an honest verdict"
Instruction 2
In most cases the order REALLY matters, if it doesn't the judge can say so, if
it doesn't say so it matters and MUST be done that way, otherwise you get juries
deciding the damages first and then assuming the defendant must be guilty
otherwise why did they do the damages. It is perfectly acceptable for the jury
to return a verdict "impossible to decide" and then move on, but once
they have done so they can't go back.
Instruction 3
Only evidence in court counts, that's the rules and the law. Any juror who says
anything other than that is not acting as a juror. Since his only reason for
being in the jury room is to be a juror if he steps outside that role he is a
fool and should be ignored, how can that even be marginally controversial?
---
There is nothing in life that doesn't look better after a good cup of tea.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
