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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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
More likely he didn't disclose it in voir dire. | 458 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
More likely he didn't disclose it in voir dire.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 25 2012 @ 08:21 PM EDT
Check page 103? of the transcript:

Question:

" NOW, MANY OF YOU MAY HAVE YOUR OWN VIEWS
16
17 ABOUT WHAT OUR LAWS SHOULD BE, BUT I JUST NEED TO
18 ASK YOU ONE MORE TIME WHETHER YOU WOULD ACCEPT THE
INSTRUCTIONS ON THE LAW THAT I GIVE YOU AND NOT
19
20 INSERT AND SUBSTITUTE YOUR OWN PERSONAL VIEWS OF
21 WHAT THE LAWS SHOULD BE. WHETHER YOU DISAGREE OR
22 DISAGREE WITH WHAT I TELL YOU THE LAW IS, WILL YOU
23 ACCEPT IT? IF YOU CANNOT DO THAT, WILL YOU PLEASE
24 RAISE YOUR HAND? "

No hands were raised.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

More likely he didn't disclose it in voir dire.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 25 2012 @ 08:31 PM EDT
It also looks like neither side pursued the litigation
involvement question very well. He did answer it, but they
seemed to be happy with one admission.

All in all, though, Hogan's post trial, self proclaimed
behaviour as a jury member was in direct conflict with many
of the answers he gave to the Court's questions during jury
selection.

I believe that he lied to the Court, or more correctly, he
clearly broke the promises he made to the Court.

I guess that is OK these days.

[ 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 )