|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 26 2012 @ 04:13 AM EDT |
You hear that? he must be innocent, and all the statements
to the press were misinterpreted. He didn't swing the
verdict by acting as an expert witness and (mis)directing
the jury on matters of law and process, he didn't preside
over a jury that decided to punish against jury
instructions, and he didn't skip awkward questions in order
to rush out a verdict for a highly complex case in a
ridiculously short time. Also, there were no mathematical
errors or inconsistencies due to any of these factors.
That's settled then.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: albert on Wednesday, September 26 2012 @ 10:13 AM EDT |
Anonymous said "....someone who speaks
authoritatively on matters he has little understanding of..."
It amazes me that he would speak publicly, and at length, about ANYTHING to do
with the trial. This case is a battle of giants, with big money at stake.
After reading Groklaw for so long, I would be terrified to talk about ANY case I
was involved with.
Any attorney would have told him to shut up, but he obviously didn't consult
one.
Don't lose sight of the main point here: This is great for Samsung. Hogan
couldn't have done more for them if he tried.....or did he have a sudden attack
of conscience?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
