Anyone who appreciates jury nullification or other jury empowerment theories should be staying far away from this.

With great power comes great responsibility!

The Jury - via the public information Hogan has made available - decided to ignore the Jury Instructions regarding damages and set their own damages by their own calculations. This is just one example of where the Jury appears to have ran off-track.

Yes, I appreciate Jury Nullification. But I also think that while a Jury has the power to supersede the Law - if they choose to do so, then they must also explain their choice. Such power should not be used lightly, and not without some kind of examination into it when it is applied.

If it can be used without any kind of oversight or control - then it's a tool that could easily be used for Mob Justice. How do we prevent that if not by some type of oversight or overrule?

We're not talking about a dispute on how to interpret certain evidence or a disagreement on who to trust. We're talking about a Jury that seems to have deliberately chosen to ignore the Jury Instructions. The instructions that guide on how the Law is laid out and what the Jury's responsibilities are.

And this isn't a case where we're talking about the freedom of an ebony woman to sit on a bus seat without fear of incarceration. We're talking about a civil lawsuit between two Corporations.

So - here's the magic question: Why did the Jury feel it appropriate to ignore Jury Instructions and take the Law into it's own hands?

Do I feel Mr. Hogan's life should be examined?

With respect the publicly available information on Lawsuits which he may have played a role in wherein he told the Court he wasn't involved in any: Absolutely.

With respect to the privacy of the rest of his life, his family, friends, etc. No - to myself that would be crossing the line.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]