|
|
|
| Authored by: cjk fossman on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 02:06 PM EDT |
| Excellent answer. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 03:34 PM EDT |
I was thinking the same thing. If the judge failed to ask a necessary follow up
that is clearly on her.
I wonder why the jury didn't fill out questionnaires in advance. Some of these
types of things could have been cleared up that way.
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: soronlin on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 04:48 PM EDT |
I can see a possibility that Mr Hogan started out talking about the most recent
case and intended to go on and talk about the others, but the judge swept on by
to another juror and Mr Hogan was insufficiently confident to call her back to
him. I wasn't there, and I didn't hear the speech patterns or see body language
that might indicate that, but it is one possible reading based on the
transcript.
So it _might_ be an unfortunate misunderstanding. I don't necessarily see a
pre-planed revenge here, just a guy in an intimidating situation. But then I
like to think of myself as a reasonable guy, and my psychological type is very
different from that of Mr Hogan, so I really can't guess at what he was
thinking. I can't help thinking that one should never ascribe to malice, what
can be adequately explained by incompetence.
For me, the introduction of extraneous evidence is much more damning, but of
course they have to dance around jury deliberations being sacrosanct to address
that.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
