|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 02:10 PM EDT |
No, each juror is supposed to make his/her decision. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 03:24 PM EDT |
No, it is absolutely NOT the juror's job to _influence_ the verdict. It is the
juror's job to weigh the testimony and decide what that evidence indicates is
true, without resorting to other sources, _especially_ personal bias toward the
litigants.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 03:25 PM EDT |
The capacity to have an effect on the character, development, or
behavior of someone or something, or the effect itself.
With regards
offering your line of reasoning given the evidence admitted in trial,
yea, then one can consider influence in that regard.
However - when
dealing with questions of Law (for example, what does the Law consider prior
art) - those are questions of which "influence" belongs to the Judge and
Lawyers. Hogan's previous experiences with the USPTO was "external evidence
introduced during the Jury Deliberations to which no Lawyer or the Judge was
given the opportunity to review, cross-examine or present their own countering
evidence".
If that is not influence which should stay out of the Jury
Deliberations then it very well should be.
The concept is no different
then the recent example where the Juror decided to share his own experiments on
the situation with the rest of the Jury without the Judge/Lawyers being aware of
it as it was happening. That case was sent back for a new trial.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|