|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 02:04 AM EDT |
So if he swore under oath, does that mean purjury? Is this guy in serious
trouble, or does purjury only apply to people lying on the witness stand?
Or contempt of court, especially as he's continuing to spin his answers and keep
lying?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 11:11 AM EDT |
In retrospect, fault or not, the Court errored by not asking
how many
since
'a' is singular. So in the sense that the
question was asked he
correctly
responded since it was not exclusive. But he also it lied
because
there was not single case. It followed with another
Court error, as other
posters said, by not checking if there
were
any others even if there was an
expectation of how many. An
another error is that the Court never asked
what
company and also if the patent was done as part of a
company (if, so which
company). But these should not
have impacted the trial if the jury had
done what it was
told to do.
Another possible mistake relates to the
"Seagate and Samsung
strategic alignment" from April
2011 (link has the press
release as well). This creates a link between Samsung
and
Hogan that he probably should have informed the Court of. I
was under the
impression that jurors are meant to tell the
Court of any potential conflicts
of interest so the Court
can decide what is actually a conflict. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|