An honest juror would have volunteered the information that there were other
cases, since it is obvious to anyone with more intelligence than a rock that the
Judge wants to know about ANY cases.
A lie by omission is still a lie.
Hogan was dishonest in the way he answered the questions about his litigation
history. He quite deliberately gave the impression that he had only had that
one lawsuit, and did not mention at all being sued by his former employer
Seagate, or declaring bankruptcy.
The question now is whether he was just
foolish or absent-minded, or whether he was malicious and wanted to get on the
jury to have a chance to punish Samsung (who owns a large chunk of his old
nemesis, Seagate). Either way, things look bad.
The application of justice
should not only try to be done as fairly as possible; it also has to be seen
to be fair. Even things that give the appearance of unfairness (as
this whole trial certainly does) ought to be avoided, because they decrease
everyone's trust in the rule of law.
Right now, this trial stinks to high
heaven. I don't think anything short of a whole new trial with a different
Judge is going to convince me that Samsung got a fair trial. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|