|
|
|
| Authored by: nola on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 08:54 PM EDT |
As PJ says, what do you do? You want juries, but then you
want to constrain and second-guess them.
Assuming for the sake of discussion that Hogan's behavior
was improper -- how much post-trial revision do you
want to permit? Should all juries have an exit interview?
Who reviews and decides upon those? Should jurors have
a criminal liability for their deliberations and decisions?
What should be the legal threshold needed to overturn
a jury verdict?
These may seem to be simple questions in this specific
case. The general issue is much more serious.
How much post-trial tweaking should be allowed
for a jury verdict? I believe that it should be possible
but that the bar should be set very high.
In this case, I don't know whether or not the threshold
has been met.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 05:56 AM EDT |
Just because Federal Circuit have a cause and power to pursuit what amounts to
law making, does not mean that judge based system necessarily do as you say.
Your argument is something often heard from Americans, but European experience
does not confirm that.
First important difference is, that German law is not precedence based.
Precedences plays a role there, but they are not binding. Second one is that the
courts are not allowed to make up the law or push law boundaries as US courts
do.
It is impossible for precedences to pile upon precedences and drift from the
original meaning that much. German judges simply do not have that power and can
not grab it.
But to be fair to US, German law system is currently considered the best one.
Try to get a quick and fair judgement in post-communist countries - they are
part of Europe too. You will learn a lot about delays and corruption.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: janolder on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 01:25 PM EDT |
Well, on the other side, how would you like it
if
the magistrate in
this case was the only judge you got?
got?
I wouldn't, but on the
other hand at a hundredth of the
trial cost I could easily afford an appeal
should the result
be outrageous as it is here. Could you afford an appeal in
the US?
Also, if the outcome greatly mattered, say in a criminal
trial,
there'd be more than one judge and senior ones at
that. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
