|
Authored by: Wol on Monday, October 22 2012 @ 03:31 AM EDT |
I'll just add to that - hopefully the Judge has learnt that when the next case
comes, she should keep digging, at least until it appears there's nothing left.
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: PJ on Monday, October 22 2012 @ 10:14 AM EDT |
He didn't need to understand the law to
answer a question honestly and fully. It
isn't physics or something really hard.
Nor was it a trick question. The judge on
more than one occasion during voir dire
told them not only that it mattered if
they were in any litigation before but
also why it mattered. And she asked the
group more than once that same question.
This has nothing at all to do with any
mistake on the judge's part. Putting it
on her is unfair. But it wouldn't legally
alter the part that matters, that he
didn't tell about Seagate and he didn't
honestly answer the question about having
strong views on patents.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|