|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 21 2012 @ 05:42 PM EDT |
P'raps the judge expects that people selected for jury service
will be vetted for having no more than one significant brush
with the court system. In some places that selection is done.
P'raps running a Lexis profile on every candidate in California
would result in an empty jury pool...
Does California have a "clean slate" provision? What might give
Hogan the idea that ten year old cases are forgotten? The judge's
failure to press the issue?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PJ on Monday, October 22 2012 @ 02:07 AM EDT |
Wol, enough already. The law disagrees with
you. And Groklaw is about the law.
If you need to bring your thinking into harmony
with the law, that's the next step for you.
If not, stop posting about how it's not
wrong to leave out a full answer to a judge's
question, because you may influence others
and that would be contrary to the law. Look
at the mess this juror has caused, and don't
influence others to think it's all right to
cause such a mess. It's not.
Whether it will be serious enough to cause
a new trial is unknown. But what he did will
never be right. If a judge asks you a question,
always answer honestly and fully. The entire
legal system depends on such honesty and
responsibility by participants. If the judge
thinks you are finished before you are, raise
your hand again until you have completed your
answer.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
