|
|
|
| Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, April 02 2013 @ 12:06 AM EDT |
Don't worry. That is what the appeal is for.
In general, courts are reluctant to interfere
with juries, because they want us all to be
willing to be on them, and because they know
if they overrule a jury, it inspires litigators
to try for that on every loss. Also juries
are responsible to decide the facts and the
judges are responsible for the law. So they
don't interfere lightly, and that is a good
thing. So that is
the reluctance.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 02 2013 @ 01:13 AM EDT |
What are the odds that ANY methodology, careful or not, just happens to be a
hair right above a billion dollars? The foreman already admitted that they
wanted to "send a message" (in violation of jury instructions), which
is not consistent with the supposed method of calculating amounts based on
individual offenses.
I think they may have started with the message-sending number $1 billion, and
then chopped it up and tossed it over the various phone models, possibly adding
a little extra here or there to make some of the numbers look consistent. When
you do stuff like that, you can end up apportioning the total is irrational
ways.
I also suspect that they knew they were going overboard. They didn't want to
make it exactly a billion to the penny because that would look too suspicious.
So why not make it some odd and non-arbitrary-looking amount like 1.37 billion?
People sometimes get a back-of-the-head sense of shame or embarrassment when
they kind of know they are being naughty, which can make them behave hesitantly.
Like the kid who steals a handful of candy, but tosses a little back in the jar
before running off.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
