|Authored by: PolR on Wednesday, September 26 2012 @ 03:57 PM EDT|
|Judges don't want to moot entire trials on minor points. They want the trial to|
be done for good when a verdict is reached. They don't grant new trials just
because attorneys find defects in how the jury reached a conclusion. If judges
start doing that no trial will ever be over because attorneys always find
something to argue about.
The precedents are that judges don't care about jury misconduct after the trial
is over unless it is proven the misconduct affected the outcome of the trial.
These old cases didn't affect the outcome in a visible way. They are point of
details that show this juror took his oath lightly. The judge won't moot the
trial on this basis but she may become more willing to consider the bigger
arguments. Think of this as some small bonus points added to Samsung's main
argument. They are not enough to win but they help.
The big items are the broken promises PJ mentions in the main article and this
juror admitted disregard for the jury instructions and the law. This is
misconduct which has affected the outcome of the trial. These are the points
that really matter.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]