4 ms·
If they didn't know about him, they were incompetent. More likely, they knew about him and made a bet he would side with them. They were wrong.
by danielweber 14y ago
If they didn't know about him, they were incompetent.
More likely, they knew about him and made a bet he would side with them. They were wrong.
- einhverfr 14y agoI read once about a case where the foreman on the jury (in a personal injury suit) was both a lawyer and a state senator. The judgement was set aside on the basis that he exercised undue influence by explaining the law to other jurors (thus usurping the judge's role). Of course the law is full of funny cases (like the time the Supreme Court filed a per curiam, and then along with it a unanimous partial concurrence). Figuring out what was meant there is... well, something lawyers can argue about forever.
- misterbee 14y agoOr they knew about him and made a bet that he would taint the decision and get the case dismissed on appeal in front of a judge, who understands and appplies law better than civilians.