4 ms·
The interviews with the foreman following the case were pretty damning—it sounded like he barely listened to the judge's instructions and essentially goaded the
by snogglethorpe 14y ago
The interviews with the foreman following the case were pretty damning—it sounded like he barely listened to the judge's instructions and essentially goaded the jury into returning a verdict which expressed his personal feelings about patents more than it reflected anything about Apple vs. Samsung.
I suppose the question, though, is whether he actually did anything that's provably "misconduct"...
- thrill 14y agoHe explicitly did not disclose during juror interview about his being previously sued by Seagate, where Samsung was the majority shareholder, and which is likely what resulted in his bankruptcy filing. One might find a prejudice in such an event, especially if it was not disclosed.
- MrEnigma 14y agoThe judge asked for events in the last 10 years. The Seagate event happened in 1993. His irate interviews made him sound questionable, but the interviews refuting samsungs data here are very much on point and concise.
- incorrect 14y agoNot true. In the official court transcript the question was open ended: THE COURT: Okay. Welcome back. Please take a seat. We had a few more departures in your absence. Let's continue with the questions. The next question is, have you or a family member or someone very close to you ever been involved in a lawsuit, either as a plaintiff, a defendant, or as a witness?