5 ms·
Which does place a lot of questions with what Samsung's legal team was doing during the jury selection. One of the questions asked of him was whether or not he
by cube13 14y ago
Which does place a lot of questions with what Samsung's legal team was doing during the jury selection. One of the questions asked of him was whether or not he had obtained a patent. He answered in the affirmative, and that should have been enough for Samsung's team to consider him a potentially biased witness. I've personally seen potential jurors thrown out for less of a reason when I had jury duty.
- debacle 14y agoHe lied (or at the very least was not entirely truthful) during jury selection. Samsung can't account for that.
- cube13 14y agoHe was truthful about the patents, which I think are a bigger flag than the entire Seagate thing.
- lutusp 14y agoWell, under the standard oath, to which people are sworn when offering testimony, not providing the whole truth counts as lying. It's cases like this that justify the wording of the oath ("the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth").
- recoiledsnake 14y agoI think each side gets only a limited number chances to disqualify potential jurors, so Samsung might have run out of objections.