That's a daft statement. It's definitely possible for juries to decide improperly -- whether Samsung succeeds on its appeals depends on stuff like that, so of

That's a daft statement. It's definitely possible for juries to decide improperly -- whether Samsung succeeds on its appeals depends on stuff like that, so of course groklaw will focus on it. They didn't discuss any personal affairs of the foreman until it was revealed out that Samsung was claiming those very affairs were grounds for an appeal. Whether the specific details about the foreman in this article are relevant or not is another matter -- but that's not what you seem to be basing your opinion on.