5 ms·

This trivializes the complexities and uncertainties involved in many lawsuits. I know someone who was a juror on a case where the entire jury agreed that real f

This trivializes the complexities and uncertainties involved in many lawsuits. I know someone who was a juror on a case where the entire jury agreed that real financial harm was done to the plaintiff, but could not return a verdict awarding any damages because of how certain business relations were structured and how the relevant laws applied to them.

mullingitover 11y ago
As a juror, you're free to return any verdict you like. Here's the list of juries who suffered consequences for returning the wrong verdict:
- themartorana 11y ago
  I read this and wondered it if we're true so I did minimal research. It is, but only if you believe the verdict you are returning to be true. Which is a small but important detail. "Because of the importance of preventing undue influence on a jury, jury tampering (like witness tampering) is a serious crime, whether attempted through bribery, threat of violence, or other means. Jurors themselves can also be held liable if they deliberately compromise their impartiality." http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury
- joshuapants 11y ago
  How do you establish what a wrong verdict is? Another jury? And then a jury auditing that jury?
  - vacri 11y ago
    This is the basis of 'jury nullification'. You can't hold a jury responsible for returning a 'wrong' verdict - that's why they're there in the first place.
- throwawaykf05 11y ago
  This also oversimplifies how things work. Typically what happens in the US is, the judge presents the jury a list of mostly Y/N questions that is essentially a flow chart, which they must answer. This list is determined based on the arguments and evidence provided, and something that the judge works with both, the plaintiff and defense lawyers, to draft. Jurors cannot deviate from that flowchart. For instance, there may be only one set of questions to which you must answer Yes or No to reach the question that says "What damages do you award?" But if your answers do not lead you down to the conclusion that you'd like, too bad, the law and the facts don't support your preference. Juries could return any verdict that is not supported by the instructions, but I'd guess that is grounds for a mistrial.
rayiner 11y ago
Most lawsuits aren't lost on what people might think of as "on the merits." Statutes of limitations, federal preemption of state laws, etc. Defendants get off on technicalities all the time--that's the bread and butter of defense lawyers. And even when you lose on the merits, that doesn't mean there isn't any "there" there. I think the Ellen Pao lawsuit is a good example. I think, based on the evidence that came out, the jury decided correctly. But there was clearly enough misconduct to create justification for a lawsuit to dig into what really happened.

mullingitover 11y ago

As a juror, you're free to return any verdict you like. Here's the list of juries who suffered consequences for returning the wrong verdict:

themartorana 11y ago
I read this and wondered it if we're true so I did minimal research. It is, but only if you believe the verdict you are returning to be true. Which is a small but important detail. "Because of the importance of preventing undue influence on a jury, jury tampering (like witness tampering) is a serious crime, whether attempted through bribery, threat of violence, or other means. Jurors themselves can also be held liable if they deliberately compromise their impartiality." http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury
joshuapants 11y ago
How do you establish what a wrong verdict is? Another jury? And then a jury auditing that jury?
- vacri 11y ago
  This is the basis of 'jury nullification'. You can't hold a jury responsible for returning a 'wrong' verdict - that's why they're there in the first place.
throwawaykf05 11y ago
This also oversimplifies how things work. Typically what happens in the US is, the judge presents the jury a list of mostly Y/N questions that is essentially a flow chart, which they must answer. This list is determined based on the arguments and evidence provided, and something that the judge works with both, the plaintiff and defense lawyers, to draft. Jurors cannot deviate from that flowchart. For instance, there may be only one set of questions to which you must answer Yes or No to reach the question that says "What damages do you award?" But if your answers do not lead you down to the conclusion that you'd like, too bad, the law and the facts don't support your preference. Juries could return any verdict that is not supported by the instructions, but I'd guess that is grounds for a mistrial.

rayiner 11y ago

Most lawsuits aren't lost on what people might think of as "on the merits." Statutes of limitations, federal preemption of state laws, etc. Defendants get off on technicalities all the time--that's the bread and butter of defense lawyers. And even when you lose on the merits, that doesn't mean there isn't any "there" there. I think the Ellen Pao lawsuit is a good example. I think, based on the evidence that came out, the jury decided correctly. But there was clearly enough misconduct to create justification for a lawsuit to dig into what really happened.