Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (11033)	7/9/2004 11:08:50 AM
From: mph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Even though you sometimes have a jury panel that does not consist of the sharpest knives in the drawer, you have to remember that there is a certain collective wisdom in a panel of 12. Sure, certain superficially appealing themes can be hammered home, even if they won't withstand real scrutiny, but you can't insult their intelligence. People sense that. I just tried a case where the plaintiff really caused his own accident and overreached on a lost earnings claim for which he had no documentation. (He claimed to be an independent contractor painter...uh huh) His lawyer argued that plaintiff had absolutely no role in causing the accident and that, in fact, it was all the defendants. (This was premises liability where he slipped and fractured his hip) He asked the jury for over $600K in his initial closing arguments. After mine, where I challenged all the liability issues and said that a lawsuit is not a lottery ($600K for an accident he caused himself?), this guy actually rebutted by saying that although I asked you for $600K, you're not limited to that amount. You can award more. (He must have thought he was Paul Newman in The Verdict.) The guy talked down to the jury the entire trial. It was almost embarrassing. As for the outcome, let's just say the plaintiff won't be retiring any time soon.............he was awarded less than $40K and will see even less after he pays his lawyer and other expenses. (That $40K includes the award against all defendants. He could have settled for that amount before trial and saved the trial expense---but he thought he was going to be the next millionaire.)

To: Oral Roberts who wrote (11033)	7/9/2004 11:19:11 AM
From: miraje	Respond to of 90947

I guess the juror's sitting on that trial answered my question though, didn't they. Unfortunately, one of the weaknesses of our jury system is that lawyers can cherry pick the most gullible dimwits, those that are the easiest to manipulate, to sit on juries...