View Single Post
Old 08-28-2012, 12:33 PM   #362
JoeD
Guru
JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 889
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: Hanlin v3, iPad, Kindle 4NT
Quote:
Originally Posted by heySkippy View Post
It wouldn't be possible to prevent US jurors from talking about it after the trial unless you can get the SCOTUS to carve out an exception to the first amendment.
That's why I think the judge stressed that whilst they could talk about it, they should be careful what they say as it could cause a retrial.

Not sure if this has already been posted, but since it's related to the current apple/samsung case and the issue of jurors talking about deliberations

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...-factors.shtml

@Harry:

It's an interesting issue for those of us in the UK.

If what the jurors (in the US case) have done really was to ignore prior art, the judge's instructions and try to punish samsung rather than just vote on the law at hand, in the UK we'd likely never have found out. Unless a juror reported concerns to officials at the court, but if they all thought what they were doing was perfectly acceptable (even if it wasn't), we'd likely never find out.

Last edited by JoeD; 08-28-2012 at 12:36 PM.
JoeD is offline   Reply With Quote