Quote:
Originally Posted by Phogg
Yeah, but they will be exponentially more relevant than a trial adjudicated by one of the besotten old alzheimer's fossils that preside in many jurisdictions, or the political blinder musings of one of the party hacks (who only pry their way onto the bench by sycophanticly catering to one of the two irredemably corrupt political parties) who preside over many others.
Juries only look bad if you refuse to look objectively at the quality of performance the alternative delivers in practice, rather than the theoretical one may wish it exhibeted.
|
Anything can happen in a jury deliberation room. Since they are not required to explain how they reached their decision jurors in the US are above the law. They do not have to uphold the US Constitution, State and local laws. Previous Supreme Court decisions can also be ignored. They can create their own definitions of collusion, MFN, agency pricing and monopoly. They can look beyond what was said in court.
Just choosing a jury will be difficult also. The DOJ attorneys may exclude those owning an iPad or Mac. The other side those with Kindles or users of a Kindle app.