Not exact matches
«I think the reason we won,» he says, «is because we focused on the
questions that were
going to be presented
to the
jury: Were the patents valid?
It's probably not
going to be possible
to have a
jury of people that have never heard of the bands, that have never heard the music, but the real
question is, even with that understanding, can they only focus on the evidence that's being presented by the parties at trial and only use that evidence and nothing from their own life experience outside of the courtroom
to make that decision?
SilentHunter, Some of the differences are that a newspaper is publishing an account and a dossier; that this is
going to an independent complaints commission which the police do not control; that both supporters as well as opponents of the government will ask
questions about this - in parliament, on blogs, and in many other places - no doubt pushing for an inquest with a
jury, and be pushing for broader changes in policing
to ensure its consistency with the human rights legislation we now have (such as those being advocated by Stuart White here on Next Left).
The Foundry Art Centre's
juried exhibition «
Going Home» asks the artist
to explore the
question of what is meant by «home».
Then the witnesses will start backpedalling and adding qualifications as soon as the jurors start asking them
questions (there is no attorney present
to object, though the witness can take a time out
to consult counsel outside the hearing of the jurors); there will be 18 - 24 of them: independent businessmen, committed church -
goers, accountants, etc — the federal grand
jury that I sat on had a member of the technical staff of an international pharmaceutical corporation.
Don't get me wrong; voir dire (the process of asking the
jury questions) should not be hurried and the time spent on careful juror selection has a massive impact on the verdict we get for clients, but there are more efficient ways
to go about this.
A good Prosecutor will know your weaknesses as a witness and will work with you
to get out of these situations while still presenting
to the
jury that you are
to be believed over the accused (most lawyers know exactly what a witness is
going to say
to any given
question long before they ask it in court).
His lordship turned
to the
question of whether or not there had been a case
to go to the
jury.
The case
went to trial, and the trial court submitted a general negligence
question to the
jury.
Careful planning of the
questions to be submitted
to a
jury prior
to trial will
go a long way in putting together an effective case for your client.
Then the court
went on
to evaluate whether the
jury should have gotten the
question in the first place.
Having first decided that they were bound
to consider the sufficiency of the plea
to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, and having decided that this plea showed that the Circuit Court had not jurisdiction, and consequently that this is a case
to which the judicial power of the United States does not extend, they have
gone on
to examine the merits of the case as they appeared on the trial before the court and
jury on the issues joined on the pleas in bar, and so have reached the
question of the power of Congress
to pass the act of 1820.
Simple
question, if
juries are
going to count on visual information as part of their decision - making, and your consultant is not insisting on testing graphics, do you really believe you have the best
jury consultant?
The Court reasoned that the
question of whether the defendant was
to be held financially responsible for the injuries was one
to be answered by the
jury, and the case would
go to trial.
The insurers indicated that there are minor exceptions, but their policy on frivolous cases was based on the belief that if they ever begin
to settle cases just
to make them
go away, their credibility will be destroyed and this will encourage more litigation.15 o Vidmar further testified, «Without
question the threat of a
jury trial is what forces parties
to settle cases.