DeathBeforeDenial wrote:
But, on the other hand so many jurors are 9 to 5 middle class knuckleheads. I guess you really can't expect a lot of high school graduate minimum wagers to understand the subtleties of semantics and arguement.
Hear hear! Best example of this I can think of was when a former co-worker of mine was on jury duty for a civil case involving someone getting hurt in a car accident. Now, note that the victim wasn't wearing her seatbelt, although the accident was in fact the defendant's fault.
Anyway, my co-worker, who was a pretty smart guy by all accounts, recounted the story of another juror who wanted to award the victim $10 million or something ridiculous like that. When asked why, she stated, "Because I think she deserves $10 million." No valid reasoning or anything else -- just that she felt like she deserved that money. My co-worker, on the other hand, felt like at most she only deserved medical expenses and lost wages, especially since her injuries were exacerbated by not wearing a seat belt.
In a happy ending, my co-worker managed to convince the jurors that she was only entitled to medical expenses and lost wages, which were considerably less than the $10 million that stupid lady wanted to give. Unfortunately, not enough juries have smart jurors like him on them.
