Re:A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious
by gridaphobe on Monday August 27, 2012 @12:19AM
(#4437421)
The problem with your argument is that jury nullification is designed to prevent unjust punishment. In this case the jury appears to have deliberately increased Samsung's punishment.
Re:A device with a touchscreen and few buttons was obvious
by esolyt on Monday August 27, 2012 @09:38AM
(#4438714)
"Jurors are free to ignore them, and should ignore them when justice requires it."
And justice required them to use the courts to "send a message" and punish Samsung with more than "just a slap on the wrist"?
For example, Jurors have the right to find a guy not guilty when caught red handed with marijuana simply because the law is unconstitutional. They have that right and that is intentional in our system. Judges on the other hand, tell jurors in their instructions that they "have to find them guilty if they believe he possessed the drugs". When judges do this, I consider it jury tampering, and unfortunately for innocent pot smokers, too many jurors listen to the instructions.