|
Proposed Voir Dire Questions from Novell and SCO |
|
Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 10:41 PM EST
|
The parties have filed their proposed voir dire questions, the
questions each party would like potential jurors to be asked when trying to find the jurors who will hear and decide SCO v. Novell. Here's a definition of voir dire, and here's a very good explanation from ABA of the voir dire process and why some feel voir dire is more important than the trial itself. The article explains that "Prospective jurors may be challenged for cause if they exhibit a bias for or against one of the parties." So the questions are supposed to help the lawyers find out who might harbor a bias. The article also confirms what I've been telling you that juries are remarkably capable, and in fact the article says this: "Why should anyone think that 12 persons brought in from the street, selected in various ways for their lack of general ability, should have any special capacity to decide controversies between persons," asked formed United States Solicitor General Erwin Griswold. Yet, More often than not, most observers agree that when jurors are left to apply their experiences and common sense to the evidence presented to them, they render as impartial a brand of justice as is humanly possible. Novell's most interesting question: "20. Do you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, work for or in
close contact with the accounting or financial forecasting industry?"
Here are the filings:
02/23/2010 - 726 - Proposed Voir Dire by Defendant Novell, Inc.. (Brennan, Sterling) (Entered: 02/23/2010)
02/23/2010 - 727 - Proposed Voir Dire by Plaintiff SCO Group. (Hatch, Brent) (Entered: 02/23/2010)
With that background, here are SCO's questions:
PROPOSED VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS
1. Raise your hand if you have ever had someone accuse you of writing something inaccurate about someone else.
2. Raise your hand if you have been accused of taking credit for an idea that was not your own.
3. Raise your hand if you or someone in your immediate family has worked for a computer company or a computer software company.
4. Raise your hand if you have very positive opinions of large computer companies such as Novell, IBM, Microsoft, Sun, etc.
5. Raise your hand if you have ever used a computer operating system called UNIX or Linux.
6. Raise your hand if you have any familiarity with "open source" software.
7. Raise your hand if you know what Linux is.
8. Raise your hand if you like to keep up with news in the computer/technology sector.
9. Raise your hand if you have ever seen, read, or heard anything about disputes related to software such as UNIX and Linux.
10. Raise your hand if you have ever worked for a company that has declared bankruptcy.
11. Raise your hand if you feel you have strong feelings about a company in bankruptcy bringing claims for losses.
12. Raise your hand if you feel you have lost money due to a company seeking bankruptcy protection or have had a bad experience because a company sought bankruptcy protection.
13. Raise your hand if you or a member of your immediate family has been sued.
14. Raise your hand if you have ever worked for a large corporation.
15. Raise your hand if you have a college education.
16. Raise your hand if you have any work experience or special training in software development or sales.
17. Raise your hand if you have any experience with copyrights or patents.
I think number 9 must be the "get rid of Groklaw readers" voir dire question.
: D
And here are Novell's proposed questions:
Pursuant to the "Trial Order" dated February 4, 2010 (Dkt. No. 626), Novell hereby
submits this set of proposed voir dire questions for the Court to include in its voir dire of the
potential juror panel:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
It is our purpose here today to select from among you a group of
individuals to serve as jurors in a civil dispute involving a corporate plaintiff, The SCO Group,
Inc., and a corporate defendant, Novell, Inc. You will be asked a series of questions that are
designed to assist the Court and the attorneys representing the parties involved in the dispute in
determining whether there is any reason why you should not sit as a juror in this particular
dispute. The questions that you will be asked are not intended to offend you in any way, and are
not being asked simply out of anyone's personal curiosity. Instead, they simply are intended to
see if there is anything in your background that might affect your ability to fairly weigh the
evidence to be presented without any bias for or against any of the parties.
We will now proceed with the questions. Please listen carefully to each of the questions
as we go through them. If any of you has a question or a problem during the process please raise
your hand.
1. Would any of you be unduly burdened with financial, business, or family
problems if the trial of this case lasts as many as 15 trial days?
2. Based on what we have described so far, do you or any of your close friends or
relatives work or have any business connection with any of the parties to this action or think that
you know anything about this case or the parties, The SCO Group and Novell?
3. Have any of you ever served as a juror before?
If yes:
a. In what kind of case?
b. What was the outcome?
4. Have you ever been involved in a lawsuit?
If yes:
a. In what kind of case?
b. What was the outcome?
5. Have any of you ever been personally involved in a breach of contract dispute?
If yes:
a. What was the dispute?
b. Were you accused of breach of contract or did you accuse another person or
entity of breach of contract?
c. Was a court action filed?
d. What was the outcome?
6. Have any of you ever specifically negotiated the terms of a written contract?
If yes:
a. What was the contract?
b. Did you retain legal counsel for the negotiations?
7. Have any of you ever worked for a company that has been involved in a breach of
contract lawsuit?
If yes:
a. What was the outcome?
b. How did you feel about the outcome?
8. Have any of you ever been personally involved in an action for slander of title?
If yes:
a. What was the dispute?
b. Were you accused of slander of title or did you accuse another person or entity
of slander of title?
c. Was a court action filed?
d. What was the outcome?
9. In connection with your employment, do you have anything to do with the
adjustment of claims or the settlement of claims for damages?
10. Have you or any member of your immediate family ever had a claim against
anyone for damages? (If so, what kind of claim? What did it involve? Was this claim
compromised or settled out of court, or did the matter go to trial? Would that fact influence you
in any way in reaching a verdict in this case? Were you satisfied with the outcome of this
claim?)
11. Has anyone ever had a claim for damages against you or a member of your
immediate family? (If so, what kind of claim? What did it involve? Was this claim
compromised or settled out of court, or did the matter go to trial? Would that fact influence you
in any way in reaching a verdict in this case? Were you satisfied with the outcome of this
claim?)
12. Do you know any of the following persons who may be called to testify in this
case?
[Read Witness Lists]
13. Do you know, or have you had any dealings with, any of the following companies
or businesses?
[Read List of Businesses Likely to Be Mentioned During the Trial]
14. If so, describe your connection or affiliation with any of these companies or
businesses.
15. Do you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, have any
experience, knowledge or advanced education in any aspect of the computer hardware or
software industry?
16. Do you regularly read computer- or technology-oriented magazines?
17. Are you familiar with the open source model of computer programming or with
open source operating systems, such as Linux?
18. Are you familiar with operating systems, such as Microsoft DOS or Windows or
Apple operating systems?
19. Are you familiar with other operating systems, such as Netware, UNIX, or
Unixware?
20. Do you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, work for or in
close contact with the accounting or financial forecasting industry?
21. Do you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, work for or in
close contact with law firms or the legal system?
22. Do you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, work for
companies involved in licensing intellectual property or software?
a. If yes, please describe that work experience.
23. Have you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, been negatively
impacted by the recent economic downturn?
24. Do you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, maintain a weblog,
or blog?
25. Have you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, ever filed a
copyright registration with the United States Copyright Office?
26. Have you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, ever been
involved in the sale of a business or assets of a business?
a. If yes:
i. When?
ii. What was the nature of business?
iii. Describe your involvement.
iv. Did any disputes arise concerning the sale? If so, please describe.
27. Do any of you know of any reason why you think that you could not sit in this
case and render a just, fair, honest and impartial verdict?
I think number 24 is likely Novell's "Groklaw" question.
Update: Here's an interesting article about questions lawyers sometimes ask in voir dire. For example: Knowing that she doesn't have time to probe all relevant areas, though, Zellner concludes with a somewhat metaphysical question: "If you were my client, what would you want me to know about someone like you on the jury?"
This catch-all query sometimes prompts additional disclosures about relevant experiences, biases and beliefs, says Zellner. Even if it doesn't, though, having prospective jurors imagine themselves in the party's place emphasizes that the case involves real people like themselves, who deserve full, fair and impartial consideration.
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 10:51 PM EST |
There is an incredible difference in tone between the SCO and Novell
questions. Does anyone know why?
Is Novell trying to give the jurors an
early favourable impression?
Is SCO trying to do the opposite? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Proposed Voir Dire Questions from Novell and SCO - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 10:59 PM EST
- Proposed Voir Dire Questions from Novell and SCO - Authored by: Steve Martin on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 11:01 PM EST
- Proposed Voir Dire Questions from Novell and SCO - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 11:02 PM EST
- who is left? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 11:12 PM EST
- who is left? - Authored by: Lazarus on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 11:18 PM EST
- who is left? - Authored by: Ian Al on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 06:38 AM EST
- who is left? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 10:54 AM EST
- who is left? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 10:43 PM EST
- Apparently so! - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2010 @ 09:43 PM EST
- Proposed Voir Dire Questions from Novell and SCO - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 11:15 PM EST
- Proposed Voir Dire Questions from Novell and SCO - Authored by: Ed L. on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 11:33 PM EST
- Proposed Voir Dire Questions from Novell and SCO - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 11:46 PM EST
- Quality - Authored by: wvhillbilly on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 12:58 AM EST
- Judge usually asks the questions - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 06:09 AM EST
- rules on questions - Authored by: designerfx on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 08:22 AM EST
- Proposed Voir Dire Questions from Novell and SCO - Authored by: Kanth on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 11:11 AM EST
- How does anyone in TECH get a jury of their "PEERS" if no one on the Jury know any tech at all? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 12:14 PM EST
- Voir Dire is broken. - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2010 @ 09:41 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 11:20 PM EST |
Stupid badly worded question. Silly lawyers don't even know how the world works.
Pretty much every person answering NO to that question is lying. It needs to be
rephrased along the lines of "do you think you have" or "have you
ever knowingly".
"5. Raise your hand if you have ever used a computer operating system
called UNIX or Linux."
The answer is YES.
The question is several parts of,
- have you deposited money in bank electronically?
- have you made a phone call in the last 30 years?
- have you ever used a credit or debit card for an electronic transaction.
- visited a web site (even Microsoft uses akamai)
- and so on.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 23 2010 @ 11:49 PM EST |
... since the questions are proposed I assume there are some limits as to what
can be asked and that the judge can strike questions that step past those
limits. Could someone explain to a guy who knows nothinmg about the process what
those limits are and give examples of the kinds of questions that might not be
regarded as proper.
How for example is asking whether anyone has a college degree relevant as to
whether or not they can render an unbiased opinion?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 12:19 AM EST |
While someone may know that shopping Amazon uses Linux on the server end, I
doubt the lawyers will have an issue with that. What happens if a juror
responds they have been reading/watching the case unfold over Groklaw for the
last 7 years? Does SCO's legal team drop their jaws at the mention of it?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: IMANAL_TOO on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 12:37 AM EST |
SCO's "15. Raise your hand if you have a college education."
LOL
They want Mary-Lou and Billy-John, the trailer aces!
---
______
IMANAL
.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: yorkshireman on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 01:19 AM EST |
This SCO question seems really badly worded to me:
1. Raise your hand if
you have ever had someone accuse you of writing something inaccurate about
someone else.
I am generally unsure how to answer this question if the only
person ever to have accused me of writing something inaccurate, complained about
something written about them personally as opposed to a
third party.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: kh on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 01:27 AM EST |
Do you or have you ever worked for Microsoft or for a company that works for
Microsoft or is contracted to Microsoft?
Have you ever used a computer which used a Microsoft product?
;-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: cxd on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 01:41 AM EST |
I read the US Supreme Court case that PJ put in the News Pics. Very interesting
because even though SCO was incorperated in Delaware its main nerve center where
the business is directed from is in Lindon Utah.
Does this mean that the Bankruptcy Court in Delaware does not have juristiction
of this case.
The Bankruptcy process here in Utah is alot harder on those in bankruptcy.
Is it to late to have this law applied because the case is already progressing
in Delaware or does the new law apply to all onging actions?
---
cxd[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jacks4u on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 02:00 AM EST |
IMO, Novell's (23. "Have you, or anyone in your family or any of your close
friends, been negatively impacted by the recent economic downturn?" coupled
with SCO's 15. "Raise your hand if you have a college education."
prety muchguarantees a set of 0 (zero) acceptable jurors.
My question is this: Do the two sides get a chance to object to each other's
voir dire questions? or are these non-negotiable?
imo, SCO's questions are capable of flagging every prospective juror, save
perhaps a few elderly housewives that were particularly sheltered.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 02:20 AM EST |
It seems that the questions SCO lawyers want to ask tend to subtly play to the
idea that jurors will be subject to manipulation etc, which is what the average
citizen usually expects.
The Novell questions are basically "nice" in a way which might make
such jurors uneasy since they still might expect manipulation from them as well,
but not be able to identify it.
Much of this seems to have little to do with Law outside a formal adherence to
courtroom politesse, and much more to do with forms of politics well understood
in other venues which similarly leave real facts behind in the dust of
unexamined opinion.
A dark analysis perhaps, yet effectively countered by strategies which take such
considerations into account so as to allow the SCO lawyers' efforts to turn back
upon them ...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 03:34 AM EST |
Makes me think of the film "Runaway Jury" with John Cusack in the
hotseat trying to wiggle out of jury duty (erroneously) by claiming he has to
take part in the Madden Challenge and Gene Hackman wondering whether John is
really unbiased or not ...
phantomjinx (not logger in)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 05:17 AM EST |
The article also confirms what I've been telling you that juries are
remarkably capable ...
Like the jury that awarded the RIAA $2
million against Jammie Thomas for downloading less than $20-worth of
songs?
Like the juries that have convicted more than 200 people of
serious crimes, like rape and murder. who were later conclusively proven to be
innocent?
(By the way, whenever somebody posts something about
innocent people being convicted, there's usually somebody who replies, "Oh, but
those innocent people are just a tiny fraction of the total number of people
convicted". Yes, they are. But they're the ones whose innocence can be
proven. Usually, you cannot prove an innocent person's innocence.
You have to rely on the courts requiring "proof beyond reasonable doubt" of
guilt. And at one time, that used to work. But nowadays, juries tend to convict
on the basis of 'well, somebody did it, and this guy seems the most likely' or
'we think the defendant is a liar'. More than half the time, they're probably
right. But that doesn't justify their decisions.) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: clicky_maker on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 06:55 AM EST |
Don't forget to use HTML for the links!
---
505640[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- CERN threatened with lawsuit - Authored by: sciamiko on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 09:10 AM EST
- For all the Bill Gates watchers... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 09:29 AM EST
- Google - Serious Threat to Web in Italy - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 09:53 AM EST
- The White House Blog - Intellectual Property and Risks to the Public - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 10:12 AM EST
- Canada Leads U.S. in International Property Rights Index - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 01:02 PM EST
- Xerox sues Google, Yahoo over search patents - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 01:31 PM EST
- Utah A.G. may gain broader power to demand Internet, cell-phone records - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 02:04 PM EST
- Copyright fair use limitation a liability? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 02:20 PM EST
- Government Open Source Initatives "weakens the software industry" - Authored by: Eeyore on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 02:24 PM EST
|
Authored by: clicky_maker on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 06:56 AM EST |
Because we want everything to be right.
---
505640[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: clicky_maker on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 07:01 AM EST |
Please indicate which Groklaw newspick you are referring to in the title of your
post.
---
505640[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: clicky_maker on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 07:04 AM EST |
Put them all here folks. PJ thanks you. If you are formatting the documents
with html, post using "Plain Old Text" then she can just cut and
paste.
---
505640[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 07:31 AM EST |
Looking at the questions proposed by SCO, I can't help
wondering whether in order to sit on a jury in the US, you
have to be completely ignorant, sequestered in a monastery in
Nepal for the previous 8 years, and willing to lie about
questions 1 and 2 in order to qualify for the jury.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: JamesK on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 07:58 AM EST |
"I think number 9 must be the "get rid of Groklaw readers" voir
dire question."
I think SCO's list will make it difficult to find anyone to sit on the jury.
;-)
---
IANALAIDPOOTV
(I am not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: LaurenceTux on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 08:41 AM EST |
I would say that world wide the number of folks that are capable of deciding
this "correctly" and have not violated at least one of both parties
lists is very very small.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 08:47 AM EST |
Novell's questions suggest they've considered the feelings/thoughts that
their
questions will raise in juror's minds. They appear to be designed to
elicit an considered
explanation or encourage potential jurors to to undertake
some kind of rational process
before answering.
When reading them, I
briefly wondered whether they intended to bring Dr Phil onto
their team to do
juror selection.
SCO's yes/no answering seems quite abrupt and almost
rude. And the lack of
preamble (as provided by Novell) is somewhat of a
challenge to the court/judge ("...
here's your stinkin'
questions!").
They force jurors to admit to something that will probably
result in a challenge and
it treats them like school children ( "... hands up
who didn't bring their
homework").
If I were a juror (and I have been
on an Australian jury and challenged several times)
I'd be quite offended by
SCO's style of questioning. Novell's questions remind me of the
directions the
judges gave us potential jurors before allowing the two teams to
select/challenge the panels. They emphasis the gravity of the role of a juror
and
impress upon them the need to carefully consider what they hear and
do.
Charles from Oz [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 10:20 AM EST |
This should really have read:
Have you ever worked for a company which declared bankruptcy because of
foolishly pursuing winning a lawsuit lottery?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: baomike on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 10:26 AM EST |
<<"20. Do you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends,
work for or in close contact with the accounting or financial forecasting
industry?">>
Is that really what they want to know?
I, as a retired CPA, would answer , "no" to the question.
As in many cases, the asker of the question has put too fine a point on it, and
the answer does not tell them what they really wanted to know, ie how familiar
are you with
financial/accounting matters.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 10:33 AM EST |
1) if Novell and SCO don't like any particular jurors can they dump them?
2) if they dump enough, does the selection start over -or- do they have to keep
a minimum number even if they are less than completely satisfactory?
3) How many jurors will be in the jury for this case?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 10:44 AM EST |
I have been called to Jury Service one time.
It was a criminal case that we would later find out was
careless driving resulting in Injury.
My wife and I had previously been involved in an accident
which resulted in such charges being filed against another
individual.
I answered to several of the questions.
Did I have a close relationship with a police officer?
Have I ever been a witness in a criminal case?
Have I ever been given a traffic ticket?
Each time, the judge would stop after the question and ask
if anything in my experience at that time would preclude me
from being able to consider the evidence presented and form
an opinion based SOLELY on the evidence presented in the
court room. We would move on.
Not only was I not struck, I ended up foreman of that
particular jury.
I think its important to recognize that these are questions
that are going to be asked but unless a juror trips all over
themselves to scream out that SCO needs to collapse or
something crazy, SCO only has a few jurors it can remove
from the pool. I wouldn't worry too much about the
questions.
---
Clocks
"Ita erat quando hic adveni."[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Jurors - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 10:49 AM EST
- District of Utah - 12 in Civil Jury - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 11:49 AM EST
- Whoa. - Authored by: Ed L. on Thursday, February 25 2010 @ 02:44 AM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 12:33 PM EST |
4. Raise your hand if you have very positive opinions of large
computer companies such as Novell, IBM, Microsoft, Sun,
etc.
Wow.... anyone with "very positive opinions" of IBM/MS are
eliminated. Seriously?
When they were writing that question, did they
think to ask what the percentage of population who have heard of either IBM or
MS was? I'd speculate it's a pretty large percentage of the
population.
Throw in marketing. Especially MS marketing. How many MS
users have been convinced by MS marketing that their computers are extremely
stable and don't fail? How many of them believe MS is extremely valuable for
"bringing computing to the common household"?
I'm facetiously thinking
that question alone will eliminate most of the population from Jury duty. About
the only ones who would pass that question are:
- Those that have removed
technology from their lives and don't even own a tv.
- Those whose
opinions of large computer corporations (and probably all computer corporations
by association) are only negative.
It's certainly an amusing
question.
What's not surprising about it is that they list Novell first.
I can understand they don't want anyone on the Jury that has positive opinions
of Novell. They want to be able to paint Novell in that "big bad company trying
to wipe out little competitor" picture.
I can also understand they had to
make their question far more generic, then just Novell, to be able to increase
the odds it'll be part of the questioning.
Heh, it's really amusing that
question's results have the potential - although probably slim - chance to stock
the Jury with people who hate technology and will probably have equal enmity
towards SCOG as they might have towards Novell. With such individuals, trying
to provide BSF's usual song and dance might just seriously
backfire.
Hmm.... Novell could help eliminate an even further section of
the population with the question:
Raise your hand if you have very negative
opinions of large computer companies such as Novell, IBM, Microsoft, Sun,
etc.
The two questions together would leave... quite possibly... only about
.2% of the population to qualify ;)
RAS[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 02:15 PM EST |
Is whether a person is college educated really a valid reason for
exclusion/inclusion?
Is SCO purposely trying to remove people with a computer background and Novell
to keep them?
Personally, I'd think the judge would want college educated computer smart
people on the jury. I can see why SCO would not, but is that really an allowable
exclusion.
I'd really like to know. I've only been called up for jury duty once and they
filled the jury before even getting to me.
-- Celtic_hackr[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 02:35 PM EST |
not many left after there spill.
and its why some questions should be not allowed
in an age where a majority of homes have computers how can you then be
discounted?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 08:06 PM EST |
With their counterposed questions there is probably not uch chance of any US
citizen surviving voir dire to make the jury unless they have never touched a
computer in the past 30 years or so...
I dont think even the Commodore Amiga
users would qualify...
SCO:
5. Raise your hand if you
have ever used a computer operating system called UNIX or
Linux.
Novel:
18. Are you familiar with operating
systems, such as Microsoft DOS or Windows or Apple operating systems?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 09:04 PM EST |
I thought that could be the case (judge asks the questions) but Novell's
submission does read like a script they;'d like to deliver. I still think the
manner in which they've delivered the proposed questions to the court tells us a
lot.
fwiw: in Australia (Queensland), prior to empanelling, both legal
teams get the list of names of potential jurors and some basic information about
them (age, education, current employment, place of residence, etc). They are
able to do some basic investigation of them but nothing intrusive.
No
questions are put directly to jurors other than to ask them if they know the
complainants, defendants, witnesses or the legal teams - as well as the
obligatory 'if you think you cannot make a decision about the case based on what
you will hear, please approach the judge'.
The prosecution/defence have
just one opportunity to challenge jurors - as they walk from the seats to the
witness stand to take an oath - and the indicate it by saying (defence)
'challenge' or (prosecution) 'stand-down'. You have to walk alone and across the
court in front of them and it's quite an unsettling experience.
If
challenged, you do feel upset by not knowing why you were thought unsuitable -
but when one of the the cases is child molesting, you're glad to have not been
forced to hear details and recollections of the terrible
event(s).
Charles from Oz [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|