

Patents and Juries - apayan
http://www.alertdebugging.com/2012/08/29/patents-and-juries/

======
T_S_
A little story about the jury system. Years ago I was a juror on a murder
trial in NYC. The judge was strict beyond belief with the attorneys. He seemed
tougher than any hanging judge in a movie, though not unfair. The verdict was
reached quickly: guilty. Every one associated with the trial went on with our
lives. All but the victim and the defendant.

A year later, the judge retired and published his memoir. A big surprise
awaited. He had begun his career as an ACLU lawyer in the 60s but wound up
with a tough reputation among the defense bar.

An even bigger surprise awaited me. He devoted a chapter to explaining how
hopeless the jury system is. To illustrate, he told the story of a murder
case. _My murder case_. I read, "Never was a defendant more plainly guilty". I
agreed, with some relief, but was confused. Why this case?

Turns out my trial was the _second_ trial. At the first, some of the female
jurors refused to convict. The defendant was "too good looking to have
committed the crime", in their opinion. Mistrial. Then I recalled how, in our
later trial, two female jurors wanted to find a way to justify a manslaughter
conviction for what was clearly deliberate murder. They felt sorry for the
handsome young defendant.

You be the judge (or jury), but if I had not lived it, I would not have
believed this could happen.

~~~
saurik
Given that the jury is already supposed to be isolated from inadmissible
evidence or influences in the media outside of the trial, I wonder if anyone
has looked into what the effect (positive or negative) of having juries make
their decision using a transcript, only having a picture or video of one of
the parties available in the case that it is important and accepted evidence
(such as "we have a video of the murder taking place; for reference, here is a
picture, so you can recognize his face in the camera").

