Jury Impact – Page 24

Meat + Booze + Cash = Marry a 14-Year-Old!

Jury Impact 14 January, 2009 no responses

Straight from the oh-man-why-did-it-have-to-be-in-California file, CNN treats us to a story of a father, Jesus Martinez, who sold his underaged daughter’s hand in marriage to an 18-year-old boy in exchange for cash, tasty beverages and meat. (So that’s what 14-year-olds are going for these days?)

That’s not even the worst part. The worst part is the future son-in-law, who had already absconded with the minor Martinez, couldn’t even come up with that pitiful dowry! An irate Mr. Martinez called the cops, and hilarity ensued.

Marcelino de Jesus Martinez, 36, of Greenfield, California, was arrested Monday and booked into the Monterey County Jail, Greenfield police said in a statement.

Martinez had arranged through a third party to have his daughter marry the older teenager, identified by authorities as Margarito de Jesus Galindo, of Gonzales, California. In exchange, Galindo was to pay Martinez $16,000 and provide him with 160 cases of beer, 100 cases of soda, 50 cases of Gatorade, two cases of wine, and six cases of meat, Greenfield Police Chief Joe Grebmeier told CNN.

The official felony charge is “receiving money for causing a person to cohabitate.” I presume California law doesn’t have a provision for receiving carne asada.

But before your fervent head-scratching breaks the skin, we’re told this is TOTALLY, COMPLETELY, 100% NORMAL in Mr. Martinez’ hometown of Oaxaca, Mexico.

In Oaxacan culture, the food and beverages are provided by a prospective bridegroom for the wedding…

Who am I to argue with culture? And then there’s this little gem:

Authorities believe the young girl went with Galindo willingly, and no coercion was involved, he said. However, the girl is four years younger than California’s age of consent, although the law does allow 16-year-olds to marry with parental consent.

Wait, what? Is it just me, or is California slowly starting to become Florida?

And just in case people weren’t satisfactorily nauseated, the article slips in this little nugget:

He said his department has long heard rumors of children as young as 12 being sold or offered for sale. The Greenfield police statement said arranged marriages between young girls and older men “have become a local problem.”

Yeah, I’d say when 12-year-olds are getting hitched to adult males, “local problem” is a fair assessment.

CLICK HERE FOR THE ENTIRE ARTICLE…

Article: Dennis Quaid and His Wife Settle with Hospital

Jury Impact 16 December, 2008 no responses

According to the Associated Press:

Documents show Dennis Quaid and his wife have agreed to a a $750,000 settlement with a hospital that gave his newborn twins an overdose of blood thinner. A petition filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Monday shows the Quaids and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center have agreed on the parents’ damages, but can still pursue claims for their children.

The documents state Cedars-Sinai is not admitting wrongdoing as part of the settlement.

Documents show the Quaids sued drug maker Baxter Healthcare Corp. in Illinois over the drug’s packaging, but that case has been dismissed. The petition filed Monday indicates Baxter may also sue Cedars-Sinai, which administered too much Heparin to several patients in November 2007, including the Quaids’ twins.

If you recall, the Quaids’ twins, along with another newborn at Cedars-Sinai, were accidentally given 1,000 times the normal dosage of heparin. Instead of administering vials with a 10 unit per millileter concentration, the infants recieved 10,000 units per milliliter . According to the lawsuit against Cedar-Sinai, the adult and newborn medications were allegedly stored in the same place, providing opportunity for this very outcome.

The lawsuit against Baxter was a product liability case regarding the labeling and packaging of the vials, which it is alleged were strikingly similar for newborn and adult dosages. Baxter, which used a blue label for both the 10 and 1,000 unit vials, claimed Cedars-Sinai was responsible for improper use of their product.

When the suit was filed, Baxter spokeswoman said, “While we strive to clearly differentiate our products and dosages, no amount of differentiation will replace the value of clinicians carefully reviewing and reading a drug name and dose before dispensing and administering it.”

Importantly, and thankfully, none of these infants suffered permanent damage. Sadly, three of six infants given the same 10,000 units in Indianapolis in 2006 were not as fortunate and passed away.

When They Make This Into a Movie, I REALLY Hope They Do a Better Casting Job

Jury Impact 5 December, 2008 no responses

According to the Associated Press, Doreen Giuliano, whose son was convicted of murder in 2003, decided to go undercover in search of information that could possibly result in a repeal of his conviction.

And by undercover, I mean:

…blonde dye job, fake tan, sexy wardrobe, phony name — and began spying on jurors. She befriended one juror to root out any possible misdeeds at the trial, and for nearly eight months, they drank at bars, smoked marijuana and shared meals in her tiny Brooklyn hideaway.

Apparently it worked, because the juror she zeroed in on as a target, Jason Allo, started singing like a canary.

Among other things, the motion accuses the 33-year-old Allo of concealing that he had personal knowledge that Giuliano’s son, John Giuca, ran with a rough crowd, and of defying orders to avoid news coverage once the highly publicized proceedings started. It argues that Allo “admitted the outside information he obtained about the case prejudiced him against Mr. Giuca.”

In addition to mentioning the rarity of murder convictions being overturned, the article also provides some information about Mrs. Giuliano’s son’s conviction:

A jury deliberated only two hours before convicting Giuca of second-degree murder in 2005. He and the gunman were sentenced to 25 years to life in prison by a judge who told them that because the killing was callous, “my sentence will be callous.”[emphasis added]

Yeah, I somehow don’t think that one’s going to be overturned, regardless of what Mr. Allo offered up.

The thing that bothers me about this story is the claim by both Mr. Allo and Mrs. Giuliano that there was no physical contact. I’m just wondering how someone can be “seductive” if they never actually seduce anyone. And, well, I submit a photo for further discussion:

You’re telling me vegan Vin Diesel started yapping to this supposedly “seductive” older woman because they were BFF and nothing more? Just pals who share joints, tabs at bars, and the cozy confines of small Brooklyn apartments? Really?

Definitely a Thing That Makes You Go Hmmm…

CLICK HERE FOR THE ENTIRE ARTICLE…

Survey: Half of primary-care doctors would leave medicine

Jury Impact 21 November, 2008 no responses

According to CNN:

Nearly half the respondents in a survey of U.S. primary care physicians said that they would seriously consider getting out of the medical business within the next three years if they had an alternative.

The survey, released this week by the Physicians’ Foundation, which promotes better doctor-patient relationships, sought to find the reasons for an identified exodus among family doctors and internists, widely known as the backbone of the health industry.

According to the survey, 49% said they would consider walking away from medicine because they are “overwhelmed” by the red tape created by insurance companies and government entities.

Also interesting to note was the effect this growing sentiment could have on the future of medicine.

A U.S. shortage of 35,000 to 40,000 primary care physicians by 2025 was predicted at last week’s American Medical Association annual meeting.

…

And if that many physicians stopped practicing, that could be devastating to the health care industry.

“We couldn’t survive that,” says Dr. Walker Ray, vice president of the Physicians Foundation. “We are only producing in this country a thousand to two thousand primary doctors to replace them. Medical students are not choosing primary care.”

And let’s not forget one of the primary factors driving a distaste for a career in medicine: lawsuits and the effect they have on medical malpractice insurance rates.

To manage their daily work schedules, many survey respondents reported making changes. With lower reimbursement from insurance companies and the cost of malpractice insurance skyrocketing, these health professionals say it’s not worth running a practice and are changing careers….

This is a sad state of affairs.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL ARTICLE…

Lord Justice: Web-savvy young make bad jurors

Jury Impact 13 November, 2008 no responses

This is an aspect of jury selection we frequently discuss with our clients: Younger, web-proficient jurors tend to make worse, less receptive jurors.

Young people brought up with the Internet are not used to listening for long periods and would not make good jurors, according to the most senior judge in England and Wales.

By Christopher Hope, Home Affairs Editor – Telegraph

In a speech, Lord Judge of Draycote, the Lord Chief Justice, said it might be better to present information for young jurors on screens because that is how they were used to digesting information.

He said: “Most are technologically proficient. Many get much information from the Internet. They consult and refer to it. They are not listening. They are reading. “One potential problem is whether, learning as they do in this way, they will be accustomed, as we were, to listening for prolonged periods.

“Even if they have the ability to endure hours and days of sitting listening, how long would it be before some ask for the information on which they have to make their decision to be provided in forms which adapt to modern technology?

He said: “Our system of jury trials depends on 12 good men and women and true coming to court and listening to the case. Orality is the crucial ingredient of the adversarial system.

“Witnesses speak and answer questions. Counsel speak and address the jury. Judges speak and give directions.”

Currently information is provided on screens to jurors, such as in complex fraud trials, but “not without difficulty and with great expense”, he said.

Younger jurors, sometimes called the MTV Generation, have been brought up on 24-hour news, frenetic action movies, incessant advertising, feverish competition for their attention and disposable income, and more consumer choices than ever imagined. Call them the IGIG, or Instant Gratification Internet Generation.

These jurors, when they need an answer to a question, acquire the information as quickly as they can type into Google or Wikipedia. When I was growing up and needed the answer to who the 23rd Vice President was (Adlai Stevenson–I just Googled it), it was essentially the Dewey Decimal System or nothing.

Anyhow, it’s not surprising that jurors accustomed to obtaining information and consumer goods in mere seconds, could become impatient with a judicial system set up to slowly introduce information from both sides over the course of weeks.

Although the article does not explore this, shorter attention spans can also be dangerous because these jurors–accustomed to quickly forming opinions about complex issues based on soundbites and 3-minute news pieces–also tend to quickly take a stand on their trial verdict, before opening arguments conclude. This is a concern with jurors of all ages, genders and races, but in our experience is more prevalent among young, attention span-challenged jurors.

So how do you find out if a juror is web-savvy? In our experience, the simplest is asking whether they belong to social-networking sites, such as Facebook or MySpace, or if they Twitter or maintain a personal blog. In addition to being an indication of web-sophistication, obtaining this information can also provide insight into how beneficial or unfavorable that juror could be.

If a juror has a web page on a social networking site, it allows our jury selection team to look them up and glean basic information not included in (or removed by opposing counsel) the juror questionnaire. Jurors may have revealed certain information about themselves on their web pages related to lifestyle, personal outlook, or political views. Even if the page is set to “Private,” at the very least confirming a juror has a page can be an indication they are more web-savvy than those without.

Lastly, this topic highlights the importance of presenting all jurors with simple, effective visual presentations in addition to simple, effective themes that play to their predispositions and IGIG tendencies.

CLICK HERE FOR THE ENTIRE ARTICLE, YOU WEB-SAVVY YOUNGSTER

CNN: Juror who vanished from Stevens trial went to California horse race

Jury Impact 3 November, 2008 no responses

Your jury system at work, everyone:

WASHINGTON (CNN) – A woman who had been a juror in the criminal trial of Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens told a judge Monday she made up a story about her father dying, so she could go to California for a horse race.

The judge last week initially accepted her story about a family emergency, but was later unable to reach her to learn when she would return.

Here’s where it gets good:

“I feel bad about missing the last day or two of the trial,” [Marian] Hinnant said following Monday’s hearing. “I do not feel bad about going to California.”

…

“I couldn’t think of a, well, on Thursday afternoon, they’d not finished deliberating, so I thought by then we would be through, and I came home and I thought, ‘Well, I’m going,'” she said. “My plane leaves at 6 o’clock in the morning, so I called him (the judge) up and told him my father died, in
California.”

Sullivan closed the matter without any punishment against the woman for her absence.

It’s not as if this is a trial centered on someone being slandered on the internet–this is a political corruption trial of a major, extremely powerful U.S. Senator.

Look, I understand jury duty is the butt of a lot of jokes and very few people are genuinely excited about getting $5 a day and a brown bag lunch, but it is a civic duty. And just because it isn’t Disneyland, it doesn’t give people–especially those who have already committed to serve–the right to play hooky with no consequences.

By the way, check out the Comments section of the article to gauge America’s reaction. CLICK HERE FOR THE ENTIRE ARTICLE…

Cut it Out

Jury Impact 26 September, 2008 no responses

Straight from the Waking Nightmares file comes the story of a 61-year-old man who went in for a circumcision and came out with an amputated penis (for those of you wondering what would make a man suddenly decide to have a circumcision after 61 years, according to MSNBC the circumcision was intended to treat inflammation).

Phillip Seaton, 61, and his wife are seeking unspecified compensation from Dr. John M. Patterson and the medical practice that performed the circumcision for “loss of service, love and affection.” The Seatons also are seeking unspecified punitive damages from Patterson and the medical practice, Commonwealth Urology.

A woman who answered the phone at Commonwealth Urology would not take a message for the doctor Thursday. But the Seaton’s attorney said the doctor’s post-surgical notes show the doctor thought he detected cancer and removed the penis. Attorney Kevin George said a later test did detect cancer.

The lawsuit filed earlier this month in state court claims Patterson removed Seaton’s penis without consulting either Phillip or Deborah Seaton, or giving them an opportunity to seek a second opinion.

The couple also sued the anesthesiologist, Dr. Oliver James of Shelbyville, claiming he used a general anesthesia even though Seaton asked that it not be administered.

There are certain cases in which no matter how good the medicine or the expert testimony, the odds of a positive defense outcome are slim. Focus group participants have consistently demonstrated that any case involving the loss of private part use–or especially the loss of private parts–results in a near-automatic desire to award money.

To that point, the article casually mentions:

The Seatons’ suit is similar to one in which an Indianapolis man was awarded more than $2.3 million in damages after he claimed his penis and left testicle were removed without his consent during surgery for an infection in 1997.

However, in this case cancer was confirmed in the penis, making the “medical emergency” argument at least plausible. However, the consent issue will likely be a significant obstacle in making arguments about medical necessity. Brutal.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL ARTICLE…

« Previous 1 … 22 23 24 25 26 … 28 Next »

Author: Jury Impact