Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Juror Tweets Could Create Mistrial

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the cell-jammers-being-installed-next-week dept.

nandemoari writes "Russell Wright and his construction company, Stoam Holdings, recently lost a $12 million dollar lawsuit brought by investors. But lawyers for the firm have complained that juror Johnathan Powell's Twitter comments broke rules when discussing the civil case with the public. The arguments in this dispute center on two points. Powell insists (and the evidence appears to back him up) that he did not make any pertinent updates until after the verdict was given; if that's the case, the objection would presumably be thrown out. If Powell did post updates during the trial, the judge must decide whether he was actively discussing the case. Powell says he only posted messages and did not read any replies. Intriguingly, the lawyers for Stoam Holding are not arguing so much that other people directly influenced Powell's judgment, rather that he might have felt a need to agree to a spectacular verdict to impress the people reading his posts."

5 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Tweet? by neoform · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've made many websites, far more complex than that pile of trash. Feel free to look at the one in my sig.

    --
    MABASPLOOM!
  2. Re:It's the Juror's Fault by Narpak · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I guess it is high time proper behaviour in the digital landscape become a serious, and mandatory, course at all elementary and high schools. And perhaps send someone around to politicians, judges, teachers, and generally everyone above the age of twenty who do not know not to post stupid shit online.

    "So, Johnathan, what did you do today?' Oh, nothing really. I just gave away TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS of somebody else's money!" and "Oh, and nobody buy Stoam. It's bad mojo, and they'll probably cease to exist, now that their wallet is $12M lighter. http://www.stoam.com/ [stoam.com]."

    Those comments pretty much makes it look like this guy should never have been a juror in the first place.

    --
    The Long Now Foundation
  3. Re:Spectacular by Xtravar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So... they're arguing that the only 'competent' juror who may have fallen on their side had he not been showboating... is a Twitter user.

    Interesting strategy.

    --
    Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
  4. Re:It's like notetaking? by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If what you mean is that he could have decided that verdict X might make a good book deal, and secretly committed himself to giving verdict X, but didn't say anything until afterwards than I agree 100%.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  5. Jesus H. Christ..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How can people be so fucking stupid?!

    What on Earth could make somebody flagrantly disregard instructions and risk jail time just so they could blog on Twitter to all their friends? Why not wait until AFTER the trial? So you were a juror sitting on a trial..... WHO THE FUCK CARES?! WE'VE ALL DONE BEEN THERE!

    The judge ought to have beat the idiot to death with his gavel. It would have been a good example of 'Public Service'.

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....