Win 80 million for being a moron

[Wonkie]

Originally Posted by DMN [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

All you need is 1. minimal science background 2.not be a moron. There are these magical things called "studies" which you can read if you can handle those pre-reqs.

studies say the money will be reduced on appeal, but not the mad

[DMN]

Originally Posted by Wonkie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

studies say the money will be reduced on appeal, but not the mad

It's all fun and games until the day you have to go to court for something and you have a jury full of moutbreathers who couldn't pass a grade school reading/science/math test.

[aaezil]

Good thing juries arent scientists or we would be totally screwed. That fact that a jury of randos got to make the decision and not a scientific review board is just sad though

[azeth]

Originally Posted by aaezil [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That fact that a jury of randos got to make the decision and not a scientific review board is just sad though

This I agree with in a sense, regardless of where either of us fall on the political spectrum.

The jury of peers is an incredible system in America, but I'm not sure if a jury of even average to above average intelligence people are equipped to - again - even have an opinion on this subject, let alone make a decision.

[Wonkie]

Originally Posted by azeth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This I agree with in a sense, regardless of where either of us fall on the political spectrum.

The jury of peers is an incredible system in America, but I'm not sure if a jury of even average to above average intelligence people are equipped to - again - even have an opinion on this subject, let alone make a decision.

i just cant believe a jury found causation beyond a reasonable doubt

[DinoTriz2]

Originally Posted by Wonkie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

i just cant believe a jury found causation beyond a reasonable doubt

a jury recently found an innocent man guilty because he was a Trump supporter

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by azeth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This I agree with in a sense, regardless of where either of us fall on the political spectrum.

The jury of peers is an incredible system in America, but I'm not sure if a jury of even average to above average intelligence people are equipped to - again - even have an opinion on this subject, let alone make a decision.

Constitution makes no distinction for who composes a jury other than they be peers.

[Tethler]

You don't need to present facts to a jury. You just need to be more convincing than the other guy.

Facts, or no facts, the corporate attorneys were less convincing. /shrug

[DMN]

Originally Posted by Tethler [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You don't need to present facts to a jury. You just need to be more convincing than the other guy.

Facts, or no facts, the corporate attorneys were less convincing. /shrug

No, you just need to find the right pack of morons. The legal system should not be a fucking lottery. justice is supposed to be blind not random.

[Wonkie]

Originally Posted by DMN [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No, you just need to find the right pack of morons. The legal system should not be a fucking lottery. justice is supposed to be blind not random.

how much is monsanto paying u to be mad