That's what KOA just said the jury asked Judge Naves in the Churchill case. Naves said they had to have some sort of dollar amount.
Update: Another jury question (via KHOW): If one juror disagrees with the amount, can we get rid of him (or her)? Uh, no.
Silverman just mentioned PB!
Update II: C & S are predicting a verdict today. They also will have CU lead attorney Patrick O'Rourke will be one at 3:20. KHOW's live stream.
Caplis: Why didn't you play the tapes of Chutch's encouragement of terrorism.
O'R: Wanted to keep focus on research misconduct.
Silverman: You quoted Wart on the tapes. Why didn't you use the tape itself?
O'R: Again, didn't want to bring it back to a free speech issue. Might have "pumped up the volume of damages."
S: So you thought that would harm your case?
O'R: I didn't know . . .
C: Help us with procedural things. If they find for Churchill but award nominal damages, what are the consequences?
O'R: The judge has remedies, which include reinstatement, but if the jury comes back with nominal damages I don't think he'd get his job back.
C: Would a nominal award get D. Lane his attorneys fees?
O'R: Up to judge, but nominal damages might mean Lane gets only a little of his costs.
O'R sounds depressed.
S: What about the jury. Never seen one like that in Denver. How did that happen.
O'R: 17 jurors excused for cause by Lane; we had two excused for cause. The panel we ended up with was remarkable. . . Only two jurors raised their hands when I asked them if they'd be upset if they had a relative in the Twin Towers. Oldest juror was 36, youngest 19. We ended up with a panel that I knew (faced us) with severe challenges
S: Discouraged by jury questions?
O'R: I'm disappointed. . .
S: If they don't agree on damages, do they take half the damages . . .?
O'R: If it's a hung jury, we get to try it over again . . .
C: Seems to me CU had much more info they could have used. Art fraud, fake Indian . . . Do you think the outcome might have been different if you'd used that?
O'R: I don't think so. . .
C: Oh well, it's a tough gig . . .
S: Sure is . . . (plays Wart tape). You think they would have reacted favorably to Churchill if they'd heard that?
O'R: I thought if I started using that sound I was afraid the jury would think I'd given up on the research misconduct charges . . .
S: Couldn't you have made it clear that it was about his credibility Wouldn't the judge have let it in . . .?
O'R: I think you're right, Craig. The judge would have let it in . . . But again, thought it would prejudice the jury. . .
S: Lane tried to serve me with a subpeona to get me on the stand about collusion between CU and the media. . .
C: A nominal award would be a victory for you . . .
O'R: It would have been hard for me to say with a straight face that the investigation had nothing to do with the 9/11 essay . . .
S: Dan and I were jsut dumbfounded that DL didn't just defend WC, but urged the jury to reject the "master narrative" and that the TT vics deserved what they got. . .
O'R: DL did a good job of masking his hateful comments and try to make them seem intellectual. RttB very interesting . . . Mentioned the "Obama factor," tried to appeal to people who didn't go through 9/11 events . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment