or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by johndoe98

That was true even before Samsung answered AllthingD's emails.
That's part of the risk involved in holding a trial open to the public. Did Samsung leak anything new evidence? Nope. Did they share their opinion they didn't like the fact some evidence was excluded? Yep. Did the jury already know that? I think so, weren't they present when Koh told them to shut up about it?
Yes, I did miss that. That looks like it might be sufficient leverage for judge Koh to impose sanctions no? Although, as the lawyer posted, Samsung's lawyer might have enough wiggle room given the fact that all the information was already public.Anyway, thanks for calling my attention to this.
Ok wrong expression then. Expressing strong dissent.
Ok, but the information was already out there in all the major news outlets before Samsung's shenanigans, so what exactly is Samsung revealing other than that they think this evidence is pivotal to their case? We already knew that when they whined over and over about it not being included and Koh told them to shut up or they would be sanctioned. So again, nothing new was added in this gesture, other than Samsung showing the court it's willing, to speak colloquially, "spit...
Yep, as Quinn noted in his declaration all the same info was already published in most major news outlets, including the New York Times, the LA Times, Cnet, etc. The only thing Samsung added with this fiasco was their claiming the evidence would completely exonerate them, which frankly is preposterous.
I'm not aware of the destruction of evidence. I must have missed that scoop. Do you per chance have any sources that I may avail myself regarding that? I have heard of Samsung destroy evidence in other trials, but am I to understand they did it again here?
You all keep repeating this. It makes no sense to me though and I would like a clear explanation. Let me give you an analogy. I say don't go into the room 212 with information X in it. Then someone, perhaps me, puts some information in room 212 for others to see. How can anyone who put information in to room 212 be responsible if you happen to find yourself in room 212? We told you not to go in there, so if you are in there, you did something wrong and no one else did.
First, I didn't say nothing that Samsung does can interfere with the jury. You are equivocating. If Samsung presented the evidence to the jury, directly, in the court, it would clearly be tampering with the jury in a way that the jury could not ignore, and therefore that would be a blatant case of an attempt to prevent the jury from doing its duty. However, given the fact that the jury is not allowed to look at the media coverage, anything Samsung does in that domain is...
I care enough to inform others I have no problem with them ignoring me if they have nothing to contribute, sure. Have anything else to add?
New Posts  All Forums: