Appeal says juror sent 'tweets' during $12.6M case

[Blue_Tires]

Source: AP

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. – A building materials company and its owner have appealed a $12.6 million verdict against them, alleging that a juror was posting related messages on Twitter.com while hearing the case.

The motion filed Thursday seeking a new trial claims the juror sent eight messages — or "tweets" — to the micro-blogging Web site via his cellular phone. One read in part: "oh and nobody buy Stoam. Its bad mojo and they'll probably cease to Exist, now that their wallet is 12m lighter."

Another describing what "Juror Jonathan" did today, read: "I just gave away TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS of somebody else's money."

The motion filed by the lawyer for Russell Wright and his company, Stoam Holdings, alleges the juror researched the case and communicated with others outside the jury. Wright did not appear in court when the case was heard in Washington County in late February.

The jury awarded the money to Mark Deihl and William Nystrom, who invested in Wright's company. The company claimed its building material, Stoam, combines the insulation qualities of foam with the strength of steel.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090313/ap_on_re_us/juror_tweets

---

this stuff is starting to get out of hand

[LisaM]

1. The juror should face a little jail time

IMHO.

[Tempest]

2. Any sensible judge will throw out the conviction and award

This idiot will be responsible for jurors having to turn over their electronic devices before entering a court room.

[LisaM]

3. Well shouldn't they be doing that anyway?

I'd like to think that most jurors aren't sitting there waiting for their phones to ring.

[Robb]

4. Interesting.

I highly doubt "Tweeting" from his phone qualifies as "researching the case," given the one-way nature of the thing.

"Communicating with others outside the jury" is another matter.

[enlightenment]

5. Has anyone started studying the growing social

problems associated with these technologies? I'm convinced that it is addictive behaviour for many, because they can't seem to stop themselves. I've had students (college) who literally panic when told they cannot have their cell phone on in class - not because they are parents who need to be in constant communication with their children (a subset issue of the problem, imo) or working in jobs that require them to be in contact . . . I will make provisions for people who can prove they need to have the phone on during class.

These students are generally younger (late teens, early 20s) who have had a mobile for most of their life. The thought that they have to go an hour without checking their texts is too much for them. I wonder sometimes if they sleep through the night, or wake on the hour to check their phones.

Twitter is just multiplying the problem exponentially.

How long before we need '12-step' programs for some of these people?

[Javaman]

10. steps 1 & 2...

1)cut off right thumb
2)cut off left thumb

[Tyler Generation]

6. I fucking hate the ever loving fuck out of Twitter

People need to grow up. I'm in my 20's and barely know anyone in my age group that uses it. It seems like it's most popular with those over 35 trying to be hip and relevant, lol.

Seriously, people need to stop with this stuff in Congress and juries. Unacceptable.

[KamaAina]

7. Supposedly two out of three people who tweet are repukes

:eyes:

[lynnertic]

27. interesting. Where did you read that? n/t

[wackywaggin]

8. Agree completely!!

This fellow should be made an example of,as he agreed to the rules of the court and was sworn to uphold them. He should now face prosecution and be made an example of!!

[Renew Deal]

13. That's because you're not cool. n3wb

:D

j/k. I don't care for twitter either. I'm surprised it's actually taken off.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

24. Bullshit. Plenty o' 20-somethings use Twitter.

Are they pissed off with Facebook and migrating to Twitter? Perhaps they've outgrown pet seahorses and cupcake-throwing contests. Narcissism and constant need for validation know many age groups, evidently.

[Veruca Salt]

28. +1

And if I may, I also hate how they're called 'tweets' WTF is up with that??

I always think 'twitterpated' whenever I hear of that silly system. With apologies to all who like said silly system.

[madmom]

9. When you are sworn in to set on a jury, you are told to NOT have any

communication with ANYONE regarding any facts of the case. The idiot deserves to be punished.

[Renew Deal]

12. But re-read the comments he posted

They sound like they came after the verdict was announced.

[madmom]

15. If the jury has not been excused he is still technically still a juror, same rules. What

was so important that he couldn't wait till he got outside the courtroom? The rules are made very clear and he messed up.

[Renew Deal]

16. Maybe, maybe not

They allege that he made the comments during the case, but the comments sound like they were made after the case. I'm not assuming the defendant is telling the truth. It's just legal BS. And if it didn't affect the case, they won't throw out the verdict.

[Renew Deal]

11. Those comments sound like they came after the verdict was announced

Which means there's nothing there. Now, if there's messages saying "sitting in jury doody, Stoam is going down", then there's something to talk about.

[Egnever]

21. Agreed

These apear to have come after the decision was already made . I dont see a thing wrong with that unless the verdict was sealed.

[bemildred]

14. I wanna see proof.

That said juror actually exists and that he/she actually did what they say. If sounds fishy to me.

[gratuitous]

17. Proof?

You aren't seriously saying that a large corporation that just got clobbered with a substantial verdict would try to game the system post-trial? That they wouldn't just submit to the authority of the court system and the considered verdict of 12 good citizens and true?

Golly, it just sounds so cynical. And true to life.

[crimsonblue]

18. This verdict will and should be overturned.

The defendents should be granted a new trial, or the case dismissed. There is no validity in the judicial system when impartiality and fairness of the jury is called into question. There should be a national ban on communication devices inside a court room, excluding those devices that allow for a fair representation of the proceedings to be presented to the general public (i.e. cameras, microphones, etc). Obviously, this would not apply to the prosecution and defense, as it relates to materials necessary for the conduct of a court case.

[Egnever]

22. Why?

looks to me like these messages are after the decision was made.

[crimsonblue]

23. The messages bring into question the impartiality of the juror...

there is no such thing as a fair trial if the jury can be called into question. Give the company a new trial.

[Laelth]

26. The juror only has to be impartial before the trial.

In fact, by the end of trial, the juror should be partial. His mind should be made up one way or the other. Looks like this juror made up his mind. He, therefore, did his duty properly.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Laelth]

25. I don't see how those messages interfere with impartiality and fairness in any way.

I think the verdict will be upheld.

:dem:

-Laelth

[jmowreader]

19. The really SICK part of the whole thing...

is, unlike Bernie Madoff's scam, Stoam is a wonderful product. I've seen it.

What he makes is a building system consisting of styrofoam panels with steel studs embedded in it. They manufacture a house at their factory and bring it out on a truck as panels. Six workers can have a Stoam house roughed-in in less than a day and a crew of twelve can have the whole house habitable in less than a week.

If it wasn't for the fact Russell Wright seems to have pocketed most of the money...

[Egnever]

20. So?

From the tweets quoted it appears to have happened after the decision was made. Whats wrong with that?