General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMartin Shkreli jury selection transcript is hilarious!
benjamin brafman: Im sorry.
juror no. 1: I think hes a greedy little man.
the court: Jurors are obligated to decide the case based only on the evidence. Do you agree?
juror no. 1: I dont know if I could. I wouldnt want me on this jury.
the court: Juror Number 1 is excused. Juror Number 18.
juror no. 18: Both of my parents are on prescriptions that have gone up over the past few months, so much that they cant afford their drugs. I have several friends who have H.I.V. or AIDS who, again, cant afford the prescription drugs that they were able to afford.
the court: These charges dont concern drug pricing. Could you decide this case based only on the evidence
juror no. 18: No. No.
the court: presented at this trial and put aside anything you might have heard in the media?
juror no. 18: No. No.
the court: Sir, we are going to excuse you from this panel. Juror Number 25, come forward, please.
juror no. 25: This is the price-gouging, right, of drugs?
the court: This case has nothing to do with drugs.
juror no. 25: My kids use those drugs.
the court: As I said, the case does not concern anything that you might have read or heard about the pricing of certain pharmaceuticals.
juror no. 25: It affects my opinion of him.
the court: I am going to excuse you. Juror Number 40. Come on up, sir.
Much more at link: https://harpers.org/archive/2017/09/public-enemy/
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Dave Starsky
(5,914 posts)Yes, people from all walks of life certainly all agree that Martin Shkreli is an enormous asshole.
Not Ruth
(3,613 posts)They ask questions, but it is a group (all the lawyers) decision as to how to proceed. Everyone goes on a break, the lawyers work it out, then some jurors are sent to another room. It is not done in as public a manner as in the article.
Beaverhausen
(24,470 posts)maybe different in different courts?
Not Ruth
(3,613 posts)The court is multiple lawyers, with multiple viewpoints. An immediate dismissal suppresses the voice of any lawyer other than the one speaking.
progressoid
(49,978 posts)Granted, it wasn't this high profile (selling drugs and a slip and fall lawsuit). But it was all out in the open. Perhaps its different from state to state.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)cwydro
(51,308 posts)Lebam in LA
(1,344 posts)Potential jurors were dismissed or selected as they were individually questioned.
marlakay
(11,451 posts)They asked questions in open court for all to hear. But a few people were asked about their past and the lawyers left the room with judge to hear personal answer not about person charged.
Almost everyone answered in public but a few did go to next room. Since it had to do with public drunkenness I wondered if people had DUI or something and didn't want to say out loud.
catbyte
(34,373 posts)the court: The question is, have you heard anything that would affect your ability to decide this case with an open mind. Can you do that?
juror no. 144: I dont think I can because he kind of looks like a dick.
-------------
But the Wu Tang Clan album was pretty funny too.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)I'm in a restaurant laughing out loud.
Definitely worth clicking the link!
Thanks for posting this; I so need laughs these days.
underpants
(182,769 posts)Generic Other
(28,979 posts)I thought this was satire, but apparently not!
herding cats
(19,564 posts)There's so many good ones in there it's hard to pick a favorite.
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)That was a hanging crowd if ever I heard of one! Maybe teach some other fancy pants Wall street pirates a lesson.
Solly Mack
(90,762 posts)Miles Archer
(18,837 posts)FUNNY stuff. Thank you for posting.