Sequestration and other thoughts

By webster

March 12, 2010

Sequestration: Incredible excitement this day. SCO is so worried about the jury consulting Groklaw. They should offer to pay for sequestration. They can put them in a different hotel than their lawyers... and a different one than their witnesses. Novell's too. They should also screen the hotel for any Groklaw reporters. They should get an old hotel without internet. They should monitor the jury's calls and computer use. They could let them watch TV and movies. They could discourage ingesting recreational substances. They could also put GPS boxes on their legs. What about room visits? [As far as one side or another is concerned there is a lot of juror misbehavior that becomes known about, to say nothing more of surreptitious netsurfing.] Novell would object to sequestrastion. The Judge would take the blame to avoid prejudice to SCO. ;-)

Caution: No matter what you think is going on in this trial, it is impossible to know what is going on from the jury's perspective. They were chosen because they knew nothing about this situation. They are only exposed to what they hear in court, the witnesses and lawyers. They get exhibits too. Sympathy is the most important ingredient. It is what resolves doubts. Groklaw readers have been following for too long to even begin to limit their perspective to that of a juror.

Blake and Mo: Just think that the Novell lawyers have known about this email, and many other documents for years. It has only become known to us today. They sit hunched over at counsel table trying to mask their anticipation as a SCO witness opens the door to the devastating introduction of such documents. Novell's pounding away with even losing motions over time will bring the Judge up to snuff since he is years behind the lawyers and PJ. SCO may well regret using O'Gara now. It is known, it is misleading, biased and malicious. They also exposed their experts to her. It will taint them. If SCO won't use her now, Novell will.

Another fly on the wall: The rosy fingers of dawn are starting to wake Trustee Judge Cahn in the middle of the night. Apparently Singer left out a few things when he briefed Ms. Fatell. But how would she know what questions to ask? Who would have thought a reporter and blog were relevant to litigation? Who would have thought Judge Stewart would reverse himself? Cahn now even tried to call Singer himself, but Singer is "in trial." Stowell says he was just doing his job. He sent releases and gave background to many. Did any lawyers give Stowell ideas? Who suggested sources to the experts? Did Stowell stoke any of these other sources used by SCO experts? Did Darl or anyone else?Can Cahn get a copy of all the sealed depositions? Cahn wants to know now what difficulties lie ahead, but the lawyers are in trial and the SCOfolk see outrage, not problems. Why didn't BSF see that claiming slander damage since the lawsuit started would open the door to the rulings of our open court system? What? Is he questioning their professionalism? What about Stewart suggesting aborting the trial due to the cert? Isn't abortion illegal in Utah? Would Stewart do such a thing? It's late. What a day! Has anyone else given up reading mysteries?


11:29 PM EST

Copyright 2010