• Home
  • Apple
  • News
  • Apple vs. Samsung Judge to Jury: “Stay Conscious”, Won’t Tell Jury About “Evidence Destruction”

Apple vs. Samsung Judge to Jury: “Stay Conscious”, Won’t Tell Jury About “Evidence Destruction”

Apple vs. Samsung Judge to Jury: “Stay Conscious”, Won’t Tell Jury About “Evidence Destruction”

The morning’s trial session between Apple and Samsung will begin with the lengthy reading of 84 “jury instructions”. The instructions tell the jurors how they must apply the law while they deliberate. Judge Lucy Koh did have one request before beginning the instructions…

The Wall Street Journal:

“I need everyone to stay conscious during the reading of the instructions, including myself,” Koh warned Tuesday morning. To help, she said she would ask everyone to stand from time to time to keep the blood flowing. Closing arguments will follow.

There is one notable instruction that won’t be on the list: Telling the jurors that both Samsung and Apple allowed emails to be deleted, thus destroying potential evidence. The issue of whether or not to inform the jury that the two parties did not honor their obligations to preserve evidence has been a hot button issue for the past 48 hours.

The issue became a hot spot when an earlier judge ruled that Samsung had not met its obligation, and the jury would be told so. Judge Koh then decided that both parties had not acted to preserve evidence and the jury would be told that. This morning, however, Judge Koh has changed her mind.

Yesterday, she had asked both parties whether they would prefer to both be “dinged”, or neither be “dinged”. Both parties replied, “neither.” She then issued an order this morning that she would drop any mention of this to the jury. This is seen as a win for Samsung, which had expected her to tell the jury that it hadn’t honored its obligations.

Judge Koh also shot down a request from Apple that Samsung’s lawyers be reminded how to argue closing arguments. Apple requested that the court “instruct Samsung in advance of closing arguments that it may not argue based on excluded evidence.” Judge Koh denied the request, saying “the Court presumes that as officers of the court, the attorneys will comply with all pretrial and trial rulings in this case.”

  1. 521062 988258replica watches are remarkable reproduction of original authentic swiss luxury time pieces. 749513

  2. 279573 468284 An fascinating discussion is worth comment. I feel which you need to write much more on this topic, it might not be a taboo topic but normally people are not enough to speak on such topics. To the next. Cheers 999525

  3. 544618 307151I just now discovered your weblog post and now Im remember to start with followers. 125493

  4. nova88 says:

    775521 870074Just a smiling visitor here to share the adore (:, btw wonderful pattern . 870078

  5. 241627 788170I like this website so significantly, saved to favorites . 184277

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.