Jump to content

Jiggy-Z

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2906
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jiggy-Z

  1. My contributions to this board have been of a comic and light hearted nature with seldom a substantive or or deep diving donation to the collective. I am, in fact a serious person. So much so that In everyday life I need to almost disguise my seriousness in a vail of comic relief and buffoonery so as to not be too intense. I am not an intellectual, although I wish I could be and have often been labeled as such by those who dont understand the meaning of the term. I speak 2 languages, play 2 very different musical instruments, have my own business and a masters degree from UT as well as a CPA license. I pay my taxes and support my community in a very modest way. I was raised Catholic and followed the teachings of the church up until the second pedophile scandali. I supported Reagan and Bush until the later lied about the WMD. I have been a registered Democrat since 2018. This thread is insane. The incumbent POTUS is in a dog fight with a convicted felon, rapists, filanderer, traitor, tax cheat, bankrupt fascist and it is down to the wire and it's just another day. Get busy assholes. This shit is serious.
  2. No way. There was enough dirt on him even before the 2016 election. The bankruptcies, filandering, lost on 2 civil tax cases, the stiffed vendors, associations with known drug traffickers. Trump should have have gone before the first primary if not sooner. The press got so caught up in all the chaos, that they forgot to actually do their job. That and Barack Obama was black and Hillary was a woman.
  3. Juries are weird. My CSB jury experience to help fill this dead time. I am not a lawyer. I am a licensed CPA, but I do not practice since I run a small construction company. Civil case Travis County court. Background: Late Middle aged black guy dies on the operating table durring biopsy because surgeon knicked a vital artery in a delicate proceedure. The deceased was terminal with heart disease and some other ailments and had just a few months to live. Family sues Dr. for negligence asserting either he fucked up or should never had performed the proceedure on such a compromised individual. Seeking only moderate damages in the 100-200k range ( or less) as compensation for stealing away their last days with him and his oppprtunity to get his affairs in order etc. Lawyers got the jury up to speed on the ins and outs of the actual procedure and the plaintiff called members of the family who cried on the stand as some kind of emotional appeal. Plantif calls their expert witness, a Dr. In the same line of work who calls out defendants negligence and demonstrates with various exhibits. The guy was credible enough and believable. So I'm thinking the defense is going to call their own expert witness to cover up the the plaintiff's guy...and they do. The only thing is that its the the Dr. being sued...and wouldn't you know it, he advocated for himself. So we get back to the jury room for deliberations and I'm thinking this is pretty cut and dry and we need to start thinking about the damages. So we take a vote, and Im the only jurror who wants to find the Dr. liable. WTF people? This Dr. couldn't find one other Dr to back him up and we are just going let him cover up an expert witness? I held up that jury for 3 days before I finally gave up. I have no idea whether the Dr. was negligent or not, but the case that was presented in his defense was ridiculously weak since their only expert witness had the mother of all conflicts of interest. Looking back on it, I think some of it was pride and stupidity on the jury. I also think there were a few racists on the jury. Still, I couldn't beleive that there was not one other person on that jury who would find for the plantif. There were other things that also caugjt my attention. The Dr.'s/insurance company lawyers were much better than the plaintiff's. Their suits were better, their assistants were better, their evidence was slicker and more polished, and their rapport with the jury was better. Their client was composed and well dressed while the plantiff side looked poor, desperate, bewildered, and affraid....and black. The whole thing seemed unfair, except for, you know, the actual evidence. I was not too happy with myself for giving in, but there was no talking sense to those guys and I was a single dad at the time who had more obligations besides work. I left that courtroom pretty down on the American legal system. I dont know how you lawyers do it. Never trust a jury.
×
×
  • Create New...