← Back to context

Comment by crossroadsguy

21 days ago

I'll piggyback and I'll ask a hypothetical question: imagine a scenario where there's a jury out there and the lawyers proved something almost perfectly, as perfect as something proven by lawyers can get. Now jury goes to deliberate/discuss and for some reason unanimously decides to rule in a way that goes totally against that proof provided - for any reason (maybe just for the kicks, ignore that; because I guess it is ignored). What happens then? Can a judge say to that "bugger off, this is bs" or something like that instead offer their own judgement or have another jury or so? Or is it - tough luck, jury is jury, deal with it. And they can appeal if there's scope of appeal (don't know how that is decided whether one can appeal or not to begin with).

2 comments

crossroadsguy

Reply
awesome_dude  21 days ago

I think that there have been such instances - (I can only speculate, but I think that) the judge can rule a mistrial, or it can be heard on appeal.

Ah google to the rescue:

> In the U.S., a jury’s factual findings can only be challenged post-trial if an appellate court or trial judge determines that no reasonable jury could have reached that verdict based on the evidence.

And

Civil Cases - (Judgment as a Matter of Law / JNOV): Governed by Rule 50 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a judge can overturn a jury’s factual finding if the evidence is legally insufficient to support it.

Criminal Cases - (Insufficiency of the Evidence): Under the Fifth Amendment's Double Jeopardy clause, an acquittal cannot be appealed or overturned. However, after a guilty verdict, a defendant can file a motion challenging the evidence, asserting that the facts do not support the conviction