|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Jim Henderson wrote:
> From my understanding, it works pretty much the same;
So the facts the trial judge decides are worth aren't overturnable? I guess
I can see how that works, OK.
>> Rare that it goes all the way back to reversing the decision.
>
> Yeah, in the case of Stella (to whom you refer here), the verdict wasn't
> overturned, but the punitive damages awarded by the jury were, as I
> understand it. That's not a question of changing the verdict, though,
> just the damages - and I was thinking criminal courts, in civil courts
> the procedures are a bit different because the threshold isn't "beyond a
> reasonable doubt", which is why you get things like OJ being acquitted of
> murdering his wife, but being convicted in the wrongful death suit that
> followed.
Right.
> I don't think it does, actually - I'll have to ask my wife what she was
> told.
Hmmm. OK. Could be. :-) I would think how soon you can be called back to a
state trial after doing a federal trial would be up to the states, but maybe
not.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no
CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |