Juror bias could give Bayer hope in appeal


When a person is picked to be a part of a jury, then that person has to be totally unbiased throughout the entire proceedings.  In an appeal of an $80 million verdict given to a man in California who obtained non-Hodgkins lymphoma from using the weed killer RoundUp, attorneys for Bayer AG, the owner of the Monsanto, the manufacturer, has pulled out a last-ditch effort to not pay the specified amount.

As evidence, a juror that was on the panel for the previous verdict wrote a letter to the judge that is presiding over this appeal stating that the judge should uphold the total amount of $80 million.  This stupidity could possibly give Bayer some hope that they do not have to pay in this case or on future cases.

What do you think?

9 points

Written by ahol888

Coolest dwarf in the world. Expert on the topic of mediocrity.


Leave a Reply
    • They might not have to pay that much because of this dumb juror. This incident highlights a problem throughout the world. People are looking to acquire their 15 minutes of fame without thinking about the consequences afterwards.

Leave a Reply