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?

10 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