Foolmewunz
22nd July 2007, 09:47 PM
Evidently Dubya is so unpopular that the mere mention of his name may be sufficient to sway a jury to vote a certain way...
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1184869654447
Laffey and DiDomenicis argued that "the identity of George W. Bush has no relevance to plaintiff's claim and should not be admitted."
Any "probative value" of Bush's identity, they argued, "is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to defendant."
Bush's identity, they argued, "in and of itself, presents the danger that the jury will favor plaintiff."
A township is defending itself from a civil rights lawsuit brough by a doctor who claims he was "apprehended" for displaying an anti-Bush sign at a rally. The lawyers for the township feel that the mere mention of Bush's name would be prejudicial to the results.
(Typing in a hurry - rushing out to an appointment - sorry for the weird construction and/or syntax.)
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1184869654447
Laffey and DiDomenicis argued that "the identity of George W. Bush has no relevance to plaintiff's claim and should not be admitted."
Any "probative value" of Bush's identity, they argued, "is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to defendant."
Bush's identity, they argued, "in and of itself, presents the danger that the jury will favor plaintiff."
A township is defending itself from a civil rights lawsuit brough by a doctor who claims he was "apprehended" for displaying an anti-Bush sign at a rally. The lawyers for the township feel that the mere mention of Bush's name would be prejudicial to the results.
(Typing in a hurry - rushing out to an appointment - sorry for the weird construction and/or syntax.)