Craig, you seem to be know a lot about this subject, but I must tell you that what you said about a jury's opinion overriding the law is simply not accurate:

"I know some of the members have told you, there is nothing you can do... But what you need to realize is, it doesn't matter what the "LAW" states, but what a "JURY" thinks... Innocent people go to jail, guilty people are set free, lawsuits are won & lost, not based on the "LAW", but,what a "JURY" thinks!"

Apparently, you're not aware of "judgement notwithstanding the verdict", or "Judgement N.O.V." as it is called in legal mumbo-jumbo. In the American legal system, there are several diffent types of verdicts; however, a "verdict" is basically a decision (or opinion, if you will) by a jury regarding the factual aspects of a civil or criminaltrial. Once a verdict has been issued, thetrial judgerenders a "judgement",which is the legal and final finding of the court.In determining judgement, the judge must apply the law to the facts of the case (as determined by the jury), while also considering legal precedence. If the law does not support the verdict, the judge will render a"Judgement N.O.V." - essentially a judgement in spite of the verdict.

Our laws (and legal system) have becomequite complicatedin this country (attorneys would have it no other way), and sometimes judges make legal errors in rendering a judgement. This, of course, is where the courts of appeal come into play. Keep in mind that judges, for the most part,donot enjoy havingtheir rulings and judgements overturned by an appellate court.

 

"MAN... The importance of carrying a recorder, or even using your cell phone's recorder. Especially when you are called into an Office for ANY Talk or Meeting. You are legally allowed to tape record the conversation for record keeping purposes - EVEN if THEY say you CANNOT! WRONG! YOU CAN!"

In Illinois this is felony eavesdropping, you cannot record without both of the parties consent, unless its not a conversation that is considered private.

At a second look, maybe you should stopping recording sounds its a felony in Michigan also, there is no exception for notetaking.

"750.539c Eavesdropping upon private conversation.

Sec. 539c.
Any person who is present or who is not present during a private conversation and who wilfully uses any device to eavesdrop upon the conversation without the consent of all parties thereto, or who knowingly aids, employs or procures another person to do the same in violation of this section, is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in a state prison for not more than 2 years or by a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both."

 

i agree with gale155
it a judge's verdict doesnt agree with the case law, it will be likely overturned in appeals.
also what gale155 is getting at in layterms is that a judge does not have to follow a jurys instruction. Jury's are kind of a suggestion. Happens alot in civil cases with huge settlements. Its seems to me that it is rare to rule opposite of a jury though, i think they'd rather keeep the appeals courts busy.

 

Ah... Well, that law is definitely not enforced!!! in any state!!!

For I have recorded conversations for years (in just about every state in the United States, and dealership and other sales/customer service oriented businesses recordall phone calls -- both incoming and outgoing. I can also promise you MOST corporations, Police Departments, and Government Offices not only record your conversations, they read both your incoming and outgoing emails as well. Or... conversations taking place ata businessare not classified as "Private", thus making it legal to record as notation! Also making any meeting, for whatever the reason, subject to recording for notation purposes. Businesses cannot have it both ways! So most businesses are either breaking the law, the law does not apply to business, or that law is NEVER ENFORCED!

GALE (Officer of the Law) I repectfully disagree (so don't hunt me down and give me a ticket. While a judge can throw out a jury's decision, it is very rare indeed, that an "Elected" judge would! Thus the reason why judges in the court of appeal are placed by appointment. However, decisions are rarely overturned, as you well know. What would you say is the percentage of cases a court of appeals overturns, may be, may be5%.

 

Please note that I amended a portion of my previous post, as follows:

"Keep in mind that judges, for the most part,donot enjoy havingtheir rulings and judgements overturned by an appellate court." Initially, I left out the word "not", which I'm sure caused some confusion.

Let me make one thing perfectly clear - I am no longer a police officer. I retired in July, 2005, after a total of 30-years in the biz. In my "retirement", I currently work in casino security.

As you suggest, judgements notwithstanding the verdict are rare, as are appeals. Nevertheless, I've seenthem many times over the years, in both criminal and civil trials. As for the actual percentages, I must admit that I haven't a clue. I'll do some research on that, and get back with you.

 

Well, I can't find any credible statistics onthe frequency of "judgements notwithstanding the verdict". Something in my last post was misleading, and I want to correct it. I said:

"As you suggest, judgements notwithstanding the verdict are rare, as are appeals. Nevertheless, I've seenthem many times over the years, in both criminal and civil trials. As for the actual percentages, I must admit that I haven't a clue. I'll do some research on that, and get back with you."

One could imply from thisthat I witnessed many judgements notwithstanding the verdict, which is not the case.What I meant to say was that I've seen many appealsover the years. How often arejudgements overturned on appeal? Well, that depends on the specific court and the type of case, but the average would be much higher than5%.

Also,when a jury returns a verdict of "not guilty" in a criminal trial (as opposed to a civil trial), the judge cannot override the verdict with a judgement notwithstanding the verdict - I don't want there to be any confusion about that.

 

I wouldn't be concerned about it in the grand scheme. Just find another job quick. Charter just gave me the axe for improving efficiency if you can beleive that. I freaked out the first few days, but I'm sleeping better than I did when I was with them.