1 / 15

WHY ARE WE HERE?

WHY ARE WE HERE?. Joel Smith v. Emerald Drilling Company. WHY ARE WE HERE?. Big and important case Simple case Serious injury on an offshore rig. Joel Smith v. Emerald. PURPOSE OF VOIR DIRE Identify the issues and law governing this case

mswinney
Download Presentation

WHY ARE WE HERE?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WHY ARE WE HERE? Joel Smithv.Emerald Drilling Company

  2. WHY ARE WE HERE? Big and important case Simple case Serious injury on an offshore rig

  3. Joel Smith v. Emerald PURPOSE OF VOIR DIRE • Identify the issues and law governing this case • Have the jurors disclose their views, opinions, and attitudes regarding the issues and the law • Identify jurors with strongly held views and opinions • There are NO RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWERS

  4. Joel Smith v. Emerald Bad Experience with Justice Because of a bad experience with the civil justice system or otherwise, will you more than likely end up viewing the evidence through trial and during deliberations from the defendant’s point of view?

  5. Joel Smith v. Emerald Offshore Oil Rig in Foreign Water How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statement: A rig operated off the coast of a foreign country should be as safe as possible. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

  6. Joel Smith v. Emerald Offshore Oil Rig How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statement: An offshore rig should be operated as safely as possible. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

  7. Joel Smith v. Emerald Language Barrier How strongly do you agree with this statement: If rig workers do not speak the same language, it is more likely to result in someone getting seriously hurt or injured. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

  8. Joel Smith v. Emerald Boss Responsibility How strongly do you agree with this statement: If a rig boss participates in the meeting where decisions were made that result in an injury, the boss is responsible. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

  9. Joel Smith v. Emerald Boss Responsibility How strongly do you agree with this statement: “The buck stops here” for the boss. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

  10. Joel Smith v. Emerald Doing Job as He Was Trained How strongly do you agree with this statement: If a person is doing his job as he was trained and gets hurt, it is not his fault. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

  11. Joel Smith v. Emerald Damages for Mental Anguish and Pain & Suffering Even if the judge instructs you that the law allows you to award money for mental anguish and pain and suffering, and the evidence support it, you could not award money for those damages.

  12. Joel Smith v. Emerald Higher Standard for Certain Damages Even if the Court instructs you that the burden of proof is preponderance of evidence in civil cases, you personally would require a higher burden of proof before awarding money for mental anguish or pain and suffering.

  13. Joel Smith v. Emerald DAMAGES If the facts justify a large damages award, how uncomfortable or comfortable would you feel awarding millions of dollars in damages? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Very Uncomfortable Very Comfortable

  14. Joel Smith v. Emerald Higher Standard for Large Award Even if the Court instructs you that the burden of proof is preponderance of evidence in civil cases, you personally would require a higher burden of proof before awarding millions of dollars in damages, even if the evidence supports the award.

  15. Joel Smith v. Emerald CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY How strongly do you agree with this statement: It is very important that a company be held accountable for their conduct. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

More Related