This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Perspective

Jan. 20, 2016

Letter to the editor: Not guilty but return the cows

The Jan. 14 column, "Why do we have rules of evidence," reminded me of an old anecdote I had read a while back. By Hirbod Rashidi

The Jan. 14 column, "Why do we have rules of evidence," reminded me of an old anecdote I had read a while back. Unlike today where we don't want the juries to know anything about the case, original jurors were preferred to know something about the case. They were actually charged with conducting their own investigations.

The case in question involved some stolen cows. After the trial the jurors returned a verdict of "not guilty but he must retu...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up