From: eck@panix.com (Mark Eckenwiler)
Subject: Re: The state of justice
Organization: NWO Steering Committee
Lines: 52

In <1993Apr15.143320.8618@desire.wright.edu>, demon@desire.wright.edu sez:
>	A judge denied GM's new trial motion, even though GM says it has two
>new witnesses that said the occupant of the truck was dead from the
>impact, not from the fire.
>
>	Thoughts?
>
>	It's kind of scary when you realize that judges are going to start
>denying new trials even when new evidence that contradicts the facts that led
>to the previous ruling appear.

There's this minor thing called "interest of finality/repose".  What
it means is that parties aren't dragged into court over and over again
because the losing side "discovers" some "new" evidence.  I don't know
about you, Brett, but I suspect GM had the resources to find just
about as many expert and fact witnesses as it wanted before the trial
started.  Letting them re-open the case now is practically an
invitation to every civil litigant on earth to keep an ace in the hole
in case the verdict goes against him.

BTW, in federal criminal cases, Rule 33 does permit a motion for a new
trial "based on . . . *newly discovered* evidence" if made within 2
years of the verdict.  (Emphasis mine.)  If you're trying to make a
backhanded point about criminal justice in a discussion that has
little to do with criminal trials -- as the estimable David Brock did
in his amusing WSJ piece last week -- save your breath.



>	Or has the judge decided that the new witnesses are not to be 
>believed? 
>Shouldn't that be up to a jury?

Yup.  Which is why they shoulda been brought around the first time
through. 


>	And what about members of the previous jury parading through the talk
>shows proclaiming their obvious bias against GM?  Shouldn't that be enough for
>a judge to through out the old verdict and call for a new trial?
>	Whatever happened to jurors having to be objective?

Unless there's some reason to believe that this supposed bias predated
the trial (as opposed to being a product of it), and that GM was
unfairly prevented from discovering it (by venireman concealment or
otherwise), why should GM be allowed to complain?

-- 
MORAL: Always Choose the Right Sort of Parents 
       Before You Start in to be Rough
                                        - George Ade
	Mark Eckenwiler    eck@panix.com    ...!cmcl2!panix!eck
