PointofLaw.com has Vioxx mistrial coverage. “The jury was almost unanimous — all save one were prepared to find for the defendant Merck, on the grounds that Vioxx was not the cause of the defendant’s attack.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the one holdout juror didn’t seem to care about the law at all:

According to one juror, the holdout wasn’t swayed by the majority’s argument.

“Basically the sticking point was the marketing” of Vioxx, this juror said. “There was just folding of the arms and rolling of the eyes and not listening,” and saying that “the marketing was inappropriate and that kind of thing,” the juror added.

In other words, to this juror, forget causation, poor marketing makes one liable for things one didn’t cause.”

Related posts:

1. A juror faints, the defendants rush to help: A mistrial in the Charlie Weis case
2. One Angry Man: How an individual educates his co-jurors in a medical malpractice case
3. Robots in cardiology
4. Denying care
5. Patients are watching
6. Surveys
7. How to get out of jury duty: "Just tell ‘em you’re a doctor"

  Follow on Twitter   Subscribe