Regarding the ruling review process, I have the following questions:
When you say "reviewed cases have only 3 possible outcomes for the ruling: the dispute was flagged incorrectly and the original ruling is served" What original ruling are we talking about? As I understand it, the juror flags the case before jury ruling otherwise if the court has provided a ruling the appeal period is the one that applies, right?
Also, reviewed cases have only 3 possible outcomes for the ruling:
(i) dispute was flagged incorrectly and the original ruling is served,
(ii) dispute was flagged correctly and the case is dismissed because both parties attempted to bribe the jury, or
(iii) dispute was flagged correctly and ruled in favor of the party that did not attempt to bribe the court.
I imagine the above 3 outcomes are connected with the responsibilities of the code of conduct which are also 3:
(i) In the event that either party of the dispute attempts to bribe the court, the juror agrees to flag the case for review,
(ii) In the event that both parties attempt to bribe the court, the juror agrees to vote for dismissal of the case,
(iii) In the event that a single party attempts to bribe the court, the juror agrees to rule in favor of the party which did not attempt to bribe the court
I can't totally understand how these different sets of 3 outcomes play out together. For example, in the event of responsibility (ii) the juror instead of flagging the case for review can directly vote (I assume you are using vote and rule indistinctly here) in favour of the the party that did not attempt to bribe the court. Thus, how the outcome (ii) of the reviewed cases can be possible. As I understand it, if the juror agrees to vote for dismissal of the case in the event that both parties attempt to bribe the court, there is no ruling review.
I imagine there is something about the process for flagging a case for review, between the different jurors of a jury, that I'm not understanding or there is something that I'm missing.
Regarding the ruling review process, I have the following questions:
When you say "reviewed cases have only 3 possible outcomes for the ruling: the dispute was flagged incorrectly and the original ruling is served" What original ruling are we talking about? As I understand it, the juror flags the case before jury ruling otherwise if the court has provided a ruling the appeal period is the one that applies, right?
Also, reviewed cases have only 3 possible outcomes for the ruling: (i) dispute was flagged incorrectly and the original ruling is served, (ii) dispute was flagged correctly and the case is dismissed because both parties attempted to bribe the jury, or (iii) dispute was flagged correctly and ruled in favor of the party that did not attempt to bribe the court.
I imagine the above 3 outcomes are connected with the responsibilities of the code of conduct which are also 3:
(i) In the event that either party of the dispute attempts to bribe the court, the juror agrees to flag the case for review, (ii) In the event that both parties attempt to bribe the court, the juror agrees to vote for dismissal of the case, (iii) In the event that a single party attempts to bribe the court, the juror agrees to rule in favor of the party which did not attempt to bribe the court
I can't totally understand how these different sets of 3 outcomes play out together. For example, in the event of responsibility (ii) the juror instead of flagging the case for review can directly vote (I assume you are using vote and rule indistinctly here) in favour of the the party that did not attempt to bribe the court. Thus, how the outcome (ii) of the reviewed cases can be possible. As I understand it, if the juror agrees to vote for dismissal of the case in the event that both parties attempt to bribe the court, there is no ruling review.
I imagine there is something about the process for flagging a case for review, between the different jurors of a jury, that I'm not understanding or there is something that I'm missing.
(From @mariapao)