Cigarette Mistrial Boiled Down to Smokers v. Nonsmokers on Jury

• Health issue? Since when is Larsens cognitive failure to read one item on  a product while disregarding the other, a health issue? While 8 of the jurors fell for the plaintiffs 'song & dance' routine along with their prejudices against a popularly vilified entity with deep pockets, 4 stood firm against this stupid old hag and the insatiable avarice of her mouthpieces. Public disgust with well heeled companies, sleazy legal tricks, and pathetic plaintiffs are losing favor with juries as SSM recently found out. Everybody hates the phone company and AT&T got ripped off to the tune of $80 million with the plaintiffs clients getting $80 IN COUPONS while the shysters laughed all the way to the bank. Although it could be argued this court ordered monetary retribution provides consequences for corporate irresponsibility, right? I suppose CRAMMING is OK with you, right?   

• You're fixated on the health issue, which was not the issue here at all. The customers' conduct is not the issue. The jury voted 2 to 1 for the proposition that Philip Morris misrepresented the product and deceived customers. The jury fell one vote short of awarding damages to the customers. That proves that eight jurors weren't fooled by Philip Morris' attempt to defelct the issue from the real point of misrepresentation.

• Like disregarding the SG warning, eh? This case got shot down because at least four of the jury wasn't fooled that anybody like Larsen can be so oblivious and then expect to be rewarded for their own stupidity! Nor was this twit: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/01/12/nj-man-loses-appeal-on-dennys-sodium-case/ Face it, Swedlow and ilk of his kind.......Atticus Finch, he ain't!

• This case was not about the health risks of smoking. It was only about deceptive advertising. If a company misleads customers into buying a product by misrepresenting it as something it is not, that is rightly the subject of a lawsuit. The courts created class-action suits to allow consumers with small individual claims to take on huge companies with many millions to spend to defend their misconduct. In this case, the lawyers said Philip Morris unfairly made about $700 million by misrepresenting Marlboro Lights. Without cases like this, comapnies could mislead customers into buying products that don't perform as promised with no fear of being held accountable. That's the issue -- not the health risks of smoking.

• Americans are not anti-Science, we are anti-Nanny State. I don't care if smoking, trans fats and salt are bad, it's MY BODY, MY CHOICE. As a recently naturalized American, I suggest you start listening to Rush Limbaugh, visit Reason.com, Townhall.com, and learn what America is really about. http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/

• As a recently naturalized citizen it still astonishes me to see just how anti-science Americans and their institutions are.  It has been established scientific fact for decades now that smoking in any form is harmful and negatively impacts health.  You would think that such a suit in the courts would've been thrown out with such overwhelming evidence and prior precendent but in our system of jurisprudence no one here is ever really responsible for their actions. Apparently if you want to prove common sense, logic, and scientific fact in the U.S. you should bring lawsuits.

TotalComments: 6