Perry Mason-like Drama Emerges From Samsung v. Apple Fight; Judge Koh "visibly upset"

dgstorm

Editor in Chief
Staff member
Premium Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
10,991
Reaction score
3,961
Location
Austin, TX
samsung_presentation_leak_102.jpeg

Updated: Edited to more accurately reflect timeline of events that were unclear in previous reports.

We have been purposefully holding off for a few days on reporting any Samsung vs. Apple patent wars stories, because they were getting to be a bit overwhelming. Today's news is so mind-boggling, we just had to share it. In fact, you may want to sit down with some popcorn for this one, because some almost Perry Mason-like shenanigans have been occurring and this is just the first week of the trial! (The article seems long at a glance, but is a fast read and very much worth it.)

First, we will catch you guys up on recent developments. Basically, Samsung's star lawyer, John Quinn, tried to have some very damaging info entered in the trial as evidence that virtual proves Samsung was designing their rounded corner smartphone either before or at the same time as Apple was. Additionally, this evidence even reveals a very suggestive internal Apple email that suggests Apple stole Sony's design, or at least borrowed from it liberally. However, for some reason that the Judge never made clear, she would not allow Samsung's lawyers to enter this information as evidence and had it stricken from the proceedings.

This, of course, completely stymied and frustrated Mr. Quinn and his legal team. Shortly after this, Mr. Quinn made the decision to release the information to the press in response to their requests. Apple made "false representations" about Mr. Quinn and his team, and several unethical news outlets (without any facts or even having seen the evidence) began to publish this as fact.

After that a firestorm erupted. Apple's lawyers were seething and implored the Judge for retribution. They let it be known that they would file an “emergency motion for sanctions.” Judge Lucy Koh herself was described as "visibly upset" over the events. After this, Judge Koh demanded that Samsung's Attorney, Mr. Quinn explain who drafted it and what his role in it was. He filed a document called the Quinn Declaration (found in a source link below), basically explaining that his release of the evidence was not meant to circumvent Judge Koh's suppression of the evidence, but was simply a response to the media calling his reputation into question, and was in the spirit of knowledge the press was asking for.

He shared that his public submission of the evidence was neither "illegal" nor "unethical" and was a response to Apple's "false representations." He said, “These false representations by Apple’s counsel publicly and unfairly called my personal reputation into question. [They] have resulted in media reports likewise falsely impugning me personally.” Additionally he further elaborated that, “Samsung’s brief statement and transmission of public materials in response to press enquiries was not motivated by or designed to influence jurors.” He also indicated (and this was my favorite part of the brief), that he was keeping with the spirit of the trial in which Judge Koh had expressed that the case would be "open to the public" and that the documents in the case would not be sealed because "the whole trial was going to be open." Here's a quote with his final concluding arguments,

If those jurors did read the presentation – which includes sections of testimony by ex-Apple designer Shin Nishibori, who had been tasked by the company to come up with what he believed Sony’s interpretation of the iPhone might be, as well as concept art by Samsung’s own team for touchscreen-centric handsets that predate the reveal of the original iPhone – Quinn says, the fault is theirs’ alone.

“The members of the jury had already been selected at the time of the statement and the transmission of these public exhibits,” he concluded, “and had been specifically instructed not to read any form of media relating to this case.”

What can we say about this? This is unbelievable, and proves that sometimes fact really is stranger than fiction. It will be thrilling to see how this turns out. Below is a quote from the RedOrbit article detailing how things went down when Attorney Quinn attempted to enter his evidence to the court and got shot down three times by Judge Koh. It will likely have you shaking your head, or screaming at your monitor.

Samsung’s lawyer, John Quinn, began the court session on Tuesday by begging Judge Lucy Koh to allow the Korean company to submit some drawings and other documents as evidence in the hearing. Judge Koh had previously denied this same request three times, and was none too pleased with Quinn pushing the matter. According to Thompson Reuters, when Judge Koh once more denied the Samsung request, Quinn began to get upset, saying, “What’s the point of having a trial?”

“What’s the point?”

Koh responded, “Mr. Quinn, please, please, we have done three reconsiderations on this. You’ve made your record.”

Quinn pressed the matter further, begging for explanation when Judge Koh shut him down.

“Mr. Quinn, don’t make me sanction you, please!” the judge barked. “I want you to sit down, please.”

When opening statements were over and lunch had been eaten, some select journalists were surprised to see a very interesting press statement land in their email inboxes containing the exact evidence Judge Koh had previously denied 3 times.

“The excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design,” the statement said. “Fundamental fairness requires that the jury decide the case based on all the evidence.”

Source: PhoneArena, RedOrbit, & Quinn Declaration
 
Last edited:

VirtualCLD

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2010
Messages
84
Reaction score
14
However, for some reason that the Judge never made clear, she would not allow Samsung's lawyers to enter this information as evidence and had it stricken from the proceedings.

First, as always, I'm not a lawyer. I also tend to play devil's advocate here, but I thought the reason was very clear: Samsung had plenty of time to submit evidence during the pre-trial phase, but failed to submit this evidence before the deadline. The reason for having this is to give the other side time to examine the evidence in order to prepare for the trial itself. However, I could be wrong on this as I only came across this info in one or two articles.
 

johnomaz

Silver Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
3,187
Reaction score
633
Location
Central Valley, California
Current Phone Model
Google Pixel 2XL
Why do I feel that Judge Koh is suddenly sitting pretty financially? Yup, I do feel Apple has no issue greasing certain palms.
 
OP
dgstorm

dgstorm

Editor in Chief
Staff member
Premium Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
10,991
Reaction score
3,961
Location
Austin, TX
First, as always, I'm not a lawyer. I also tend to play devil's advocate here, but I thought the reason was very clear: Samsung had plenty of time to submit evidence during the pre-trial phase, but failed to submit this evidence before the deadline. The reason for having this is to give the other side time to examine the evidence in order to prepare for the trial itself. However, I could be wrong on this as I only came across this info in one or two articles.

Yes, this is likely the case, but the whole thing still seems wonky. Having worked as a para-legal briefly for my Mom who is an attorney (soon to retire), I have noticed that sometimes the courts make decisions that defy reason and common sense in order to stick closely to the "rules of the court." Sometimes those "rules" (and I am not referring to the law), end up getting in the way of real justice. This might be one of those times, but there's almost no way to know for sure without actually being there. Obviously my experiences with the law do not make me an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but are simply meant to illustrate that I have been around it enough to scratch my head sometimes.

I have found that many of the "rules of law" make sense when you look at them individually, but sometimes they can be completely illogical when taken in context of the bigger picture. In this instance, I understand that it is only fair to allow the other side to be able to prepare their defense versus the evidence presented, yet how can one justify leaving this evidence out when it is so important and actually would allow real Justice to be served. I must admit to wondering why they didn't present this evidence sooner...

Regardless, it makes for some interesting drama.
 
Last edited:

Beardface

Active Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
687
Reaction score
97
Location
Raleigh, NC
Judge Koh is corrupt. There is no other way to put it. If she's not on the Apple bankroll under the table I'd be completely shocked.

She's been an Apple shrill since Day 1. Denying evidence that supports Samsung's claims, getting visibly upset when this evidence is presented, threatening sanctions against the lawyers?

Come on. Get that clown off this case.
 

B0B0

Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2012
Messages
117
Reaction score
5
Location
I travel
sounds like the judge has been bought.

Yup, fair legal system at play, gotta love it -_-. what a joke
 
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
141
Reaction score
10
Gotta love Freedom of the Press. Apple is going to sink it's own ship from the looks of it. Basically gave him a way to circumvent the obviously biased judge and show real evidence by attacking him openly with non-fact. If they try to pull the jurors card then they could get a mistrial and then Samsung could use that evidence in the new case with hopefully a more intelligent judge.

Sent from my Droid Razr Maxx
 

liftedplane

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2011
Messages
2,303
Reaction score
793
Location
Washington State
Judge Koh is corrupt. There is no other way to put it. If she's not on the Apple bankroll under the table I'd be completely shocked.

She's been an Apple shrill since Day 1. Denying evidence that supports Samsung's claims, getting visibly upset when this evidence is presented, threatening sanctions against the lawyers?

Come on. Get that clown off this case.

the only problem is that she would have to recuse herself, and unless SHE feels that SHE is unable to be impartial she has absolutely nothing forcing her. There's no real way to get her off unless it can be proven that she is infact being paid by apple, that would require some pretty hard evidence and would then bring her under pretty heavy fire.

she may not be getting paid, but I bet you she is an apple fangirl, BUT that's not proof that she can't be impartial.

I'm sure there's other ways to get her off the case, but it wouldn't be easy.

samsung needs franklin and bash, they'd get themselves held in contempt in a heartbeat if it meant winning the case :p I love that show :biggrin:
 

VirtualCLD

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2010
Messages
84
Reaction score
14
Yes, this is likely the case, but the whole thing still seems wonky. Having worked as a para-legal briefly for my Mom who is an attorney (soon to retire), I have noticed that sometimes the courts make decisions that defy reason and common sense in order to stick closely to the "rules of the court." Sometimes those "rules" (and I am not referring to the law), end up getting in the way of real justice. This might be one of those times, but there's almost no way to know for sure without actually being there. Obviously my experiences with the law do not make me an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but are simply meant to illustrate that I have been around it enough to scratch my head sometimes.

I have found that many of the "rules of law" make sense when you look at them individually, but sometimes they can be completely illogical when taken in context of the bigger picture. In this instance, I understand that it is only fair to allow the other side to be able to prepare their defense versus the evidence presented, yet how can one justify leaving this evidence out when it is so important and actually would allow real Justice to be served. I must admit to wondering why they didn't present this evidence sooner...

Regardless, it makes for some interesting drama.

And that's exactly the impression I am getting here: follow the rules of the court proceedings even if it goes against justice. Quite a frustrating and sad state of affairs.
 

BJPalmer85

Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2011
Messages
260
Reaction score
6
Location
Louisville, KY
Apple needs to go away and die. Im tired of hearing about this just like im tired of hearing about Chick-fil-a and Dan Kathy's nonsense.

All Apple wants to do is control the world IMO. Progress is pointless to them if they dont create it and they get scared when they get some true competition.

Dont get me wrong, they make a great product but so does Samsung. The similarities are minor and dont warrant all this legal BS

my .02

B
 

jayman350

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
843
Reaction score
18
Location
Lowell, Ma
Where's Denny Crane and Alan Shore when you need 'em??

if I had my choice, I would have Jack McCoy as first chair, Michael Cutter as 2nd chair, and Connie Rubirosa as a backup. No way they would let this crap get out of hand, actually they would probably end up pulling something very similar to what Quinn did. damn i miss Law & Order :mad:
 

MissionImprobable

Silver Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
2,040
Reaction score
142
Hey, Apple sends off-duty cops to shake down people and make them think they have no choice but to allow and illegal search, so I'd put nothing past them. Koh may no be paid off, but there is nothing fair and impartial about her actions. I see almost no way that had she allowed it in that it would have been deemed inadmissible down the road, so her judgement is more than questionable.

All I can say is that this can't be do anything to gain Apple support among anything but the most diehard of fans. It's whatever, though. Dinosaurs will die.
 

jsprings

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
49
Reaction score
4
if I had my choice, I would have Jack McCoy as first chair, Michael Cutter as 2nd chair, and Connie Rubirosa as a backup. No way they would let this crap get out of hand, actually they would probably end up pulling something very similar to what Quinn did. damn i miss Law & Order :mad:

Law & Order is in reruns on cable (USA, ION, etc.) on U-Verse. ;-)

Harmony Link (Logitech) for your OG Droid. I becomes a remote control for your entertainment system.
 
Top