Originally Posted by daswig

Once again, we're back to the "please don't distort what I said" part of the thread. Some things are constant. I have no idea what you do for a living, but let's hypothetically say you're a tire specialist. You know a LOT about tires. Let's say you know that BF Goodrich Model XYZ should be inflated to a range of Q to T PSI pressure. Then let's say that you saw reported in the news that in a certain case, the BF Goodrich model XYZ tires were inflated to within R to S PSI. Would you know, without knowing all of the specifics of a case, that a pressure level of R to S was within normal guidelines for that tire? Of course you would.

Some things are universal. If you're representing a client in a case, the nature of the case and plaintiff makes a HUGE difference in what kind of factfinder you choose. If it's a case where your client that has been injured through no fault of his own but has a really bad criminal record, has lots of previous convictions for crimes of moral turpitude, and looks like the love-child of John Gotti and Lucretia Borgia when he wears a suit, you simply don't request a jury trial, because your client is not sympathetic. If, on the other hand, your client is a nice little girl who looks adorable in her nice little dress and who was born with cerebral palsey that you're trying to blame on the doctor and his insurance company even though it's not really the doctor's fault, you ask for a trial by jury. This is BASIC stuff.