UT - Gwyneth Paltrow sued over ski collision at Deer Valley Resort in 2016 - trial, March 2023 *GP Not Guilty*

[turaj]

This is almost as funny as the photos yesterday. James does not need to bother to cross.

 

[turaj]

this guy is where? Some Pacific island???

 

[Chelly]

This is almost as funny as the photos yesterday. James does not need to bother to cross.

This is laughable. I think judge is smiling. Looks like 3 stooges minus one.
They just got disconnected. Gallery is laughing.

 

[Weki]

Defense atty doesn’t even object properly. Object to this entire testimony! Say it doesn’t allow you to do a proper cross!

 

[shotgun09]

Just my opinion, but this last witness has put me to sleep, with the equations. I have suddenly been brought back to Algebra II in college, and seriously feel the need for sleep. Only to be woken up with the " Did I pass?"

Poor Jury

Epic Fail....

 

[ilovewings]

Can I just say that every trial I watch I cannot help thinking…if I was on THAT jury I’d sure have a hard time waiting for deliberations to be able to talk to someone about the case. I guess I wouldn’t be a very good juror for a lengthy trial…I’d need duct tape on my mouth or something lol

Ditto

 

[NoSpoonFeeding]

This is so wrong, ribs can be fractured from a standing fall, but he wasn't standing, he smacked down on packed snow with movement. And that's all I gotta say about that.

 

[ilovewings]

I predict verdict by end of today. No way these jurors are coming back on a Friday to continue this bs. I predict plaintiff will lose. IMO that’s the just verdict here.

His daughters aren’t even there in the courtroom to support him! Supposedly his life has been completely altered due to all this. *eyeroll*

We all have known or have people like this in our lives. It is the worst! A complete drain! By the way, the TS that took the stand loved being up there! He loves this! I didn’t fully see it until yesterday! Wow!

They could award him something less than 300,000- personally I wouldn't give him 5 cents

 

[Weki]

This rebuttal is a wash! The defense witness was in person, believable and credible. This long winded over the phone rebuttal is ineffective IMO. The defense witness wins this one.

 

[turaj]

Iwonder if they were going to call Ramon? Or who? What a joke.

 

[Weki]

We were going to call someone else but decided not to.
- A country lawyer

And you need to announce this because!? How does the judge do it?

Oh we’re at jury instructions!

 

[tlcya]

okay, all caught up. watched the animation replay the defense witness about the calcs used by plaintiff expert and why they were inadequate. I am watching the live stream now.

ETA I agree with those saying this verdict will be quick and will be in favor of Paltrow.

 

[turaj]

Damages...I think TS should pay her legal fees as this was a money grab that backfired.

 

[Luna20]

Well, I am a lone wolf in my opinion, but I do think GP rammed into TS. I cannot stand GP or her lawyers, nor can I stand anyone on TS's side except for Bueller.
I hope TS wins this case. There. I said it! (I like tomatoes!)

I still have no clue of who hit who.

TS has some traits that I don’t care for ‘lying’ is just one. He is way too dramatic for my liking. If he hadn’t worked all of his life I may feel differently about the opportunist angle. I think it’s more about him feeling important by taking on a celebrity.

GP has entitlement issues, leaving the scene and yelling obscenities. On a personal note I don’t agree with her weird practices and viewpoints. The latest being ‘ozone’ injected to your back parts to enhance the sexual experience.

So I wouldn’t be able to vote either way.

 

[Weki]

TS and Ramon are SO in cahoots. Seeing Ramon in the gallery just drives this home for me. These two decided that GP needs to be taught a lesson bc she’s a spoiled Hollywood celeb who is never held accountable. But the real reason is that she was rude to both of them. These two were excited by the celebrity encounter and wanted attention. I know many of you have been saying this since the beginning but I genuinely didn’t fully grasp it until yesterday/today!

 

[ilovewings]

I still have no clue of who hit who.

TS has some traits that I don’t care for ‘lying’ is just one. He is way too dramatic for my liking. If he hadn’t worked all of his life I may feel differently about the opportunist angle. I think it’s more about him feeling important by taking on a celebrity.

GP has entitlement issues, leaving the scene and yelling obscenities. On a personal note I don’t agree with her weird practices and viewpoints. The latest being ‘ozone’ injected to your back parts to enhance the sexual experience.

So I wouldn’t be able to vote either way.

For the sake of argument though, what would you do if you were on the jury-- the facts of the case stand alone, given you don't like either party---the idea is to make an objective assessment of the facts and render a decision (you don't have to if you don't want to) just wondering though what you would do if you had to decide

 

[Teche]

get ready to laugh as you have never laughed at testimony

Kinda like parts of Depp v Heard.

 

[Weki]

Mark Geragos (Scott Peterson’s atty) was on some show and said the purpose of a civil trial is to determine who is the @**hole?! Lol. I would tweak that for this case to “who is the bigger @**hole?” And without a doubt, no matter what you think of GP, TS is the bigger @**hole. When you make an out of touch celeb sympathetic you’re a gigantic @**hole.

 

[ilovewings]

Mark Geragos (Scott Peterson’s atty) was on some show and said the purpose of a civil trial is to determine who is the @**hole?! Lol. I would tweak that for this case to “who is the bigger @**hole?” And without a doubt, no matter what you think of GP, TS is the bigger @**hole. When you make an out of touch celeb sympathetic you’re a gigantic @**hole.

Spot on!!!!!

 

[aafromaa]

There were 6 children in my family and any time something was broken there was a lot of he said/she said going on. My parents would not take the word of one child over another. There had to be some additional proof. I think that’s what we have here and there is no proof of who hit who in the back. TS says she did and GP says he did. Yes TS has CR who says he saw GP hit TS from behind but GP has the ski instructor who saw TS behind them doing slaloms or something prior to the collision and was keeping an eye on him until they got far enough apart that he didn’t think he would be an issue for his student. Yes they both had experts who said the broken ribs had to come from their point of view - forward fall for TS and backward fall for GP. So you’ve got he said/she said and dualing experts. If you give equal weight to each witness and expert then you still cannot determine who hit who. I tend to think that GP’s account and the ski instructor’s testimony were more credible than TS & CR. And I think that the defense experts were more credible than the plaintiff’s. If I was on the jury I’d have to deny plantiff’s claim and award the $1 to GP. BUT if the reasonable doubt requirement for a criminal trial applied to civil trials, I’m afraid that we’d have a hung jury because I see reasonable doubt on both sides.


Let’s see if anything said in closing arguments changes my opinion.