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

Status
Not open for further replies.
so this one has 8 jurors and only 3 need to agree? No problemo there for this case.
I'm not 100% clear on it.

"No problem for this case" - in which direction? TS winning? He does have a good chance if only 3 out of 8 jurors have to agree. But then only 3 out of 8 have to believe Paltrow's side of it. Should be majority rules in my opinion, I need to research this more, I don't think my link was clear enough now that I am looking at it again.

I don't think 3 out of 8 is right.

Need 3/4 majority. 3 out of 8 doesn't add up, probably need 3 when there are only 4 jurors. Probably need more than 3 for 8 jurors.

Jurors - 4-8
Decision - 3/4
 
Last edited:

A jury for the Utah District civil court contains 4 or 8 jurors. For a conviction to be made, at least three members of the jury must be in agreement on the verdict.
so this one has 8 jurors and only 3 need to agree? No problemo there for this case.
I'm not 100% clear on it.

"No problem for this case" - in which direction? TS winning? He does have a good chance if only 3 out of 8 jurors have to agree. But then only 3 out of 8 have to believe Paltrow's side of it. Should be majority rules in my opinion, I need to research this more, I don't think my link was clear enough now that I am looking at it again.

Need 3/4 majority. 3 out of 8 doesn't add up, probably need 3 when there are only 4 jurors. Probably need more than 3 for 8 jurors.
yes it must be 3/4 if there are 4 and if there are 8 jurors then I would imagine at least 6. Makes more sense. I think much depends on TS on the stand and I feel he is not going to be that good...I think on cross he could get very uncomfortable and maybe angry. It will be interesting. Right now I think GP could easily get 6 out of 8.
 
Last edited:
so this one has 8 jurors and only 3 need to agree? No problemo there for this case.

yes it must be 3/4 if there are 4 and if there are 8 jurors then I would imagine at least 5. Makes more sense. I think much depends on TS on the stand and I feel he is not going to be that good...I think on cross he could get very uncomfortable and maybe angry. It will be interesting. Right now I think GP could easily get 5 out of 8.
Yes, 5 out of 8 makes sense. I'm sure it is only 3 when you have only 4 jurors. That gives the 3/4 majority needed.

I think TS will screw up somehow on cross. Paltrow's lawyer will have his chance to rattle him, push his buttons. Can't take criticism? Has bad temper? Defense will play on that to their advantage.

Even my husband is interested in watching this case. Usually it is me watching the court cases. He can't wait to see TS on the stand, and other witnesses.
 
Yes, 5 out of 8 makes sense. I'm sure it is only 3 when you have only 4 jurors. That gives the 3/4 majority needed.

I think TS will screw up somehow on cross. Paltrow's lawyer will have his chance to rattle him, push his buttons. Can't take criticism? Has bad temper? Defense will play on that to their advantage.

Even my husband is interested in watching this case. Usually it is me watching the court cases. He can't wait to see TS on the stand, and other witnesses.
I wonder if it’s simple majority so 5 out of 8 or if it’s 3/4 so 6 out of the 8? Personally I think skiing can be a dangerous sport and as long as the other party wasn’t doing something egregiously dangerous they should each take their ball and go home. I participate in what can be a dangerous sport as well, horseback riding. If someone else’s horse flips out and mine flips out and I get injured, it’s on me.
 
Yes, 5 out of 8 makes sense. I'm sure it is only 3 when you have only 4 jurors. That gives the 3/4 majority needed.

I think TS will screw up somehow on cross. Paltrow's lawyer will have his chance to rattle him, push his buttons. Can't take criticism? Has bad temper? Defense will play on that to their advantage.

Even my husband is interested in watching this case. Usually it is me watching the court cases. He can't wait to see TS on the stand, and other witnesses.
i corrected my post if it is 3/4 then it would be 6 out of 8. I agree that TS will not do well on cross. The door has been opened to so much personal information about family relationships, medical info including very personal conditions etc. etc. He set himself up for this so I am sure defense will not hold back. I assume Owens will do the cross. I sure hope it is not the same attorney for his case that questioned GP to do his questioning. She was the worst .
 
Last edited:
I wonder if it’s simple majority so 5 out of 8 or if it’s 3/4 so 6 out of the 8? Personally I think skiing can be a dangerous sport and as long as the other party wasn’t doing something egregiously dangerous they should each take their ball and go home. I participate in what can be a dangerous sport as well, horseback riding. If someone else’s horse flips out and mine flips out and I get injured, it’s on me.
he would have never brought this suit had it not been a celebrity. I am sure his family tried to talk him out of it.
 
Yes, 5 out of 8 makes sense. I'm sure it is only 3 when you have only 4 jurors. That gives the 3/4 majority needed.

I think TS will screw up somehow on cross. Paltrow's lawyer will have his chance to rattle him, push his buttons. Can't take criticism? Has bad temper? Defense will play on that to their advantage.

Even my husband is interested in watching this case. Usually it is me watching the court cases. He can't wait to see TS on the stand, and other witnesses.

Agree with all three points -- Mr. Laughing, Retired watched most of Depp/Heard, every minute of the Murdaugh trial. & is watching this one! (Maybe I've created a monster, here?)

Wait & see, but GP is the most credible witness so far imho.

And regarding wider ski stance --- if GP has slowed to look for a path down the slope -- this is imho reasonable. Another skier moving faster could indeed ski right into her. Since both are moving -- they may slide on several yards before becoming tangled & falling in really any direction.

jmho ymmv lrr
 
Yes, 5 out of 8 makes sense. I'm sure it is only 3 when you have only 4 jurors. That gives the 3/4 majority needed.

I think TS will screw up somehow on cross. Paltrow's lawyer will have his chance to rattle him, push his buttons. Can't take criticism? Has bad temper? Defense will play on that to their advantage.
I think that the plaintiff will have to work hard to remain calm and truthful during testimony. It sounds like he is more easily frustrated since the crash, which will work against him.

Additionally, his memory of the events that day has changed. For example, his testimony of being unconscious for 45 minutes hasn't been independently confirmed ... yet. Doesn't that detail come later? People who have been unconscious don't suddenly come to and claim - hey, I was unconscious, what'd I miss? I'm not a medical professional, but I don't think unconscious people know that they've been unconscious unless told.
 
i corrected my most if it is 3/4 then it would be 6 out of 8. I agree that TS will not do well on cross. The door has been opened to so much personal information about family relationships, medical info including very personal conditions etc. etc. He set himself up for this so I am sure defense will not hold back. I assume Owens will do the cross. I sure hope it is not the same attorney for his case that questioned GP to do his questioning. She was the worst .
During questioning, the lawyer was sometimes casual and conversational with Paltrow. She referenced the deposition. Perhaps the tone of the deposition was more casual, with the odd quip. The trial questioning included serious questions with the odd quip. As long as the lawyer elicited the responses she needs to impugn the witness ... that's the goal.
 
I think that the plaintiff will have to work hard to remain calm and truthful during testimony. It sounds like he is more easily frustrated since the crash, which will work against him.

Additionally, his memory of the events that day has changed. For example, his testimony of being unconscious for 45 minutes hasn't been independently confirmed ... yet. Doesn't that detail come later? People who have been unconscious don't suddenly come to and claim - hey, I was unconscious, what'd I miss? I'm not a medical professional, but I don't think unconscious people know that they've been unconscious unless told.
I don't get the unconscious part. It sounds like he wasn't unconscious yet says he was?

This should be cleared up on the stand when he testifies.
 
I think the plaintiff has to come across as really sympathetic to win any money here. Due to his age and GP’s celeb status, I wouldn’t be surprised if enough jurors feel sorry for him and decide to award him a little bit of money. But if the defendant was a regular Joe Shmoe the jury would laugh him outta court. And like others have said he wouldn’t have even brought this suit if it was a regular Joe Shmoe! Imagine a 14 yo bumped into him while distracted and he sued the parents??! We should all walk around in bubble wrap then! Cause that’s mad!
 
I don't get the unconscious part. It sounds like he wasn't unconscious yet says he was?

This should be cleared up on the stand when he testifies.
I've heard varying reports - that he was unconscious at the time of the accident, that he was unconscious at some time after the accident, that it was for a short time, and that it was for 45 minutes. Unless there is independent testimony, I don't believe he was unconscious.

I don't believe that people who have been unconscious know it. When they come to, how would they know the difference between sleeping and unconscious? All they know is that they are now awake.
 
Obviously he saw a big pay day- His initial demand was 3 mil- now it is 300,000--- I really hope he gets zero-
Did he first sue under hit and run for $3.1 million - but that was disqualified because it was not a hit and
"run". Paltrow's assigned someone to provide her personal information.

Then he sued under some other clause where the max is $300k?
 
Did he first sue under hit and run for $3.1 million - but that was disqualified because it was not a hit and
"run". Paltrow's assigned someone to provide her personal information.

Then he sued under some other clause where the max is $300k?
I believe he is going to be demolished on the stand because of his peculiar personality and because he is exaggerating his injuries. we shall see.
 
Normally you don't fall asleep/wake up on a ski slope...
True, but people who are skiing, bump the head and are momentarily unconscious, are not confused by the ski hill.

It has already been testified that he was not visibly unconscious at the time of the crash. Ski patrol might say something different.
 
I believe he is going to be demolished on the stand because of his peculiar personality and because he is exaggerating his injuries. we shall see.
I can't wrap my head around someone claiming to have a persistent brain injury (over 7 years) and travelling 10 times for adventures including ziplining. That doesn't add up for me. Maybe it was worse in the beginning and he's afraid to admit that many symptoms have improved?
 
Did he first sue under hit and run for $3.1 million - but that was disqualified because it was not a hit and
"run". Paltrow's assigned someone to provide her personal information.

Then he sued under some other clause where the max is $300k?
Found this…

Sanderson filed a lawsuit against Paltrow seeking more than $3.1 million in damages. A judge dismissed the eye doctor’s original claim and removed the Utah Resort and Paltrow's instructor from the suit. However, the judge did allow the suit to go forward as a $300K claim instead of the original $3.1 million

Gwyneth Paltrow Sued for 2016 Skiing Accident: Everything to Know
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
175
Guests online
2,425
Total visitors
2,600

Forum statistics

Threads
589,962
Messages
17,928,373
Members
228,020
Latest member
DazzelleShafer
Back
Top