In a case involving a car accident that aggravated the plaintiff's arthritis, would either side want former star athlete Bo Jackson on the jury? It actually happened recently. In a newspaper article, the plaintiff's lawyer said he thought Bo was a perfect choice:
Attorney Michael Maher, one of the lawyers in the case, said he quickly recognized Jackson, and was glad to have him as a juror. Maher represented a 67-year-old Villa Park man seeking damages for a 2000 car accident that he claimed aggravated his arthritis. Jackson, who had hip replacement surgery because of arthritis, seemed to be a perfect fit for the jury, Maher said.
"I figured he'd probably be familiar with what my guy was going through,'' Maher said.
"Bo knows baseball, football -- and now jury duty," by Dan Rozek of the Chicago Sun-Times.
At the end of the trial, the jury awarded the plaintiff $32,000. I don't know who is claiming victory, but it seems a little risky to put Bo Jackson on a jury: surely the other jurors would give him more deference than they might to others in the room? It makes him too much of a leader when you can't be sure how he's going to vote. On the other hand, you might think that with his money, a cool couple hundred thousand dollars for aggravated arthritis might not seem like all that much . . .