Heart Attack Victim Loses in Second Vioxx Trial
In a stunning defeat for those all those injured by Vioxx across the country, a jury in New Jersey state court found against plaintiff Mike Humeston in the second Vioxx trial in the country. The jury voted 8-1 that Merck did not fail to warn of the known cardiovascular risks of Vioxx. The jury voted unanimously that Merck did not commit consumer fraud, and neither concealed nor misrepresentated the known dangers associated with Vioxx.
The verdict is a surprise considering the FDA did everything short of telling Merck that they failed to warn of the cardiovascular risks associated with Vioxx.
After following the trial for most of the last seven weeks, it is safe to say that Merck successfully employed a strategy of attacking the plaintiff's character versus explaining the science. You might remember the last trial that Merck lost. Many people opposing the verdict cited the juries inabililty to understand the science behind the drug. Conservative groups rallied to the tune of discarding the trail-by-jury system for civil trial, stating that juries are incapable of understanding complicated cases and properly dispensing justice. No doubt these same people will be touting the recent verdict as a triumph of the jury system.
Regardless of the result, our Seventh Amendment right to trial-by-jury should be exahlted.