Everything I've heard says the jury was pretty irate at Simon's firm. Have there been any articles that would detail and explain what was behind their unhappiness?
Their decision just doesn't seem to fit with the facts as given here!
Were they perhaps bought?
People are ticked off at businesspeople in general these days. Perhaps they all owned a bunch of Enron and Worldcom stock and were taking it out on Simon.
The plaintiff was a convicted
drug dealer and ex-con, yet the jury believed him and not Simon's firm. That is an excellent indication that there was pretty hot documentary evidence damning Simon's firm.
There is no better proof that jury was really, really mad, than the $65 million punitive damages award - 5x the special damages. Reviewing such jury verdicts is my day job.