With the jury delivering its verdict in the high-profile Apple-Samsung patent trial within three days and awarding Apple slightly over $1 billion in damages, it might appear that the proceedings were probably being wrapped off by the weekend. However, a legal expert is of the opinion that the `quick' verdict does not imply that the jury had shirked its duty.

Acknowledging the fact that though the Apple-Samsung case was a complicated one and the verdict form was complex, and that it was quite "surprising" that the jurors delivered the verdict "so quickly," Roy Futterman - director at DOAR Litigation Consulting - said on Friday: "It looks like they were thoughtful about it and they did their job."

According to Futterman, who is a clinical psychologist and works on trial strategies as well as the jurors' mindset, the main indication that the jury delivered a "thoughtful" verdict is the `consistency' in the verdicts --- with the jurors voting one way on patent-infringement and another way on invalidity.

In addition, Futterman also said that their thoughtfulness in delivering the verdict is also evident from the fact that "they did pick and choose among devices," instead of merely going across the board and checking everything. Moreover, with the jurors also elaborating which devices had infringed on which patents, it is apparent that they made "some clear choices."

Noting that he was definitely surprised that the jurors "came back that quickly," Futterman said: "It looks like they did a lot of work in a short amount of time."