There's an interesting question here, actually. Do people really have the right to screw themselves out of a fair trial? I guess so - if only because it would be very difficult to deprive people of this right. I would point out, however, that most constitutions I know of go to great lengths to try to deprive people of the right to screw themselves out of a fair trial. That's why people are given public defenders if they cannot afford a lawyer, for instance.
More to the point - this case isn't just about Samsung. Everybody is affected by the changing limitations and definitions involved in patent law. So while it's hard to say that Samsung doesn't have a right to screw up their own defense, it's also hard to say that justice isn't infringed when jury selection is botched here.
At the very least, if someone were a champion of Apple's cause here (and I am not saying I am one) then that person would justifiably be very upset to see that what could have been a clear and direct case setting precedent of the future can become a hazy decision which will be ardently appealed and at the very least questioned for years.
You're confusing criminal and civil cases. People are given public defenders when they're part of criminal case, but not when they're part of a civil suit. All of this protection is so people are not railroaded by the government in court. People can be railroaded by other people/corporations and the government doesn't really care (for the most part).
As to your broader point, then the parties in the follow-up cases can argue that it doesn't make any sense since Samsung screwed themselves. It would then be up to a judge look at the established case law and say, "No this is incorrect." It would then be up to an appeals panel to decide which is the correct interpretation. These things takes years and even decades to work their way through the system.
More to the point - this case isn't just about Samsung. Everybody is affected by the changing limitations and definitions involved in patent law. So while it's hard to say that Samsung doesn't have a right to screw up their own defense, it's also hard to say that justice isn't infringed when jury selection is botched here.
At the very least, if someone were a champion of Apple's cause here (and I am not saying I am one) then that person would justifiably be very upset to see that what could have been a clear and direct case setting precedent of the future can become a hazy decision which will be ardently appealed and at the very least questioned for years.