DaftScholar
158475
6606
329
Feb 29, 2016 10:00 AM
DaftScholar
158475
6606
329
jailhouselawyer
The last thing you want to do as an attorney is assume the appellate court can read what is implied.
Munchman347
Can the Three Stooges still sue for copyright infringement, they lost 60 years ago when these first went around...
tangier
Court transcript are long, so having the witness answering simple question makes looking back at the transcript a whole lot easier.
eggbrook
Repost but I still giggle at these +1
TheCobraChicken
Repost? this shit is old as balls.
tomhanksgetyourhandoutofthepicklejar
she was quote "thicker than a bowl of oatmeal"
dkunjosh
Oral
SauceBot
This is an index of selected chronological lists of cases decided by the United States Supreme Court.
CedricPabloIsMyBestFriend
Thanks Saucebot!
JustPlaneWrong
That second one
oneillwith2ls
Reference in comment section: located. Applying upvote.
z0mz0m
#1 more likely she said - Four-to-Five years.
mostlyjustheretoupvotefunnycomments
snore
wowsomanyusernamesicannotfindonethatworks
The URL to this is somewhat satisfying...
ErogenousEnigma
I will never not laugh at these.
wantfastcars
The "brain in a jar" one gets a chuckle from me every time.
wouldyougiveitasecond
Oral.
Saeryf
The sarcastic responses are so good. I love good sarcasm.
creativeandfunnyusername1778
Would somebody care to tell me what "myasthenia gravis" is?
tpgreyknight
Myasthenia gravis is a neuromuscular disease that leads to fluctuating muscle weakness and fatigue.
flyvan
Oral...
creativeandfunnyusername1778
Well played.
asdfertjryjre
#2 Get out.
Sorcatarius
That's actually stupidity on the witnesses part, date of birth asks year of birth as well, saying every year means you are reborn every year
asdfertjryjre
I was referencing Hot Fuzz.
MrNoodlemansbrother
@DoIHearAnAmen
doihearanamen
@MrNoodleman
MrNoodlemansbrother
Do I get boobs now??
BryzCB
"He's 20 much like your IQ" And that kids is how I spent 2 night in jail for contempt of court.
[deleted]
[deleted]
PandraPierva
I,'ve,got,plenty,to,spare,you,want,some,?,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
someonefigureditout
Insulting a lawyer is not contempt of court
chettlar
It may give you bonus points with the jury if they are also already annoyed with the attorney.
someonefigureditout
Ditto for the judge
BestOfMenMustDie
Can we get some new ones please? There must be new ones by now
Squeezit
I agree
xxcredxx
Currently sitting in court, finding these is ironic. +1
tpgreyknight
Why are you on imgur in court, perhaps more to the point?
xxcredxx
It was too boring, probably would have payed attention if it was for something more serious.
JonathanHoag
Why are you in court, do share
xxcredxx
Tag went out on my car, nothing too fun.
Flameboy1234
We, the jury, find the defendant savage af.
ihatewarmpickles
Ummm yeah, no, yeah, no, yeah, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say NONE of these were said in court.....
DatMormon
Could the first one simply be "four to five years"?
SlabBuIkhead
I downvoted because of that one. Son could've easily moved back home after moving out.
terribleinternetpunsfirstborn
"By whose death" could be the partner's death, a child's death, a family member's death, a friend's death, all capable of ending a marriage
funkyjunky
I love it how each time I read these 'actually took place in court' extra punchlines have been added.
HennozzG
I'm just imagining all these were taking place between the same two people
Benzyl
© the bumper book of jolly fun 1840 something or other.
AngelilloPio
For the second pic, It's a Phoenix!
herbert5
Slightly more fitting title: "Re: Fw: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: these conversations actually took place in court."
Scytail
You won't believe number 7!
Spidey209
Obligatory " Have to say it to get it recorded "
derkderk2010
This actually does happen. As stupid as these seem the attorneys have to assume that the witness, jury, and other party are all idiots (1/2)
derkderk2010
To make sure that everything is clear and that if the other party requests something read back from the record they didn't miss anything
derwulf
At work [engineer] I will ask seemingly pedantic questions to ensure there's no misunderstanding. There is, occasionally, a point.
derkderk2010
"A client asks you to design two ropes attached to a 2x4. You give them 2 ropes attached to a 2x4. Only after does he tell you he (1/2)
derkderk2010
wanted a swing." My professor on my first day of intro to design when I was an engineering major
equinoxiq
I'm ashamed that I've read these so many times and I still laugh
NotSoSmartAlek
I'm not ashamed.
NightRush
Most of these are obvious on purpose, lawyers just need the witnesses to say the words on record so they can argue their case.
BluesRockCosmonaut
Also you gotta go a long way to prove doubt sometimes
JustAnotherRandomCommenter
Yep. The attorney can't make a statement directly.
Captainplanetmotherfucker
It's still stupid though.
StooperDave
I was gonna point this out.
ArmorcladCowboy
True but there are better ways to ask. Also it's fair to make it an insult to the attorney as they were boarder line leading the witness.
ChibiYui
*borderline
ArmorcladCowboy
Ugh sorry, %#£€ you autocorrect
ChibiYui
:D I know the feeling.
justforth
Consider easy or stupid questions entry questions for multiple reasons. Some as a starter to warm up a witness to talking publicly or to
sigmaecho
Also, it's against the rules for the lawyer to give any information, so he has to get the witness to say EVERYTHING for the record.
Gryfer
This is what no one understands. We're literally never allowed to assume or give info. We *HAVE* to have the witness say it.
DrSparken
So what's going on when he asks how old the 20-year-old son is?
MnemonicMonkeys
Then why not just say something NOT stupid and have the witness confirm or correct it?
Gryfer
If it's not said explicitly and you reference the obviously implied fact later in trial, that could be grounds for a mistrial. Mistrials = $
Gryfer
Some attorneys are dumb, sure -- see the autopsy question -- but some are requirements of the system.
justforth
assert dominance by forcing someone to behaviour (e.g. testifying ridiculously obvious stuff), which they usually would resist. Or to have
justforth
it noted down in the protocol files.
terribleinternetpunsfirstborn
Also a decent number are perfectly reasonable questions that the witnesses just decided to be a smartass over
justforth
Yeah. What´s obvious to someone involved is not often as obvious to someone looking from the outside in. Lack of empathy and a bruised ego.
darthlordvadermort
Every time this is posted someone mentions how they have to do this, so they aren't "leading" the witness to a certain answer.
justforth
While I agree, I do believe that there is a grey area, in which a good lawyer can influence the perceived story by knowing how memory,
justforth
perception, social factors, like prejudice etc., work in favor or against his or her clients cause.
darthlordvadermort
Oh most definitely. I'm not saying this solves the problem, I'm just saying that's the general intention and why they have to do it.