Lawyers, What's The Best Way You've Seen Someone Blew A Court Case ?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ธ.ค. 2022
- 😈 NEXT STORY - • All Of Our Stories
Lawyers, What's The Best Way You've Seen Someone Blew A Court Case ?
This video is filled with crazy stories. Be sure to watch the entire video ;)
Subscribe for Best Story Videos
Inspiration:
Night Shift Clerks, What's The Weirdest Thing You've Seen ?
• Night Shift Clerks, Wh...
What's Your Biggest "I Have To Get Out Of Here ASAP" Moments ?
• Video
Who's The Worst "Attention Wh*re" You've Seen ?
• Video
What's The Scariest Thing That Has Happened To You ?
• What's The Scariest Th...
I wasn't involved in the trial. I was just riding the bus. Two women were sitting on the bus across from me. One was a juror in a trial and the other one was her friend. They were talking about the trial and I couldn't help but overhear what they were saying as they were talking quite loud. By the time I got off at my stop, I knew what the trial was about, who the jury foreman was, who the judge was and even which court room the trial was being held in. I got to work and told my boss and he had me call the court house and tell them everything. At first, the lady who answered the phone thought I was pranking her or something, until I told her the judges name and the jury foreman's name. Her voice got kind of tight and angry sounding and she told me that she would inform the judge.
"are you sure?" reminds me of a VERY old comic strip where a lawyer drove a policewoman crazy by asking "are you sure?" LITERALLY A DOZEN TIMES, then said her testimony was unreliable because she was "unstable"...
it was a newspaper comic called "Levy's Law".
So that's where the people I talk to got their argumentation skills from.
I'm just picturing, who was it? John Cena? 'Are you sure about that?'
This one was extra good!
I've watched a court cam episode where a guy, accused of smoking pot, lights up a joint in front of a judge. Courtrooms are more wild than people think.
reminds me of a story i read in a book, where a guy accused of drug-related crimes said he was "searched improperly".
so a cop demonstrated the proper way to search someone...
and FOUND A PACKET OF COCAINE IN THE GUY'S POCKET!
"the judge began laughing so hard he had to take a 5 minute break."
Omg i love that clip. I admire the balls on that guy.
Bro I just saw that clip just this morning lmao
what a god!
Ok but, "Half of all lawyers graduated from the bottom half of their class" only works if everyone who graduated went to work, and then stayed as a lawyer. And even then, graduating law school isnt passing the bar.
Yeah, that phrase has always bugged me; if the class is any good, then even the bottom half of the graduates should be reasonably competent. The part about other hurdles to getting into employment is also good.
@@KnakuanaRka In general the bottom half of law school classes don't go on to practice law and the have much higher bar failure rates. This is pretty much true in all but the very top law schools where "I graduated from harvard" is often good enough.
There is an old attorney saying "dont ask a question you don't already know the answer to." I saw it first hand when I was a witness in a case concerning an eviction. I was head of maintenance and was on the stand. Our side finished with me and the other side's attorney got up with a look like he "got me". "Didn't you say that the reason you had to rekey the front door of the unit was because you had to have access to an electrical panel which served areas outside of the unit." YES. "Take a look at this photo...it shows a door on the exterior of the building which is marked "electrical"...isn't it true that the access to the electrical is on the outside of the building??" I pointed out that there are two electrical panels, one on the outside for the elevator and kitchen and the main panels inside of the unit for the entire quadrant. The judge looked up at the attorney and said "any more questions?"
Allow me to share with you "The Thick Needle Defense." My father, about 20y/o, goes to court for a speeding ticket. When asked to explain himself, he states, "Your honor, I have a thick needle." Basically, his defense was that the odometer needle on his truck was thick, so he may have been going 30mph, or 35mph, but he couldn't tell. Because of the thickness of the needle, you see. The judge, stifling laughter, told him to get out of his court room. 😂
I think your father was the thick one for thinking that would work. Especially if he had the car for a while and should have gotten used to the speedometer (not odometer) by that point.
Story 11: well, on federal court, once a veredict is given, you stand up and say that you actually did it. Someone once did it and walked out of the court with no problens
Just don't admit to any crime like if yiu get off for murdering Bob don't say you Also killed Ben because they can charge yiu for murdering Ben but not Bob
@@lordarkay272 Not only that but in investigating Ben's death they may find more evidence and try you for killing Bob again.
Evidence or it didn’t happen
@@justins340 new evidence can only exonerate you of a crime that has already been tried. Double jeopardy prevents you from being tried again for the same crime EVEN IF new evidence comes out that would've changed the outcome of the trial.
If in US, and many other countries, it's true for every level.
26:08 my aunt used to be a judge, I asked her once why she stopped considering the money she could have made and she said something to the effect of “if I was still a judge we’d never be able to have this conversation. Cause I likely would have either killed a person or myself”
Yup! Being even a family and/or criminal law Judge is much harder than being a lawyer.
Just curious, why is that? Trauma?
@@bkproductions383 most likely getting so done with people's stupidity that one just snaps
@@bkproductions383 cuz the people you have to deal with aren't always all there if yknow what I mean
The reason he waited 6 hours is so he could establish that they were lying and that they wanted them to dig a hole so deep that that evidence would bury them.
Edit. Just wanted to elaborate. It isn't like TV shows. Testifying can take hours. Even days. Here, they are taking so long to rip apart their credibility, defense, possible defenses they could try. But it has to be relevant. If the court feels time is being wasted, they put a stop to that line of questions and try to direct the trial forward.
My grandfather was a lawyer. And once, in the 80s he defended a man for car theft. The trial had barely begun when the plaintiff stated that it wasn’t just the car but also the keys that were stolen. At this point the defendant loudly says “Well, that’s what you get for leaving them on the porch!” Needless to say, my grandfather lost the case and his client went to prison for three years. Dumb, dumb, duuuuumb!
Its for the better though.
Story 26:
They probably waited before showing the clear proof that he was the engineer to destroy his credibility.
If they can prove that he was extremely willing to lie about that, it means that any other claims he makes during the case are going to be very poorly received.
He was basically just wasting time, he could've just came out right with it and let the guy destroy his case like that.
@@TheodoreBrosevelt also if he was paid hourly, that is a sweet paycheck.
I was thinking the same - yet still it shouldn't take six hours of arguing the point to establish that. Ask him if he was the engineer on the project. He says no. Asked him if he ever claimed to be the engineer on the project. He says no. Maybe one more question and you're done.
I love these stories because they're being read by an actual human rather than a text-to-speech voice.
or an EXTREMELY advanced AI, same effect tho
It is still AI just more code making it more fluent. You can tell by how certain words come out the same way every time. Adding punctuation in the writing that the AI is reading also greatly improves the quality of the audio
I actually have one! NAL, but I’m a receptionist for a bankruptcy attorney. At the initial meeting with the judge and creditors, the debtor was asked why she didn’t file taxes. Debtor responds with the fact that she doesn’t make enough taxable income to file taxes. Debtor also continues with “I make money under the table and I’m paid cash!” Needless to say we are going to be investigating this…
NAL? Dafuq? Just write it out for Heavens sake 🤦
you hear multiple times not a lawayer in this video... the only issue comes if you shorten i am not a lawayr.@@TheINFJChannel
I was in the gallery of a civil court case. Business partners dissolving their partnership. This was a hearing on defamation. On cross exam, the defendants attorney got the plaintiff to admit that some of his statements were outright false. He then blurted out "its my first amendment right to say anything I want, even if I know it's not true". He lost. His full time job? Police Officer.
Cops are legally permitted to blatantly lie to defendants, and all too often skate by when caught falsifying legal documents/lying under oath in court...
29:10 I feel like this was less an "And then everyone stood up and clapped" story, and more of an "I got so freaking lucky to have a slam dunk for my first case, and managed to realize this in spite of the opposition trying to cow me into submission" story.
yeah that seemed unnecessarily rude.
I love how the narrator went from "I have friends who work in courts and anything is believable" to "nuh uh, this guy's LYING!" over the course of the video.
You know he’s doing something right when you can get hooked on the first story
A few years ago I had been given a parking ticket, to be fair, it was deserved. When the police officer wrote the ticket he reversed the dates as he had apparently recently moved to the country from the United States (wrote 6th of February instead of 2nd of June), so when I turned up to contest it the judge asked if I was in this particular place on the 6th of February I confidently said “no, I wasn’t even in the country on that date”. I proved this with my passport and airline tickets and was let off.
some brits got barred from reentry into USA left US 11/6 (11 june) us computer says left US 6th november so was down as overstayer
So for the story about destroyed evidence, the reason the judge made a big deal about it to the jury is because in normal circumstance, if evidence can't be produced, it can't be considered when the jury make their decision. But it was proven that there was evidence and it was destroyed, he's saying they can make the inferrence that it could have proven the defendant guilty.
Not quite accurate, the inference is that the evidence would have weighed against the party at fault for destroying the evidence, unless they can prove it was accident (stored in a shed that burned down from a lightening strike etc). Not an automatic guilty/liable verdict, but it certainly doesn’t make them look good.
@joshuaridgway3230 If it is intentionally destroyed, they are instructed to assume that it is detrimental to the side that destroyed it.
@@karlrovey that’s what I said.
@@joshuaridgway3230 also what I said
When I went to get my name legally changed. The amount of people who no-showed for child support and other cases was astonishing. Out of 30-40 cases that day, 5-10 didn't show up, 5-10 were extremely late, and 5 were wearing clothes that were clearly lounge wear/ home only clothes.
Back when I was a law student, I used to hang out at the court just to watch the proceedings. There was this guy representing himself on a speeding ticket. He asked the police officer what the weather was on that day. I guess he figured that the ticket was written two years ago and he wouldn't know. Turns out, the cop actually had that in his notes and told him the exact weather and temperature. The guy then says that it's not true, and gives his own account of the weather, and says that if the officer lied about the weather, then the court can't trust anything he said, and so the ticket should be dismissed.
The Judge, just looking a bit bewildered at this ridiculous argument, pointed out that he didn't actually have anything to show that the weather was as he claimed, and also pointed out that the officer was a sworn friend of the court and so he was definitely to be believed unless evidence proved otherwise.
Guy tried to make the same argument again for some reason and The Judge just put a stop to it.
I had jury duty this past summer on a domestic abuse and battery case. Police had bodycam footage with audio of a phone call between the testifying officer and the Defendant. On the footage, testifying officer asks the Defendant if he was previously at [the location of the presumed incident] and the Defendant said yes, he was. Testifying officer gets asked a few related questions before its the Defendant's turn on the stand. Oh, boy. Prosecution asks basically the same question as the officer did and asks a question about if he lived in the same area. The Defendant responds that no, he was not at that location and does not live in the area, even though he had confirmed both previously in the video and in previous questioning. So the judge takes over and rephrases the question. Insert a five minute "argument" between the Defendant and the judge where the judge asks "how do you not know where you live" because the Defendant kept going back and forth on if he did or didnt live in the area. After so long, the judge has has enough and sends him back to his seat, where the Defendant proceeds to whip out his phone and starts texting someone. The judge, at this point, has had beyond enough and sends the jury back to the deliberation room for about the third time since the trial started that day.
All of this, of course, happening on the second time we were supposed to be there for trial. The first time, the defence lawyer had brought forward new evidence and we were dismissed until a further date for the prosecution to go over it. Said evidence were photos of damage to his clothing and bruises he claimed to have gotten that day, but really could have happened at any point in time as those were clothes he wore to work at, if im recalling correctly, a factory and the photos werent taken until days after the apparent incident.
Additionally, the victim claimed her phone had been taken by him after the incident, which he left in her car at a later point. He claimed that, even though he already had his phone and, at no point in time had he given it to her, the phone was his.
Story 22 (wife refusing "marital duties" because husband refuses birth control) makes me so sad. The wife clearly didn't want her uterus to be treated like a clown car, but after being a SAHM for a few years it is financially very hard to leave. Remember, ladies, being a SAHM is fine but you ALWAYS need to have an exit fund. No matter how great your partner is now, in an extreme case they can be hit in the head and turn evil, so never let yourself become financially stuck!
Has nothing to do with being financially stuck has to do with rushing to get married because she wanted someone else to take care of her both women and men rushing to get married is the main reason for marriage problems spend at least 2 years with the person before marriage which is nothing if you going to spend the rest of your life with them.
'Uterus treated like a clown car' is a wonderful expression
@@basillah7650 That's a lot of judgement. We don't know how long they were together, but he was treating her like a baby factory and not a person.
@@basillah7650 you understand that, in order to have 8 children together they had to have been enjoying a relatively loving relationship for at least 8 years and seeing as they're obviously religious they probably stick to the year prior to marriage and no baby making room after marriage structure? He just decided the misinterpreted "no birth control allowed scripture" was more important than his wife's health or their finances. It was most likely the part where he decided his pleasure was more important than her survival part that really had her removing the rose tinted glasses and, by then, and she'd been a stay at home parent for YEARS (because once you have multiple children hiring a sitter so you can work stops making any sense) so... Your reply about rushing into things makes absolutely no sense
This is why the divorce water is so high lol
I'm no lawyer but I can think of two stupid ways I've seen lawyers blow cases:
1) I sat on a jury for a murder/robbery/kidnapping trial. One guy shot another guy, etc. For nearly a week we heard testimony from cops and "experts" and even the accused himself. It likely seemed that it could have been a self-defense case and the days of testimony were pointless. The prosecution (for the State) went on and on but finally revealed after nearly four days that the accused was already a felon due to evidence tampering. Ultimately, we had enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused did use more than justifiable lethal force and the jury did convict of murder but all other charges we acquitted because of an extremely sloppy prosecution. A slam-dunk charge was not even brought up, that of a felon being in possession of a firearm. That alone would've sent the guy to prison for several years but the sloppy prosecution never once mentioned it.
2) A friend was involved in a "legal separation" instead of a divorce. Both parties agreed to the division of the only asset between them, the house, and they went their separate ways. The guy foolishly decided to go the "cheap" route and used a public online website to determine the value of the house and his very new and inexperienced lawyer never suggested paying for a house appraisal. The girl's lawyer, of course, never brought it up, since it's not the lawyer's job to tell the other lawyer how to do their job. The girl got an appraisal done and knew the true value of the home. When the house was sold and the separation was final the guy lost more than $20,000 in equity because he didn't have an appraisal that proved the actual value of the home.
I mean this is my personal opinion but I really hate some laws, like the right to own a gun as a felon somehow being wrong.
There are a ton of non violent felonies, or possible trumped up charges against you when dealing with cops.
Like the point of prison allegedly is to say they served their time, and should be allowed back into society, either the government trusts then to be good or they dont, if they dont keep them locked up, yet the gov strips away an alleged fundamental right? It doesnt make sense, and also an alleged felon they are saying doesnt deserve to protect themselves or their family?
To me it would matter what the felony charge was, was it armed robbery? Or was it fraud? Drug possession? Prostitution? Its a BS system.
I mean dont get me wrong, while I am defending rights of some people, I would also be incredibly harsh on criminals personally… I think the D penalty should be used with undeniable proof like a video, etc, for murder, grape, armed robbery.
I would even include grand theft auto, or stealing of money of amounts over 1-2k.
Like the old west rules, you steal a horse, you get hung, a car is a modern day horse. Or at least a removal of a few fingers or hand, how they do it in some countries, and the medieval times. XD
Crimes should not be taken lightly, but those that reform should be given a second chance.
Story 46:
Sadly this is very common with public defender's being paid pennies compared to their private counterparts I was found that some defender's had 2000 cases in a year ontop of just passing the bar.
So alot of public defender's are seriously underpaid and have minutes to talk to their clients who statistically are likely guilty...
The guy that tried to get him by saying "you sure?" Was some phenix Wright ace attorney type stuff
Even Phoenix Wright is nowhere near that dumb.
@@japanpanda2179 I'd say that taking a testimony from a parrot is probably dumber than that. Also, one of the main mechanics of the series is literally to ask if people are sure about their statements
On story 11 the sad thing is the no double jeopardy clause in the bill of rights prevents if right after you are proven innocent by the judge you could scream out, “I KILLED THAT GUY,” and you would not be able to get arrested if they already closed the case.
Not quite. The "double jeopardy" rules prevent you being tried twice for the same crime *on the same set of facts* so if new facts emerge after the trial, they could be used to try you. It is exceedingly rare for that to happen though
Not a lawyer, but my understanding is that double jeopardy doesn’t necessarily apply if the trial ends without a verdict being rendered (eg, the prosecution drops the case, or it gets dismissed on a technicality). It’ll probably make their case harder, but it’s not entirely out of the question.
All they would need to do is get new different charges to stick
@Tall Troll I’m pretty sure that Double Jeopardy still applies even if there is new evidence. At least in the US.
@hkfifty8 Yes I understand it’s viewed as a continuation of the same jeopardy in such cases.
Honestly, kinda like this channel because even though it's just reddit readings, it's actually well done. There's effort put into the narration. Well done.
Story 26: You sometimes let the other person deny a certain claim for hours as a way to show the judge that their word is untrustworthy. Now anything THEY claim has to be backed up by hard PROOF while you have a little slack on your claims.
In that first story, not everyone who graduates law school goes on to work as a lawyer, so it's probably not wrong to say that it's not that high. However, that lawyer probably deserves to be laughed at nonetheless
Back In my late teens I got pulled over for turning around in a school parking lot, long story short they found a weed pipe and the officer asked me if I could give some dealers names when the detective got back from vacation and in exchange he would let me go on the spot. I said sure, and went on my way. Never having any Intentions of ever talking t the detective and so I ducked him for 9 months at which point a warrant was sent out for my arrest. I turned myself in, got a lawyer and the lawyer tells me they don't even have my pipe in their evidence locker, got off scot free but the judge gave me a very dirty look.
See the smart thing for them to have done was make a physical list and asked for the bong(I heard they're cheap but I could be wrong).
Glad you got off it, but you really didn't need to extend it for over 9 months.
I was in court for some traffic tickets. one of the guys was there for a possession charge. turns out he was turning himself in for something else and forgot to empty the pot out of his pocket. this was in California, but before it was legal
another time I was in court (still traffic stuff ), but there was a bunch of us from the jail. The judge starts by saying, "If everyone pleads either, guilty or no contest you can.go home with time severed." Then he calls the first name, the defendant stands " how do you pleas?" " not guilty" he says.....we all groaned
When the jackass of the class askes the teacher about the homework being due at the end there
Just *groans of annoyance and exhaustion* "Dude, stfu" lmao
There are the rare cases when someone represents themself and wins. But usually they've been properly preparing for a while, and have consulted an actual lawyer beforehand.
If I was a lawyer hearing these cases, I would have a permanent face palm mark on my forehead.
So Sokka from the Avatar episode "The Cave of Two Lovers"?
My son is a lawyer - a contract lawyer!!! Now I can understand why he didn’t want to be a litigator!!!!
Not a lawyer, but attended some courts when I was in law school.
In this case, person A had allegedly hit person B in the face. Person B claimed he had to go to the hospital and claimed about 5k euro in damages.
Judge: "You claim to have 5k euro in medical bills. Can you show them to me? Because the only thing I can find in your file is a 50 euro cab bill"
Person's B lawyer proceeds with completing freaking out and yelling at the judge like: "I wasn't there, ask my client"
The face of the judge said it all...
Not sure if that’s down to a lying client or an incompetent lawyer, or both.
I still think both
I can believe most of these just based on what I've literally saw with my own eyes.
One of my old friends had to go to court for a traffic ticket with a pill fob full of M*th around his neck on a lanyard.
Another guy I knew had a court case for no operators license and drove himself there with 3 unregistered firearms in his back seat.
When I was 16 or 17 both my brother and I had to go to court for tickets (skateboarding without a helmet). One of the dudes called before us was there for a charge of 'minor in possession of tobacco' and this dude walked up with a ciggie tucked behind his ear. He had apparently turned 18 since being initially charged but damn the judge was not happy with him. Also got chewed out for wearing shorts to court. IIRC he plead guilty so he probably figured you don't really need to look nice if you aren't fighting it.
It is rather sad that seemingly the only thing both sides of the law are uninterested in the actual truth, the only thing that seem to matter to both lawyers and the prosecution is "winning" the caae instead of getting to know what actually happened.
Yeah the justice system is a joke when procedure matters more than the truth.
It's built that way to prevent corruption or tyranny. By having two adversarial sides you always have someone trying as hard as possible to make the truth come out no matter which side is true. If you had one person doing it, whatever they said would be uncontested, and any bias or ulterior motive would take over.
That said, many take it too far, but there's no good way around that.
As to why procedure matters so much, if there are no rules, the side with more force to bear wins. The reason that people can walk free on technicalities is so that you can't lock innocent people up by messing with paperwork. And if the prosecutor does their job right that can't happen.
What exists is the best balance we came up with between protecting the innocent and catching the guilty, using fallible humans. There is no perfect solution here because people aren't perfect. If they were we wouldn't need a justice system.
@@andrewbondarenko5849 That's what makes Law and Order such a good show. What happens out in the world is always a lot different than what happens in the courtroom, and usually for very good reasons. As the saying goes, better to let a guilty man go free than to falsely imprison an innocent man.
Of course losing means you either get jail time , a criminal record , banned from doing things such as driving/owning a gun or lose a ton of money normally lose 50% or more if its a marriage divorce case for example.
My law professor at the start of the year said this, The legal system is not for justice, its for profit
If I ever go to law school and see these cases, they’re definitely the “what not to do” examples
the "are you sure" and the part where the attorney asks for her client to be found guilty is just hilarious
My dads friend got accused of rape by his ex because he dumped her. He spent a ton of time in. She only got exposed as soon as she tried to sue him as soon as got out.
What happened?
@@niallreid7664 she went to jail
@@pjplayz5448 good, how long exactly did she get?
@@KH-uh8pp twice as long as my dads mate
@@pjplayz5448 that is amazing
One court case I heard about from a mate happened in the Rust belt. Small court, and the judge begins to complain of a pot smell. No one owned up to it. Then someone screamed, as a literal skunk came flying through the courtroom, people jumping up and screaming as the poor bastard ran through people’s legs. Apparently the skunk got in, and was chilling in an air duct, but then got startled. And the rest is history.
😂
I had a friend who got sued for scratching someone’s car, got someone from class to represent him and the guy told a lecture on the falklands war for some reason
I was on a jury and at the start of it the judge addressed the defendant and mispronounced his last name. The name started with the letters rob. The judge pronounced it as "robe". The defendant corrected her with "it's pronounced rob not robe, as in I am going to rob you". The look on his attorneys face was priceless.
Story 43 was from a sitcom, "It's always sunny in Philadelphia"
I've represented myself in a few cases. Nothing major, traffic infractions and the like. I've no legal training. What I do have is basic common sense and the ability to be polite. Sometimes simply being polite and having respect will getcha pretty far. In my case (pun intended) it always got me favorable outcomes.
Imagine trying to unironically do a John Cena.
Also remember when Onion Boy sued the wrong Chris Hansen. That shit was *PRICELESS.*
My stupid ex had a lawyer quit on him in the middle of court. He had beaten me up and I was hospitalized. He was out of jail on bail awaiting his criminal trial when he decided to get a protection order on me claiming I beat him and had me thrown out of my home. The order had a hearing date and he brought an attorney to the hearing. My attorney decided to have a chat with his attorney showing him photos of me in the hospital along with the fact that on the date my ex claimed I had beat him, he had a restraining order on him. When our case was called, his attorney approached the judge saying they were dropping the protection order because his client is a criminal who is abusing the court to intimidate his victim. He angrily stormed out of court and my ex was running to catch up to him. Our case never went to trial because he was persuaded to sign a plea deal.
4:58 Minor note, there is a (legal) difference between “innocent” and “not guilty”. (Also not a lawyer, but I do watch a few on TH-cam, so I learned a couple things. More “trivia” than “important things”, but still.)
I recall hearing that, but i cant recall what it is.
Something to do with Not Guilty being that you might still have done it, but the Prosecution couldnt prove it?
No one is ever ruled “innocent” in any case. The determination is always about affirming guilt. (Yes= guilty, no= not guilty)
Story 41: the cops didn't do anything wrong there. If you have your hands concealed, they have the full legal right to ask you to show them, and a command to stand up for their safety is perfectly lawful. He could of shown his hands instead and that would of been lawful but don't expect it to go the way you want
Yeah people find so many reasons to hate cops They complain about things that aren’t even problems other then just how shit works
Exactly. People try to hide knives and weapons like that all the time.
@@gokuxsephiroth4505 fr, actually seen that happen
Unless you’re not under arrest or being detained.
But the friend didn't have to let them into the house unless they had a warrant.
Story 46: Public defenders are often overworked. It is entirely possible that OP's jurisdiction needs more public defenders and their lawyer is overworked and not a crackpot.
Can't remember where I saw I saw this, but it was at a hearing, and the guy was getting indicted for drug possession (weed I think). Hearing ends and the guy lights a blunt IN THE COURTROOM ON CAMERA. Judge had him remanded to jail.
Maybe an anecdotal one, but there was a lawyer deposing a pathologist. Lawyer was asking if he was sure a said person was deceased.
Lawyer: "How do you know he's dead?"
Pathologist: "I performed an autopsy on him, I'm sure he's dead,"
Lawyer: "But how do you know?"
Pathologist: "His brain is in a jar on my desk, he is dead"
Lawyer: "Are you sure?"
Pathologist: "Well, I suppose he could be up and practicing law somewhere"
Actual human voice really feels different, it's so good. :)
I was arrested for criminal mischief. The judge told me I needed to get a lawyer at my own expense unless I could prove I couldn't afford one. I couldn't and saidI that I didnt know what I did was a crime. He gave the typical response that ignorance of the law is no excuse, so I replied "then why do I need a lawyer?"
He looked stumped and all he could think of was "because I told you to"
Then gave me a public defender
I can't wrap my mind around why him telling you ignorance of the law is no excuse had you asking why you would need a lawyer let alone why that exchange would result in a public defender... I do understand why he would be stumped though; I am as well... I reread it multiple times trying to understand what the two had to do with one another or what you were attempting to get across
@Smiley Pariah Duh. Because if everyone knows the law then why would they need a lawyer? Its pretty obvious.
@Smiley Pariah Exactly, so ignorance of the law is an excuse . That's why most people need a lawyer. The judge obviously agreed with me since he gave me a free lawyer.
@Smiley Pariah That still doesn't answer why people would be required to have a lawyer if ignorance of the law is not excuse.
There's nothing in the law that says defendants have to have a lawyer. It's up to the defendant.
@Smiley Pariah You're wrong there is no law that everyone must have a lawyer. Just because you represent yourself doesn't make you a lawyer. You have to have a license to be a lawyer. Having a lawyer is up to the defendant unless he in unable or unwilling to represent himself.
She actually said that my question made a lot of sense, which is probably why she changed her mind and gave me a lawyer without me having to prove I couldn't afford one.
What I love most about your videos is that you'll actually interject to offer your own opinion.
Well that and the fact that you're an actual human reading these.
I just wish the text transcribing his thoughts was different from the main story one. Font, color, size, whatever, just make it distinct somehow!
I'm the opposite, hate the commentary, trying the channel again after a break of it.
26:39 "It was an accident. I didn't think it was loaded." ~ Alec Baldwin
as someone who has never studied the law or knows anyone who studies the law i can confirm in lawschool they do in fact teach you to always say "are you sure?"
@@jogermaine8600Are you sure?
Love the hunt gameplay btw. Good stuff
Thank you!! I was looking for a comment that named the game lol
What with how stupid some people are, I genuinely don’t understand how they are smart enough to commit a crime
reminds me of a story where a guy who represented himself ACCIDENTALLY won by convincing the jury that he was too incompetent to have commited the crime!
I arrested a defendant on multiple bad checks. I even had copies of the checks to show him. He said he never even had a checking account at that bank, and plead not guilty. I had him sign the 4 pleas, one for each check, and gave him a hearing date.
His "not guilty " signatures, matched the checks perfectly.
Calling the Judge an alien is worst idea ever!
My aunt is a stenographer for federal court. Shortly after 9/11 a guy and his son were caught plotting to blow up a massive propane storage facility (the estimated area of destruction put my grandparents house on the edge of significant damage and complete destruction and they were 5 miles away). To prepare her machine to input the terminology correctly and have it spelled right she needed to perform some internet searches. She went to the judge for approval to search for bomb making just in case she was investigated and that information was found. It was granted. While researching she happened to come across a webpage in Arabic... She immediately noped out of that page and reported it to the authorities. TLDR: court reporter searching bomb making for her steganography machine finds a site written in Arabic.
You point?
You do know English is not the only spoken language in the world.
Bomb making is something you can find in pretty much any language.
@@lakshayahlawat5761 it was shortly after 9/11 dude and I'm fairly certain Internet searches normally priorities the language you use when searching
@@shadowrosegaming3566 Wrong, internet searches did not start doing that until the internet companies them selves starting blocking websites could search for any how to kill or bomb making website and it appears in any language use a vpn and you still get them appearing these websites do have english and other languages in the website so people can get them in searches.
I don't know about the US, but in the UK we have a saying, something along the lines of "any lawyer who represents himself in court, has a fool for a client!".
"With God as my witness, I am that fool!" Gomez Addams
And an idiot for counsel.
My brother went to his hearing after speaking with his lawyer, he told his lawyer he was going to plea guilty and take the plea deal. When the judge asked him how he was going to plea he looked at the judge and said, "I plea the fifth." He refused to answer any other questions and kept repeating the same sentence. His lawyer was pissed.
I love how he makes fun of the ones that are obviously fake
Depending on how old the guy was, I’m pretty sure that oil story wouldn’t fly nowadays. I think commerce clause has expanded to include things that “can affect” interstate business, but I’ve been wrong MANY times before
If wheat that stayed completely on a farm was held to have sufficiently impacted interstate commerce enough for federal law to be applied, surely gasoline that was actually sold to the public would have as well.
There was this Camorra member in Italy who represented himself and his other defendants. When defending himself against the accusation that he murdered someone, he actually used "We", as in him and his criminal organization. This was one of the key pieces of evidence used to convict him. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.
To reiterate a famous quote, “an attorney who represents them self has a fool for a client”.
I have a story. It is a story of how I almost died.
I was about 4 or 5 when this happened. One day I decided that I wanted to go to the backyard and swing on the swing set we had. That day though was particularly windy. So I was swinging on my swing and I heard my family yelling at me to come inside. I ignored them and decided to look up. When I did I noticed that my trampoline was flying above my head. Instead of screaming and running off however, I thought "I'm a wizard and I'm making the trampoline fly!" Then someone grabs and pulls me inside. By the time I got in the door I heard a loud crash. I look behind me and see that my trampoline fell right on the swing set. When I saw this I went over to the swing set, found a swing that worked and started swinging again. I WASN'T EVEN PHASED! It was a couple of days later that I realized that I could have died.
The first one lmaooooooo!
Man requests Judge to grant a Restraining Order against his wife. He noted that since she had been getting treatment for cancer she no longer carried out her household or marital duties. The Judge took out a Restraining Order form to the great satisfaction of the man. However his smirk disappeared when he discovered the Judge had restrained him instead.
the "NEVER represent yourself in court" thing is not actually a question of whether or not you know the law, it's because nearly the entire population of the legal profession will do almost literally _anything_ in their power to prevent that from being a viable option.
the other problem is that what happens in a court room rarely has a damned thing to do with the law in question or even the events that got you in there so even if it is a straight up blatantly obvious indisputable _fact_ that you are right that doesn't mean as much as you might think.
I think people would want to represent themselves in court is because it'd be cheaper than to hire a lawyer. Then again, I don't know much about the court system myself.
Been a while since I’ve seen a video like this with something going on in the background. I forgot how much it adds to it.
Story 43, sounds like, down to the detail, the plot of the Season 5 Ep of It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia “The World Series Defense”. Nice!
Not a lawyer. Dad went back to University when I was a teenager and took an introductory law module as an elective his first year. Instead of an exam, the final assessment was a mock trial which families were allowed to watch from the gallery.
“Judge” was the Professor, and all the witnesses, lawyers and jury were made up of students from the class. Each “witness” was given a mock affidavit of their testimony. Dad’s role was the arresting officer.
Dad was on direct examination by the Prosecutor. Prosecutor at one point requested Judge’s permission to retrieve check something in his case notes before asking the next question.
Defense Counsel Objected on the grounds that “I just think he should be more prepared”. Most of the Gallery was trying really hard not to giggle at this poor student’s expense while the Judge, with the patience of a saint, explained that it’s not a valid objection and she would have to overrule it.
For reference Dad wasn’t doing a law degree but his campus offered the module as an elective in another course.
The second part of number 59... I really want to shake that lawyer's hand because he lawyered so hard I nearly died laughing.
Even seasoned lawyers know, generally, not to represent themselves, because they know they can't be objective if they're doing so, and lack of objectivity can make things harder to argue things correctly in court.
Why does it tell me to enjoy the video and have a great day before the end. It trips me out and I start panicking trying to find more reddit stories.
regarding restraining orders, (former court clerk here): yeah. We had people like that all the time. They thought because the order "expired" that day, they could openly threaten / talk to the person who literally had an order of protection against them... in front of cops.
People really do be stupid. (Ps, it usually ended with the judge granting the full order)
Story 56: seems the transport lawyer didn't get his "monetary gift" from that victim and thusly shat all over his case until he slipped revealing he didn't even have the paperwork.
Hey mainly facts I love your videos but I have one question what game are you playing in the background it looks really good
That's what I wanna know!
I was arrested durring a protest in Boston with something like 100 other people. Judge was a trump supporter, DA wanted biden. They get in an argument about politics in the court room, judge has DA held in contempt of court, DA drops all charges for everyone that didn't result in injury. I had inciting violence, assualt on officer, and lethal weapons charges just dropped because two professional adults threw temper tantrums. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad I didn't have to do the time, but it kinda killed what little faith I had left in the legal system.
Thank God the Trump judge was there to hold that spoiled da n give him a legal lesson
And not a pompous liberal judge who will actively ignore any crony while slamming the are over the head of EVERYONE ELSE
@@nautgamingnautgaming9949 are you stupid?
reminds me of a shocking story that said most law is based on precedents, some which were effectively RANDOM choices!
especially Supreme Court decisions, "anything that makes it that far MUST be IMPOSSIBLE to resolve with LOGIC."
I was a juror. Defendant was accused of hitting a parked car across from the house he'd been visiting where he drank 'just a couple beers'. According to the police report, the defendant told the police the other car had hit him.
Maybe I'm just not understanding, but if he's on trial for murder, him only getting 2 years doesn't sound like he blew it
Story 43 wasn't friends. But it WAS It's always sunny in Philadelphia, so close enough 😆
13:06
In the words of Sun God Phoenix Wright:
"Because it's funny."
I used to live in Baltimore, Maryland. I went to a local sandwich shop with my 6 foot 8 inch 350 pound + brother from another mother who is white. I am black. We were both dressed in camouflage. I place our sandwich order and pay. My big brother sits at our table waiting for our order to be ready. In comes this very extremely drunk man with a knife demanding money from me while I am standing at the counter. I ask the people behind the counter to please call the police and they refuse. My brother wants to fight him but I signal him no let me handle it. My brother used to be a Marine and could have killed the guy. I asked the people behind the counter to call the police again or else I'd have to deal with it. Again the people running the place refused to call the police.
The drunk guy had a rather big Bowie knife. The drunk hit me causing some damage, I immediately snatched the SWEDA Electronic Cash Register from the counter and quickly went about beating the knife welding thug over the head with the heavy base of the cash register. Boy did he bleed. This was a rather flimsy cash register so buttons flew off in every direction as I beat the man in the head. I also threw and hit him with a bottle of orange soda as he ran beaten and bloody to an adjacent clothing store where he hid under rack displays.
Meanwhile my big Marine brother and I were detained in the parking lot with shopping center guards and Baltimore Police. I got sick due to my disabilities. I'm also autistic. I was rushed to the Union Memorial Hospital and seen to in the Emergency Room. Weeks later we went to court. The drunk man in the dinner was there but too drunk that day so the judge postponed the case. A few weeks later we are in court again. The man is drunk again but not as much so the judge let the case go on. Dude got 6 months after it came to light he also robbed elderly people. The funny thing I saw in court that day was a guy in court being called before the judge and he had a pot cigarette behind his ear.
The judge asked him is that a pot cigarette you have behind your ear. The black guys eyes got big as saucers as he put his hands up toward his ear stopped by the bailiffs. The bailiffs took the pot cigarette and placed it before the judge who with an indignant tone asked, "WHY DID YOU BRING POT INTO MY COURT ROOM! In a weak voice the guy answered I wanted to "DE-STRESS AFTER MY TIME IN COURT TODAY!" The judge gave him a cell in which he could "De-Stress!" My big white guy biker brother picked me up and carried me from the court room. The judge asked why I could not walk out on my own. My brother said in his big deep slow voice. JUDGE SIR this courtroom is not wheelchair accessible SIR! This was way back before ADA! My brother asked the Judge MY I PROCEED SIR? The judge said yes. My brother whispered in a deep slow voice even the deaf could hear asking me if he did good. I patted his head saying aren't you a nice fat bear. He growled we laughed and we went to I-HOP for breakfast to De-Stress after that mornings stressful court room experience!
One of these is a its always sunny in philadelphia episode.
That linen closet one was an ASIP episode, a great one at that!
My brother's best friend is a criminal defense lawyer.
He's basically the Irish version of Phoenix Wright, but with more brains.
He can't tell this story to others without cracking up.
So, back in '09, he was defending an absolute bozo from a DUI charge.
He asked the witness, who claimed she saw the bozo swig a bottle of liquor behind the wheel, "Did you at any time see Mr. (Defendant) drink while driving?"
Bozo raises his hand, and I SHIT YOU NOT, looks the judge dead in the eye and says:
"With all due respect, Your Honour, it was only 4 sips."
My brother's friend just facepalmed as the guilty verdict was passed.
"Are you sure" is actually pretty common during cross examinations. What it is used for is to trap people in a lie in order to prove perjury without giving the person testifying enough wiggle room to say "I was mistaken". It is a powerful weapon, because if they say they are sure, then they are cementing their perjury. If they say they are not sure, it shows that their testimony is inaccurate or shaky. A well used "Are you sure?" is an absolutely lethal weapon in court.
Refreshing to see some Hunt: Showdown gameplay as background today!
Also most smart lawyers don't even represent themselves
ALL smart lawyers never represent themselves, if they represent themselves they aren't smart lawyers.
Guy represents himself on a speeding ticket. He questions the cop, who says he clocked him at 75 in a 55 zone. The guy argues that the cop actually clocked the truck that he was passing. Judge asks cop if he will agree that his radar actually clocked the truck that the guy WAS PASSING. The cop says yes, the judge finds the guy guilty of speeding. The guy had a puzzled look until he figured it out.
21:48 story 43. Not sure if it was an episode of friends but that was definitely an episode of it's always sunny in philadelphia. Season 5 episode 6 "the world series defense"
That was funny Michael!
Story 49: Truckers have a thing where they pay a certain amount of their paycheck to their employer so they will eventually own the truck. The trucker was most likely using that system.
Not a lawyer but one I read about. A guy was accused of stalking a woman. He was non compos mentis and throughout the trial, he sang the line "Going to the chapel and we're gonna get married" for 45 minutes non-stop until the judge ordered him removed from the courtroom because he was disrupting the court too much. The defense attorney, who was court appointed, requested that his client be sent to a mental institution, which the judge granted, but he also granted the 1000 foot zone in which the defendant had to stay away from the woman he was stalking.
That judge has a lot of patience, personally I would have removed him after three or four minutes of singing XD
@@krankarvolund7771 Supposedly he warned the guy about four times during his performance. He kept going despite being warned.
@@chrisnemec5644 That's what I said, a lot more patience than me, I would have warned him four times in five minutes ^^
Something to note: in the United States, police do not require a search warrant to search a car. If there is probable cause that a car contains illegal items or evidence of a crime, then they can search the car without obtaining a search warrant.
Bro what game is on in the background? Looks cool.