This policeman gave an unsuspecting lawyer a dose of his own medicine. When the defense attorney brought the officers integrity into question during a cross examination for a felony trial, the officer had the best comeback EVER:
Q: Officer did you see my client fleeing the scene? A: No sir. But I subsequently observed a person matching the description of the offender, running several blocks away.
Q: Officer who provided this description? A: The officer who responded to the scene.
Q: A fellow officer provided the description of this so-called offender. Do you trust your fellow officers? A: Yes, sir. With my life.
Q: With your life? Let me ask you this then officer. Do you have a room where you change your clothes in preparation for your daily duties? A: Yes sir, we do!
Q: And do you have a locker in the room? A: Yes sir, I do.
Q: And do you have a lock on your locker? A: Yes sir.
Q: Now why is it, officer, if you trust your fellow officers with your life, you find it necessary to lock your locker in a room you share with these same officers? A: You see, sir we share the building with the court complex, and sometimes lawyers have been known to walk through that room.
__________________
Possum; AKA:- Ali El-Aziz Mohamed Gundawiathan
Sent from my imperial66 typewriter using carrier pigeon, message sticks and smoke signals.
These fictitious scenarios get told at most lawyer seminars to get the members in a happy mood prior to a boring "compulsory" listen.
Anyone who had even the slightest knowledge of the Rules of Evidence would know that the supposed questions and answers are not only inadmissible, but would not be even asked. Leading questions, opinion and hearsay are dealt with half way down the first page of Evidence 101 on day one for anyone who has ever studied.
Don't believe everything you read in these newspapers, Possum!
-- Edited by DMaxer on Monday 6th of March 2017 01:28:12 PM
I never said anything about believing - it's merely an (American?) account printed in the Chronical, copied and pasted as indicated.
It is however typical of a Lawyer to quote Rules of Evidence in an irrelevant jurisdiction to obfuscate. To quote an Australian Rule of evidence against an unknown Legal system, unknown State, unknown County, even an unstated Country.
As Navy Nurse rightly points out it is still a good story, factual or otherwise.
One thing I am certain of however is; the opinion of Lawyers by the general public including Law Enforcement.
__________________
Possum; AKA:- Ali El-Aziz Mohamed Gundawiathan
Sent from my imperial66 typewriter using carrier pigeon, message sticks and smoke signals.
I have had a lot to do with police and have always found they have a close bond with lawyers. In fact, a vast number of police either have or are studying law with a view to entering the profession. My poor old dad was a returned soldier and then a police detective and he and his colleagues always encouraged me to enter the profession.
The only thing that would really wind up dad or his colleagues would be if one mentioned military police or railway police. That would get him going for hours. He even arrested a few for over stepping the mark during his time in the job.
-- Edited by DMaxer on Tuesday 7th of March 2017 03:59:33 PM
