NationStates Jolt Archive

things people said. (http://rinkworks.com/said/).
It's brilliant, purely brilliant.
my favorite: * Lawyer: "Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?"
* Witness: "No."
* Lawyer: "Did you check for blood pressure?"
* Witness: "No."
* Lawyer: "Did you check for breathing?"
* Witness: "No."
* Lawyer: "So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?"
* Witness: "No."
* Lawyer: "How can you be so sure, Doctor?"
* Witness: "Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar."
* Lawyer: "But could the patient have still been alive nevertheless?"
* Witness: "Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law somewhere."
Lawyers say the damnedest things.

You know what I find funny? That this devoid of context quote is cited dozens of times as "funny things lawyers say" taken from "official court room documents" yet not once have I ever seen a citation to said documents...

What case is this from, pray tell? What context was it in? How convenient that the doctor on the stand being questioned by a lawyer would come up with such a perfect and witty comeback, and all "preserved for posterity"...yet without a single citation.

You know what I find funny? That this devoid of context quote is cited dozens of times as "funny things lawyers say" taken from "official court room documents" yet not once have I ever seen a citation to said documents...

What case is this from, pray tell? What context was it in? How convenient that the doctor on the stand being questioned by a lawyer would come up with such a perfect and witty comeback, and all "preserved for posterity"...yet without a single citation.

My dad just sent me this last week. Same thing he did with the supposed quotes of George Carlin about "In God We Trust" on the currency.

You know what I find funny? That this devoid of context quote is cited dozens of times as "funny things lawyers say" taken from "official court room documents" yet not once have I ever seen a citation to said documents...

What case is this from, pray tell? What context was it in? How convenient that the doctor on the stand being questioned by a lawyer would come up with such a perfect and witty comeback, and all "preserved for posterity"...yet without a single citation.

Heheheh you must be a lawyer then?

lawers are sometimes a pain, but without them, bizdroids and kings would be an even bigger one. of course sometimes they are anyway. lawers have words, warriors have guns, both can destroy things, and not be much fun.

(and i'd swear i've seen at least two if not more, other threads based on the op's quote)

=^^=
.../\...

You know what I find funny? That this devoid of context quote is cited dozens of times as "funny things lawyers say" taken from "official court room documents" yet not once have I ever seen a citation to said documents...

What case is this from, pray tell? What context was it in? How convenient that the doctor on the stand being questioned by a lawyer would come up with such a perfect and witty comeback, and all "preserved for posterity"...yet without a single citation.

I doubt highly that any real lawyer ever really said anything like that, but it is amusing none the less.

Could very well be an urban legend just like the old lady who sued a microwave company for killing her pet cat who needed to be dried.

Besides even it were true we don't know the context. Does it even need a context you ask? Ain't it just stupid as it is?

Not quite, maybe the lawyer needed make absolutely clear to the jury (if it was a jury trial) that the person was dead. It's never a bad thing to think the ladies and gentlemen of the jury have the IQ of brain-dead chimp. Just as long as they don't know you feel that way about them.

Could very well be an urban legend just like the old lady who sued a microwave company for killing her pet cat who needed to be dried.
Who knows, but I know for damn sure there were some lawsuits being written up after people nearly burned down their houses trying to kill bacteria in their sponges after hearing scientists did it. Of course they didn't bother wetting their sponges first.

Some of it is probably true since I know there are idiots out there who think common sense is a tropical fruit.

Besides even it were true we don't know the context. Does it even need a context you ask?
maybe the jury was made up of ancient Egyptians. They didn't think the brain was of much use (they would suck it out through the nose and throw it away before mummification).
Thus such a jury could well labour under the impression that a person whose brain is in a jar could still be alive.

You know what I find funny? That this devoid of context quote is cited dozens of times as "funny things lawyers say" taken from "official court room documents" yet not once have I ever seen a citation to said documents...

What case is this from, pray tell? What context was it in? How convenient that the doctor on the stand being questioned by a lawyer would come up with such a perfect and witty comeback, and all "preserved for posterity"...yet without a single citation.

In what context could it be reasonable to ask if a guy with no brain in his head could be alive?

Usually when people cry "it was taken out of context," it's not hard to imagine a context in which the statement would be reasonable. Like the guy who recently got into trouble for saying, "there are too many mosques."

The phrase was presented as an implied complaint that the culture is becoming to Islamified. But it would be a reasonable statement if he was saying that a suggested course of action was rendered impractical by the number of mosques to which it would have to be applied.

But how could it be reasonable in any context to not understand that a person can't be alive if their brain is in a jar.

In what context could it be reasonable to ask if a guy with no brain in his head could be alive?

. . .

But how could it be reasonable in any context to not understand that a person can't be alive if their brain is in a jar.

If I am the lawyer, and want to make it absolutly, 100%, completely and totally clear to the jury, without any shadow of a doubt, that the man was dead, and there was absolutly no possible way he could be alive, you're damned right I'm leading the questions in such a way so that the doctor states, with absolute certainty, that the fact that his brain was removed means that he was dead.

You think it's stupid, but remember, lawyers need to be clear to the jury, and half of america doesn't even believe in evolution, do we really expect a lawyer to just trust that everybody on a jury is going to have a working understanding of the fact that no brain = dead?

Your damned right I'm going to ask the question. I don't care if someone on an internet forum some day thinks I sounded silly. For a trial lawyer, that's not the concern.

You know what I find funny? That this devoid of context quote is cited dozens of times as "funny things lawyers say" taken from "official court room documents" yet not once have I ever seen a citation to said documents...

What case is this from, pray tell? What context was it in? How convenient that the doctor on the stand being questioned by a lawyer would come up with such a perfect and witty comeback, and all "preserved for posterity"...yet without a single citation.

Why does it have to be true to be funny? Would you laugh harder if it actually happened or if you knew for sure whether it happened?

Why does it have to be true to be funny? Would you laugh harder if it actually happened or if you knew for sure whether it happened?

a lot of things are funny and fake. The problem is when it gets passed off as true, as something "those silly lawyers" say. Much like that list of "real cases" that demonstrated the need for tort reform by showing all the ludicrus lawsuits out there.

That were all fake.

Lawyer: "So you admit that the man may very well be alive?"
Jury: "*gasp* He operated on a live person. HANG HIM!"