I found my old assignment for my intro to law class: ROTFLMFAO! even then I still had a sense of humor!!! Mr. Sanders is called by the plaintiff. He says on direct examination that he saw the accident the defendant was traveling seventy miles per hour, the victim was knocked fifty feet, the defendant’s car traveled 150 feet before it stopped, and when the defendant got out of his car, he appeared to be drunk. The defendant’s cross-examination as follows: Q: Mr. Sanders, I’ll try not to take too long. On the day of the accident, you were looking out your window at about 7:15 p.m., correct? A: Yes, when the accident happened. Q: And you kept watching after the accident? A: Yes. Q: You saw the driver get out of his car? A: Yes. Q: Did you get a good look at him? A: Yes. Q: You’re sure it was my client, Mr. Drun Kard? A: Oh, yes. Q: So did you watch him for several seconds, then? A: Yes. He got out of his car and walked quickly over to where Mr. Otter’s body was. Q: Would you say it took four or five seconds for him to get there? One two, three ,four ,five? A: Uh, yes, that’s about right. Q: Did Mr. Drun Kard go straight to where Mr. Otter’s was lying? A: Yes. Q: He didn’t fall down did he? A: What? Q: Mr. Drun Kard didn’t fall down, did he? A: No. Q: And he didn’t stagger around? A: No. Q: And he appeared to be walking quickly but normally, is that right? A: Yes. Q: Just before the accident, were you looking at the street in front of your house? A: I don’t know. I guess so. Q: That’s Main Street, correct? And so on. This would be a type of questioning that one would see and hear in an interview type situation in a court of law. ( The chiming of bell from Law and Order is omitted)
Posted on: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:26:28 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015