This is just bloody amazing and true!

Borboletta said:
This fantastic short film dramatically re-enacts an incredible court scene. Watch through to the end. It is worth it.

Click to expand...
LOL I used to work for an Environmental attorney and we had arguments like that all the time. He'd ask me a question like "and at what time did this event occur?" and I'd say "I have no idea" and he'd be like "but you were there?" and I would be like "Yes, I was."

"Well were you wearing a watch?"
"Of course I was?"
"So you know what time it was?"
"No, not really."
"I don't mean the specific minute and second but you knew generally what time it was?"
"No, not really."
"Did you not look at your watch or a clock while this was happening?"
"Yes, I probably did."
"So you know what time it was then?"
"No, not really."
Him raising is voice "HOW THE HELL IS THAT POSSIBLE?"
"Well time dilation for one."
"Time dilation? WTF is that?"
"Well time is perceived by us as moving linearly but time, as Einstien proved, isn't linear. It's effected by space and gravity."
"WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH YOU WITNESSING THE EVENT?"
"Well since the event occurred some distance in front of me moving towards a large office building the time in which the event occurred was observed by me after the fact due to time dilation so I couldn't possibly know what time it was when it happened."
Him "ARRRGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!"

Managing Engineer to Him "He's right you know?"

Him as he's running out of the room "ARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!"

Managing Engineer and Myself. " :) "
 
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople said:
LOL I used to work for an Environmental attorney and we had arguments like that all the time. He'd ask me a question like "and at what time did this event occur?" and I'd say "I have no idea" and he'd be like "but you were there?" and I would be like "Yes, I was."

"Well were you wearing a watch?"
"Of course I was?"
"So you know what time it was?"
"No, not really."
"I don't mean the specific minute and second but you knew generally what time it was?"
"No, not really."
"Did you not look at your watch or a clock while this was happening?"
"Yes, I probably did."
"So you know what time it was then?"
"No, not really."
Him raising is voice "HOW THE HELL IS THAT POSSIBLE?"
"Well time dilation for one."
"Time dilation? WTF is that?"
"Well time is perceived by us as moving linearly but time, as Einstien proved, isn't linear. It's effected by space and gravity."
"WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH YOU WITNESSING THE EVENT?"
"Well since the event occurred some distance in front of me near a large office building the time in which the event occurred was observed by me after the fact due to time dilation so I couldn't possibly know what time it was when it happened."
Him "ARRRGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!"

Managing Engineer to Him "He's right you know?"

Him as he's running out of the room "ARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!"

Managing Engineer and Myself. " :) "
Click to expand...

Hmm, the time difference would be in the order of picoseconds!
 
I had an opposing attorney do that to me when I was an expert witness at a trial. I wasn't buying it, he kept at it, and the judge finally told him basically to pound it.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
LOL I used to work for an Environmental attorney and we had arguments like that all the time. He'd ask me a question like "and at what time did this event occur?" and I'd say "I have no idea" and he'd be like "but you were there?" and I would be like "Yes, I was."

"Well were you wearing a watch?"
"Of course I was?"
"So you know what time it was?"
"No, not really."
"I don't mean the specific minute and second but you knew generally what time it was?"
"No, not really."
"Did you not look at your watch or a clock while this was happening?"
"Yes, I probably did."
"So you know what time it was then?"
"No, not really."
Him raising is voice "HOW THE HELL IS THAT POSSIBLE?"
"Well time dilation for one."
"Time dilation? WTF is that?"
"Well time is perceived by us as moving linearly but time, as Einstien proved, isn't linear. It's effected by space and gravity."
"WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH YOU WITNESSING THE EVENT?"
"Well since the event occurred some distance in front of me moving towards a large office building the time in which the event occurred was observed by me after the fact due to time dilation so I couldn't possibly know what time it was when it happened."
Him "ARRRGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!"

Managing Engineer to Him "He's right you know?"

Him as he's running out of the room "ARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!"

Managing Engineer and Myself. " :) "
Click to expand...

Yeah, the difference would be so minuscule as to have no meaning.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
LOL I used to work for an Environmental attorney and we had arguments like that all the time. He'd ask me a question like "and at what time did this event occur?" and I'd say "I have no idea" and he'd be like "but you were there?" and I would be like "Yes, I was."

"Well were you wearing a watch?"
"Of course I was?"
"So you know what time it was?"
"No, not really."
"I don't mean the specific minute and second but you knew generally what time it was?"
"No, not really."
"Did you not look at your watch or a clock while this was happening?"
"Yes, I probably did."
"So you know what time it was then?"
"No, not really."
Him raising is voice "HOW THE HELL IS THAT POSSIBLE?"
"Well time dilation for one."
"Time dilation? WTF is that?"
"Well time is perceived by us as moving linearly but time, as Einstien proved, isn't linear. It's effected by space and gravity."
"WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH YOU WITNESSING THE EVENT?"
"Well since the event occurred some distance in front of me moving towards a large office building the time in which the event occurred was observed by me after the fact due to time dilation so I couldn't possibly know what time it was when it happened."
Him "ARRRGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!"

Managing Engineer to Him "He's right you know?"

Him as he's running out of the room "ARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!"

Managing Engineer and Myself. " :) "
Click to expand...

its no wonder then that he fired you.......
 
Right said:
I had an opposing attorney do that to me when I was an expert witness at a trial. I wasn't buying it, he kept at it, and the judge finally told him basically to pound it.
Click to expand...
I had something similar happen to me at a deposition. The attorney didn't understand my answers and I refused to explain it to him since his client was essentially trying to steal our patent. He asked a question. I answered it. The fact that he didn't understand the answer was not my problem and I told him so and our attorney agreed with me.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
its no wonder then that he fired you.......
Click to expand...
No, actually we got along very well. He was just being a lawyer. He liked to argue and he liked to scream. It was his nature, I never took it personal and we used to have fun at his expense and he was a good sport about it. He self admitted that science wasn't his cup of tea.

Actually he was one of the more important mentors I had in the early part of my career. I learned a lot from him.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I had something similar happen to me at a deposition. The attorney didn't understand my answers and I refused to explain it to him since his client was essentially trying to steal our patent. He asked a question. I answered it. The fact that he didn't understand the answer was not my problem and I told him so and our attorney agreed with me.
Click to expand...

The last deposition I did took about 8 hours. It was a large residential development where many homes were placed on high fills, and 7 or 8 homes had foundation damage, two of which I had to condemn. I worked for the home builder and he was suing the developer, the earthwork contractor, and their engineer. I had already sat through the deposition of the engineer that my client was suing and listening to his high-brow technical terms, knowing that a jury might be impressed with his qualifications, but would have no idea what he was talking about.

The attorney for the developer was an attractive 40-something gal, and after going through my qualifications, not nearly as impressive on geotechnical work as the developer's engineer (but much more broad-based), she started off asking me questions trying to lead me to dispute his findings. After answering the same question put several different ways I just leaned back in my chair and looked at her intently, then asked her if it wouldn't be easier if I just told my chronological version of the events, starting from when I first arrived on site two years prior. She gave me a big smile, looked at the other attorneys, then looked back at me and leaned back in her chair and told me to proceed.

The lawyer's goal during a deposition, for those who have never been through the process, is to catch the witness in some kind of inconsistency, then use that to hang them during the trial. By agreeing to allow me to talk at length, I was almost certain, so she thought, to give her huge opportunities to find inconsistencies later, when she had time to go over the text of my discussion in great detail.

I then proceeded to talk for about 90 minutes with little interruption, progressing through the stages of my investigation and findings using plain language that a jury would understand. I had observed the damage to the finished homes, developed a theory what was happening at depth, gathered evidence to prove the theory, and found that my theory was wrong. I then developed a second theory based on the findings, gathered different evidence to prove it, and succeeded. The scientific method. She did a brief follow-up, then I answered questions from the two other opposing attorneys. During our lunch break I sat down at her table and we discussed everything except the case. She was delightful company, her kids were about ten years younger than mine and we had several stories to share.

I can only guess on the content of her conversation with her client the next day. My case against them was devastating and easy for the lay person to understand. I came across as likable and wanting the jury to understand the facts of the case, which were really quite simple: I was accusing the grader of burying clearing debris, branches and brush, at the bottom of the high fills. We proved this by boring holes next to the ruined homes, down the the level of the debris, finding "wood and crap" where I had theorized. Their engineer had tried to impress us with his experience and use of precise technical terms ("percentage of organics"), noting that the borings were placed "several feet" away from the foundations of the affected homes, and hammering away at my first theory that was wrong in some attempt to discredit me. I used simple analogies and terms that a 4th grader would understand.

The case never went to trial and my client received most of what he was asking for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top