crazietalk.net

lawgrad91 wrote:

CathyCA wrote:
Having written what I did above, I realize that you as the prosecutor have the right to amend the charge sheet right up until the point of arraignment. (That's the rule in North Carolina.)

In Virginia, I have the right to amend the charge up until the judge rules on guilt, and the only remedy for the defense should I do so is a continuance.

These defendants don't have lawyers and could prepay the tickets so I won't do anything with the face of the paperwork. If the defendants come in and argue the point, I will let the trooper lose and learn his lesson. Otherwise, I will tell him after court.

I saw him this morning, running radar. He is the kind of guy I worry about. My car is pretty recognizable and I don't go too far over the speed limit, so with most of the troopers I feel fairly safe. Him, not so much.

You can amend the charge right up to the point of the judge's ruling? Wow! That's a lot of power, Madame Prosecutor!

I don't think that our troopers would pull over any of our D.A.'s cars. Our elected D.A. has a custom license plate provided by the State. She blew by me on the Raleigh beltline a few weeks ago. I got the impression then that the troopers and police in Raleigh wouldn't pull her over, either.

lawgrad91 wrote:

DukePA wrote:

lawgrad91 wrote:Another masterpiece from the spellcheck geniuses: I have a sentencing tomorrow on a robbery case. Defendant is one of the most dangerous people who has ever come through the courthouse doors. His own lawyer won't sit in the attorney room with him, preferring to talk to him on the visitation phone for safety reasons.

The shrink that talked to him and is now simultaneously crying the blues for him and singing his praises has in her conclusion that (blah blah blah words words) "To complicate matters further, his mother died of her ADDITION."

Math kills!

Whoa! Is she a forensic Psychiatrist? Sounds bamboozled, to me.

Funny you should ask. I can't find her CV anywhere online.

Hmm. . . I imagine she has "alternative credentials."

Defense witness just described the defendant as her "baby daddy." The judge began rubbing his temples.

When she got off the stand, he told her that "father of my children" is appropriate but "baby daddy" was not.

lawgrad91 wrote:Defense witness just described the defendant as her "baby daddy." The judge began rubbing his temples.

When she got off the stand, he told her that "father of my children" is appropriate but "baby daddy" was not.

But it is in the (urban) dictionary...

YmoBeThere wrote:

lawgrad91 wrote:Defense witness just described the defendant as her "baby daddy." The judge began rubbing his temples.

When she got off the stand, he told her that "father of my children" is appropriate but "baby daddy" was not.

But it is in the (urban) dictionary...

That is what the defense attorney said after court.

lawgrad91 wrote:Defense witness just described the defendant as her "baby daddy." The judge began rubbing his temples.

When she got off the stand, he told her that "father of my children" is appropriate but "baby daddy" was not.

What IS it with these judges who don't know the lingo?

Conversation with male patient last week:

Patient: "It's been 3 months since my bypass surgery. What should my activity level be?"
dd: "You may resume all your prior activities without restrictions."
Patient: "Can I start bowling again?"
dd: "Sure."
Patient: "I have to carry 50 pounds."
dd: "Why?"
Patient: "I have 3 balls."
dd: "I'll be calling some specialty medical journals."

devildeac wrote:Conversation with male patient last week:

Patient: "It's been 3 months since my bypass surgery. What should my activity level be?"
dd: "You may resume all your prior activities without restrictions."
Patient: "Can I start bowling again?"
dd: "Sure."
Patient: "I have to carry 50 pounds."
dd: "Why?"
Patient: "I have 3 balls."
dd: "I'll be calling some specialty medical journals."

devildeac wrote:Conversation with male patient last week:

Patient: "It's been 3 months since my bypass surgery. What should my activity level be?"
dd: "You may resume all your prior activities without restrictions."
Patient: "Can I start bowling again?"
dd: "Sure."
Patient: "I have to carry 50 pounds."
dd: "Why?"
Patient: "I have 3 balls."
dd: "I'll be calling some specialty medical journals."

devildeac wrote:Conversation with male patient last week:

Patient: "It's been 3 months since my bypass surgery. What should my activity level be?"
dd: "You may resume all your prior activities without restrictions."
Patient: "Can I start bowling again?"
dd: "Sure."
Patient: "I have to carry 50 pounds."
dd: "Why?"
Patient: "I have 3 balls."
dd: "I'll be calling some specialty medical journals."

Which reminds me of an old joke...

A recent Scottish immigrant to the U.S. attended his first baseball game. After a base hit, he heard the fans roaring, "Run... run!" The next batter connected heavily with the ball and the Scotsman stood up and roared with the crowd in his thick accent, "R-r-r-un yah bahstard. R-r-run!"
A third batter slammed a hit and again the Scotsman, obviously pleased with his knowledge of the game, screamed, "R-r-r-un ya bahstard, r-r-run will ya."
The next batter's count went to three and two. As the pitch crossed past outside the plate, he held his swing. The umpire called a walk and the Scotsman stood up yelling, "R-r-r-un ya bahstard, r-r-run!" All the surrounding fans giggled quietly and he sat down, confused. A friendly fan, sensing his embarrassment, whispered, "He didn't have to run, he's got four balls."
After this explanation the Scotsman stood up in disbelief and screamed, "Walk PR-R-ROUD, man! Walk Proud!"

What do you do with a tiger with 3 balls? Walk him and pitch to the giraffe!

Free legal advice: If you are going to steal an item from a convenience store, do not pick up other items and BUY THEM WITH YOUR OWN CREDIT CARD.

Our receptionist referred a cold call to me yesterday afternoon. After I talked the caller through the facts of the case and explained the law to him, he replied, "Thank you. It sounds like you know a little bit about the law."

Yup. Some days I do.

CathyCA wrote:Our receptionist referred a cold call to me yesterday afternoon. After I talked the caller through the facts of the case and explained the law to him, he replied, "Thank you. It sounds like you know a little bit about the law."

Yup. Some days I do.

Grrrr.

Guy was supposed to be in court at 9 am. He showed up at 2 pm. Judge asked him why he was late. He said, "cuz I had a little bit to drink."

He blew FOUR TIMES the legal limit. He gets 10 days to dry out.

lawgrad91 wrote:Guy was supposed to be in court at 9 am. He showed up at 2 pm. Judge asked him why he was late. He said, "cuz I had a little bit to drink."

He blew FOUR TIMES the legal limit. He gets 10 days to dry out.

Assuming the four times was today, why was he appearing in court? DUI?

DukieInKansas wrote:

lawgrad91 wrote:Guy was supposed to be in court at 9 am. He showed up at 2 pm. Judge asked him why he was late. He said, "cuz I had a little bit to drink."

He blew FOUR TIMES the legal limit. He gets 10 days to dry out.

Assuming the four times was today, why was he appearing in court? DUI?

Setting his distribution of cocaine case for a guilty plea. The judge told his lawyer this morning to tell him to come to court today or he would be charged with failing to appear. Thankfully, his buddy drove him. On the way out of the courtroom to the jail, defendant yelled to his buddy, "Hey, Barry, you can go. Don't wait for me!" I guess he expected Barry to sit and wait for 10 days.

lawgrad91 wrote:Guy was supposed to be in court at 9 am. He showed up at 2 pm. Judge asked him why he was late. He said, "cuz I had a little bit to drink."

He blew FOUR TIMES the legal limit. He gets 10 days to dry out.

He's probably a regular. (Think Otis in the Andy Griffith Show.)

CathyCA wrote:

lawgrad91 wrote:Guy was supposed to be in court at 9 am. He showed up at 2 pm. Judge asked him why he was late. He said, "cuz I had a little bit to drink."

He blew FOUR TIMES the legal limit. He gets 10 days to dry out.

He's probably a regular. (Think Otis in the Andy Griffith Show.)

Surprisingly, he is not. No criminal record other than the pending drug charge, no DUI's.

We have our fair share of Otis types, but he isn't one of them.

Two co-defendants are charged with robbery of a man in his home for $140 from his wallet. The victim speaks no English. During the preliminary hearing, it comes to light that the victim and the female co-defendant, um, shall we say know each other in the Biblical sense, and that his dinero is helping to pay for her drug addiction.

The defense attorney asked, "How much did you pay her for sex?" Answer: "Twenty dollars."

Question: "Were you having vaginal intercourse or oral sex?" Answer: "I don't understand."

It was fun to watch the defense attorney turn various shades of red, trying to explain the difference. The interpreter turned pretty red as well.