What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

GM's thread about nothing (39 Viewers)

Ignoramus said:
Watching the morning news with Mrs. Ignoramus and the story about the US no longer being the fattest nation in the world was teased and then they went to commercial. I say, "I bet it's Mexico. What do you think?"

She ponders for a second and replies "I don't know, Europe?"

:mellow:
Click to expand...
What was the answer?

 
krista4 said:
Ignoramus said:
Watching the morning news with Mrs. Ignoramus and the story about the US no longer being the fattest nation in the world was teased and then they went to commercial. I say, "I bet it's Mexico. What do you think?"

She ponders for a second and replies "I don't know, Europe?"

:mellow:
Click to expand...
What was the answer?
Click to expand...
Mexico.

It's part of our anti-immigration plan. They move slower and are easier to detect now.

 
I've never been punched, but I have had two instances where someone had to be restrained by their attorney when they tried to come over the table at me. In both instances, the witness thought he was being clever and evasive, but ended up getting boxed in and realized that they had just admitted their knowledge of a fraudulent act.

I usually don't repeat questions (although sometimes I'll circle around to something later in the deposition from a different angle to see if I can get a less guarded answer). Most of the time you get better testimony from someone who isn't being confrontational, so I only mess with deponents if I've tried other angles and I think that pushing their buttons may get them to say something stupid. People who are angry tend to not be as guarded, and can say some pretty damning things.

 
T Bell said:
krista4 said:
Ignoramus said:
Watching the morning news with Mrs. Ignoramus and the story about the US no longer being the fattest nation in the world was teased and then they went to commercial. I say, "I bet it's Mexico. What do you think?"

She ponders for a second and replies "I don't know, Europe?"

:mellow:
Click to expand...
What was the answer?
Click to expand...
Mexico.

It's part of our anti-immigration plan. They move slower and are easier to detect now.
Click to expand...
:lol: Clever plan.

 
-fish- said:
I've never been punched, but I have had two instances where someone had to be restrained by their attorney when they tried to come over the table at me. In both instances, the witness thought he was being clever and evasive, but ended up getting boxed in and realized that they had just admitted their knowledge of a fraudulent act.

I usually don't repeat questions (although sometimes I'll circle around to something later in the deposition from a different angle to see if I can get a less guarded answer). Most of the time you get better testimony from someone who isn't being confrontational, so I only mess with deponents if I've tried other angles and I think that pushing their buttons may get them to say something stupid. People who are angry tend to not be as guarded, and can say some pretty damning things.
Click to expand...
Like Samuel L. Jackson in A Time to Kill.

 
Life lesson: never try to move to Nicaragua with a sick cat.

Our young fuzzy cat who has been in kidney failure since February can't get a rabies shot due to a compromised immune system. Try figuring out whether you can get him into Nicaragua without it. Go ahead, try. One consulate doesn't answer the phone; one speaks only Spanish; one says he's not legally authorized to do anything. I think we're down to convincing our vet to lie, or forging paperwork on our own.

On the much-needed good news side, his latest bloodwork shows great improvement after weeks of our giving him fluids and medication every day. :pickle:

 
krista4 said:
UOFI_316 said:
Hey lawyer types. Has anyone ever punched you while you were taking their deposition?? Would the court reporter write that down?? When a depondent (is that I would be??) answers your question in a way you don't like, why must you keep asking the question just with an emphasis on a different part of it??

On a slightly different topic, if you are reviewing two depositions from two eyewitnesses, and they contradict each other, one of them agrees with your assumptions of what happened, how do you answer the question of "Why don't you believe the other person?" Now what if two people agree with you, and a third has a different statement, shouldn't I be able to take the two peoples word over the one??

I hate lawyers, but none of you.
Click to expand...
I don't do litigation and therefore don't do depositions. What's got you down? :(
Click to expand...
I am an expert witness in a case were a guy fell and got hurt. I based my opinoins as to what happened on sound engineering judgement (in my mind) and quick calculations in my head (my fault for not writing them down as I thought they were obvious).

Other laywer kept hammering the "you have never installed steel before" "you have never driven a forktruck before" and kept asking why I would believe one deposition over the other. The crazy thing is, the deposition I believed was of his client, the guy who fell. I took his word of what he was doing over that of a witness. His arguement is that I am not a doctor, therefore I don't know what happens to your memory when you fall. Isn't that just saying that his clients entire testimony is wrong?? How can he then use his own clients statements as fact?

Oh well, time to go get my girls and have a beer.

 
T Bell said:
UOFI_316 said:
Hey lawyer types. Has anyone ever punched you while you were taking their deposition?? Would the court reporter write that down?? When a depondent (is that I would be??) answers your question in a way you don't like, why must you keep asking the question just with an emphasis on a different part of it??

On a slightly different topic, if you are reviewing two depositions from two eyewitnesses, and they contradict each other, one of them agrees with your assumptions of what happened, how do you answer the question of "Why don't you believe the other person?" Now what if two people agree with you, and a third has a different statement, shouldn't I be able to take the two peoples word over the one??

I hate lawyers, but none of you.
Click to expand...
The court reporter records words, and certain other events (such as the arrival or departure of someone in the deposition proceedings) and nothing more. So, if I was punched, I'd have to sound like a complete tight-### and make a record by saying something along the lines of, "the witness has just punched me in the mouth".

No, I've never been punched by a deponent (the proper word, BTW), though I've certainly pissed off quite a few people (surprise, right?) - I'm usually pretty business-like and don't act like an A hole as that tends to only obstruct what I'm doing; I in fact often can get at least decent working rapport with most witnesses, who tend to appreciate a more efficient, businesslike approach.

With witnesses with disagreeing testimony, most of the time the disparity is left up to the lawyer to argue later as to what it means, but it's certainly fair to ask if one person can explain why their recollection/observation differs from another (without speculating of course). Sometimes they can explain that they had a better view of an event, for example, but usually that's just speculation - it's hard to get into others' minds and know what they saw.

On this last point, I've concluded over the years that people don't lie as much as we're tempted to think when there are different recollections. Often people just experienced something differently, and we all tend to notice different things, such as two people observing a third in a conversation where one person is more attuned to language and speech, and the other to body language and posture. We aren't nearly as reliable and objective as historians and reporters as we like to think, particularly when there's stress or emotion involved.

Asking the same question over and over is a sign of inept lawyering, either on the part of the questioner or the attorney defending the witness or both. I don't do that and I tend to rag on attorneys who do, always objecting "asked and answered" and perhaps "argumentative" if they're trying to restate the prior answer in asking a new one but not doing it accurately. Ultimately, if it's my witness and it's continuing despite my protests, I will start to instruct the witness not to answer the (repeated) questions.

I particularly hate it when the attorney persists despite the witness answering "I don't know" or "I don't remember". While the attorney can make some attempt to jog the witness's memory with additional questions, all too often it seems like attorneys are simply try to invite a speculative answer. A key rule which attorneys often forget is that if a witness answers a question, you are entitled to assume they understood a question as phrased (because the witness is entitled to ask for clarification or restatement/rewording of a question before answering).

Sometimes, though, I'll realize that the wording of my question was a bit sloppy or potentially ambiguous, so I'll go back and restate it to tighten it up. I'm human and make plenty of mistakes during an hours-long deposition. I don't gather that that sort of occasional event is what you're referring to.
Click to expand...
Frankly I try never to get into a position where the deponent gives answers I "don't like." The purpose of the deposition is to find out what people are going to testify to if we get to trial; to nail their story down. If the witness's story is unbelievable, great. Now I've got them trapped to that BS account, and can confront them with opposing evidence either right then or at trial. I try to live by the rule that if anyone at a depo is going to look foolish, it's going to be the other guy, whether that's their lawyer or the deponent.

I definitely hone in on someone, though, if they claim not to remember things that I'm pretty sure they do. I agree that people don't lie as much as the general public think, but they're very comfortable answering "I don't recall," partly because their lawyer told them it was a good out, and partly because they've seen high profile people get away with it. If someone has remembered every key event that works to their benefit but none that don't, I will push on that. Not by repeating the same question; that's dumb. But a line of questioning that goes, "ok, so you remember signing exhibit 1 on January 3 (yes), and your remember signing exhibit 2 on January 3 ... etc etc, but you're not sure if you signed exhibit 12 that day? Why is your memory so good regarding those documents but not this one?" can be pretty powerful when #12 is the key document.

Also, I always try to develop a "just doing my job" persona at a depo. Outright hostility is just counterproductive.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
UOFI_316 said:
krista4 said:
UOFI_316 said:
Hey lawyer types. Has anyone ever punched you while you were taking their deposition?? Would the court reporter write that down?? When a depondent (is that I would be??) answers your question in a way you don't like, why must you keep asking the question just with an emphasis on a different part of it??

On a slightly different topic, if you are reviewing two depositions from two eyewitnesses, and they contradict each other, one of them agrees with your assumptions of what happened, how do you answer the question of "Why don't you believe the other person?" Now what if two people agree with you, and a third has a different statement, shouldn't I be able to take the two peoples word over the one??

I hate lawyers, but none of you.
Click to expand...
I don't do litigation and therefore don't do depositions. What's got you down? :(
Click to expand...
I am an expert witness in a case were a guy fell and got hurt. I based my opinoins as to what happened on sound engineering judgement (in my mind) and quick calculations in my head (my fault for not writing them down as I thought they were obvious).

Other laywer kept hammering the "you have never installed steel before" "you have never driven a forktruck before" and kept asking why I would believe one deposition over the other. The crazy thing is, the deposition I believed was of his client, the guy who fell. I took his word of what he was doing over that of a witness. His arguement is that I am not a doctor, therefore I don't know what happens to your memory when you fall. Isn't that just saying that his clients entire testimony is wrong?? How can he then use his own clients statements as fact?

Oh well, time to go get my girls and have a beer.
Click to expand...
He's playing his games and trying to get as much run on any loose thread he can find or manufacture. If what you did conforms to solid engineering principles, then you're good.

It's a silly evidentiary game but the law makes us play it.

 
-fish- said:
I've never been punched, but I have had two instances where someone had to be restrained by their attorney when they tried to come over the table at me. In both instances, the witness thought he was being clever and evasive, but ended up getting boxed in and realized that they had just admitted their knowledge of a fraudulent act.

I usually don't repeat questions (although sometimes I'll circle around to something later in the deposition from a different angle to see if I can get a less guarded answer). Most of the time you get better testimony from someone who isn't being confrontational, so I only mess with deponents if I've tried other angles and I think that pushing their buttons may get them to say something stupid. People who are angry tend to not be as guarded, and can say some pretty damning things.
Click to expand...
And that's how we learned that Col. Jessup, in fact, did order the Code Red.

 
Many years ago the locally owned restaurant my wife was managing was being sued (slip+fall+drunk).

The laywer for the restaurant was an old family friend of mine. There was a pretty funny part of the deposition that I got to read.

GoodLawyer: So, Melissa...

OtherLawyer: I'm sorry but could council please refer to the deponent(?) as "Mrs. Malloy"?

GoodLawyer: I should point out that I have been a friend of the deponent's family for over 30 years. Mrs. Malloy's father-in-law and my father have been life long friends. But I will try to remember to call her "Mrs. Malloy".

OtherLawyer: Thank you.

GoodLawyer: Now, Melissa...oops, I'm sorry. MRS. Malloy...

 
Homer J Simpson said:
:lawyerchat: activa--zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Click to expand...
going out with a 5' 10" Swedish chick this weekend. She looks like Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca. I think I'm out of my league.

 
krista4 said:
Life lesson: never try to move to Nicaragua with a sick cat.

Our young fuzzy cat who has been in kidney failure since February can't get a rabies shot due to a compromised immune system. Try figuring out whether you can get him into Nicaragua without it. Go ahead, try. One consulate doesn't answer the phone; one speaks only Spanish; one says he's not legally authorized to do anything. I think we're down to convincing our vet to lie, or forging paperwork on our own.

On the much-needed good news side, his latest bloodwork shows great improvement after weeks of our giving him fluids and medication every day. :pickle:
Click to expand...
This prompted me to sit down and have a long talk with my cat today to manage his expectations.

eta - he said he has shots and is willing to move to nica with you.

 
cosjobs said:
krista4 said:
Life lesson: never try to move to Nicaragua with a sick cat.

Our young fuzzy cat who has been in kidney failure since February can't get a rabies shot due to a compromised immune system. Try figuring out whether you can get him into Nicaragua without it. Go ahead, try. One consulate doesn't answer the phone; one speaks only Spanish; one says he's not legally authorized to do anything. I think we're down to convincing our vet to lie, or forging paperwork on our own.

On the much-needed good news side, his latest bloodwork shows great improvement after weeks of our giving him fluids and medication every day. :pickle:
Click to expand...
This prompted me to sit down and have a long talk with my cat today to manage his expectations.

eta - he said he has shots and is willing to move to nica with you.
Click to expand...
I'm in for the cat, the Stoner Poodles, and the little dog that jumps straight up in the air. :thumbup:

 
krista4 said:
cosjobs said:
krista4 said:
Life lesson: never try to move to Nicaragua with a sick cat.

Our young fuzzy cat who has been in kidney failure since February can't get a rabies shot due to a compromised immune system. Try figuring out whether you can get him into Nicaragua without it. Go ahead, try. One consulate doesn't answer the phone; one speaks only Spanish; one says he's not legally authorized to do anything. I think we're down to convincing our vet to lie, or forging paperwork on our own.

On the much-needed good news side, his latest bloodwork shows great improvement after weeks of our giving him fluids and medication every day. :pickle:
Click to expand...
This prompted me to sit down and have a long talk with my cat today to manage his expectations.

eta - he said he has shots and is willing to move to nica with you.
Click to expand...
I'm in for the cat, the Stoner Poodles, and the little dog that jumps straight up in the air. :thumbup:
Click to expand...
What about the chickens?

 
My wife wants to keep a couple chickens for the eggs. How hard is it to keep the little buggers alive with the cats and raccoons we have around here?

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
proninja said:
Officer Pete Malloy said:
proninja said:
My wife wants to keep a couple chickens for the eggs. How hard is it to keep the little buggers alive with the cats and raccoons we have around here?
Click to expand...
wat

Show her this.
Click to expand...
We're a little hippie-ish with our diet and only eat eggs from pastured hens. But yes, my argument has been that paying $5/dozen is better than having chickens.
Click to expand...
I hear ya. I only eat eggs from prairie chickens.
Click to expand...
:thumbup:

 
FDAS said:
Mr.Pack said:
krista4 said:
Abraham said:
I named my last kid. Not sure if this is a boy or girl but will take input/ridicule on my current list:

Boy. First name will be John. Will he called middle name or a John abbreviation (jack). Current listings: Cash, Hendrix, Holden, charles, Knox. (I hate the last one)

Girl: lyla, Layla, Charlie, hazel, Hendrix, Ridley.

Will keep you posted.
Click to expand...
More seriously, John is a great solid name, and Jack is a great nickname. "Cash" seems OK if he goes by Jack. Charles is nice and solid, too (but "Chuck" is not).

I hate all the girls' names except Hazel and Ridley. Had a good friend recently name her daughter Riley, which I think is better than Ridley.
Click to expand...
Named my daughter Merissa.
Click to expand...
I never knew you were Asian.
Click to expand...
:lmao:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

General Malaise
GM's Thread About Everything/GM's Thread About Nothing
1856 1857 1858
Replies
93K
Views
3M
-fish-
-fish-
T
***Official 2014 GMTAN Draft Thread***
34 35 36
Replies
2K
Views
45K
El Floppo
El Floppo
Early_10
***Official*** Seinfeld draft thread
25 26 27
Replies
1K
Views
36K
The Dreaded Marco
The Dreaded Marco

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 29 (members: 0, guests: 29)
Back
Top