Court: half Corny, half Art.
Those of you who liked "Street Legal" might enjoy this. For the rest of you... my condolences.[Scene: A courtroom. A Witness is being cross-examined by a Lawyer. A Judge observes skeptically.]
Lawyer: So, you say, that on June 23rd, 1997, you saw the defendant repairing the second floor balcony on 245 Wellington avenue?
Witness: That’s correct.
Lawyer: And what were you doing at that time?
Witness: I was walking to work.
Lawyer: And where do you work?
Witness: At the Unemployment office on Wellington avenue.
Lawyer: What is the street address for the Unemployment office?
Witness: 198 Wellington.
Lawyer: And from which direction were you walking to work?
Witness: I was coming from the east, going towards the west.
Lawyer: So in order to get to work, you don’t have to walk past 245 Wellington?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: So you didn’t walk past the house where you claim that you saw the defendant on June 23rd, 1997?
Witness: No, but it’s almost directly across the street from where I work.
Lawyer: So you didn’t walk past the house?
Witness: No.
Lawyer: Well, that’s strange, [picks up paper from his desk] because in the affidavit that you submitted to police, signed June 25th, 1997, it says… actually, could you read the highlighted passage? [hands paper to witness]
Witness: It says “I was walking past the house when I saw a man who was repairing the second-floor balcony.”
[Judge shakes head sceptically]
Lawyer: So, how can we believe what you’re saying now, when you said something different two days after the event allegedly occurred?
[Witness doesn’t answer, gives Lawyer an angry look].
Lawyer: How much credibility can we possibly give your testimony today?
Witness: You have no reason to question my credibility.
Lawyer: How can you say that I have no reason to question your credibility, when you said one thing before and you’re saying something different now?
Witness: You’re making me angry.
Lawyer: Please answer the question, sir.
Witness: You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry.
Lawyer: Your Lordship?
Judge: [insistently] Please answer the question.
Witness: Roar!!!
[Witness’ hands and face turn green; he goes bugeyed. Otherwise, exactly the same.]
Witness: [In extremely deep voice, incensed with rage] I said in my affidavit that I saw the man who was repairing the balcony. I didn’t say that he was repairing the roof at the time. I saw him on my way to lunch at the Marquise Restaurant, which is west of my office. In order to get to the restaurant, I have to walk past the house. I also saw him repairing the second story balcony, but that was in the morning, on my way to work.
Lawyer: [Not at all noticing the Witness’ new demeanour] But in your affidavit, you said you were walking past the house….
Judge: [Interrupting] Move on, Counsellor.
Lawyer: But your Lordship…
Judge: There’s no reason to belabor the issue. On this point, the witness’ testimony is entirely believable and consistent.
Lawyer: [Sitting down, meekly] No more questions, your Lordship.
Voiceover: The Credible Hulk: Tuesdays at 9 on Global.
| Posted by chrisdye on May 21, 2003 with category tags of Skit |
| ||||||||||||||||
Written by chrisdye
| Chris Dye |
|
|
| The more you share the more you have. -- Leonard Nimoy[quote database] |
| Lux Alliance Diplomacy Game Lux Risk Game Meowzers Action Cats Mission Me app Turtoa Global Rhythm |
Hey You! Subscribe to
chrisdye's RSS feed.
Or get wider opinion in the Vorg All Author feed.
Members login here.
© Vorg Group.