logictortured.com Blog

A Life Sentence Is But An Illusion

A prisoner wrote the judge asking for sympathy and to be released early from prison. He complained that,

I have served a life sentence of 22 years. I have lost everything I have ever known or loved.

Later he wrote,

I’ve served a life sentence sir. What more debt do I owe in your opinion?

Mmmmm… where to begin…

First, why do prisoners such as yourself seriously think that judges can release you from prison based upon mere letters? Judge have a lot of power, but they still have to act within the law.

Second, obviously the debt you owe is the completion of your sentence.

Which leads us to third, if you are still alive you have not completed your fucking life sentence. Write us back when you’re dead, and the judge will gladly consider releasing you.

Share this:

The Constitution Does Not Give You The Right To Commit Crimes

A woman and her son’s attorney were arguing in the hallway. The son was facing 25 years but he was offered a deal where he’d serve no more than 10. The attorney was trying to talk his client into taking a plea deal but the mom didn’t like it.

The attorney argued that it was his job to get her son the best deal he could. The mom argued that it was his job to get him off. The attorney argued,

How can I get him off? He’s guilty. They have three witnesses who saw him. When the police arrested him the next day he was carrying the same gun. He doesn’t have a defense. What kind of story could I tell the jury to get him off?

The mom screamed back,

It’s your job to come up with a story to get him off.

Criminal defendants in the US have Constitutional rights. These rights put limits on what the police can do, on what evidence can be used, on who has the burden of proof, on who will judge the facts, and most importantly, they give access to a court appointed attorney.

It’s is quite common in TV dramas and movies that defendants routinely get off on technicalities and that criminal defense attorneys are adept at manipulating facts to make even the guiltiest person look innocent. However, in the real world, most guilty people who go to trial are convicted. (And in the vast majority of instances guilty people simply plea.)

However, there still exists a belief among some people that the Constitution is some sort of magic pill that will simply make criminal charges disappear.

The Constitution does not give criminal defendants a right to a defense. It does not give criminal defendants a right to commit crimes and get away with them. Our Constitutional protections are intended to make the process fair and to keep the powers of the state in check. Nothing more.

Share this:

He’s my sun!

I’m here for XXX’s trial. Is that going today?

I wanted to look up his name on the computer to get his new trial date, so I asked…

Do you spell XXX with two Ts?

I don’t know. He’s my son.

Share this:

The Pen is Mightier than the Printer

I’m the dummy in this conversation. We lost power this morning at work and a co-worker was talking about how she put up some notes to let people know we were closed. I asked,

How were you able to print out notes without a computer or printer?

She looked at me like I was stupid, rightfully so.

Share this:

Prison or not to prison, that is the question

A victim dropped off a letter regarding her boyfriend who is charged with committing assault and domestic violence against her.

In relevant part she wrote:

“The reason for this letter is because I don’t feel like (Defendant) should be sentenced to any prison time for this case.”

Ok, on a side note, he has not even been convicted yet. So she’s jumping the gun a bit talking about a sentencing which might never occur. But still, she does not want him to go to prison. Fair enough.

Later on she writes:

(Defendant) does deserve to be put in prison because of our ignorant actions.”

Ok, that’s a little confusing. But it’s quite obvious she made a little mistake. We know what she really means, right? She does not want her boyfriend going to prison.

Um…. maybe she does. She next writes:

“If you could take the time to review my testimony from (date) you will see that this case should end with (Defendant) going to prison.”

Share this:

I shouldn’t talk to Asian people

I have problems talking to Asian people, I’m not sure why.

The first incident happened at a Chinese restaurant many many years ago. My friend wanted butter for his white rice. Never one to turn down extra fat on my carbs, I agreed. I asked the waitress, “can we get some butter, please?”

She started screaming at us, “We have no butter. No butter here.”

The next time was at a different chinese restaurant. My co-worker had just ordered almond chicken. I said to the waitress, “I’ll have the same thing.”

She replied, “No same thing.”

Not quite getting it, I repeated myself. “I’ll have the same thing he’s having” while pointing to my co-worker, who just ordered.

She replied, quite angrily and sternly, “No same thing. Order from the menu.”

I finally got it and replied, “I want the same thing he’s ordering, the almond chicken.”

Anyway, today there was a cute young Asian couple outside our courtroom looking lost. I asked them if they needed any help. The guy told me their professor told them to come and watch a court proceeding.

I told the guy that we had nothing going on in our courtroom but that he should check out another courtroom.

He asked, “What’s ‘another courtroom’?”

Share this:

A Pentecostal Jury?

A deliberating jury sent out this note:

We need water and snakes.

Share this:

Knowing where is half the battle

This conversation took place on the second floor directly in front of the elevators. Someone asked me how to get to his car. I replied,

I have no idea where your car is, sir.

He replied,

I’m parked out front.

I replied,

I’d go out front, then.

Share this:

Farming with Artillery

My state has a right to farm statute. The statute deals with situations where suburbanites and urbanites move out into farmland and complain about the smells and noises. The statute forbids neighbors from bringing lawsuits to stop farming activities.

There’s a lawsuit in our courthouse brought by neighbors to a farm. The farm is using the statute as a defense. The problem for the farm is that the neighbors are complaining about Halloween activities held on the farm. They have a corn maze, food, games, and best of all, a pumpkin cannon.

Remember, the farm only gets protection under the statute for farming activities. So the farmers have to explain how the Halloween activities relate to farming.

With a straight face, the attorney for the farm argued that having customers go into the maze and bring out pumpkins is akin to bringing in the crops.

But most awesome of all, the attorney argued that the farm uses the pumpkin cannon to reseed the pumpkin field each year.

Somehow I don’t think the judge is going to buy those arguments.

Update – August 31, 2011: I was right. The judge did not buy the argument about the pumpkin cannon. The Court held that the cannon was not a “generally accepted agricultural practice.”

Share this:

It depends on your definition of “all” your honor…

A particular court rule only allows a judge to take action if…

“all of the following conditions are met.”

The attorney at the hearing could only show that one of the conditions were met, so the judge said that he lacked authority to take any action on the attorney’s request.

The attorney responded as follows:

So your interpretation of the court rule is that all of the conditions have to be met, your honor?

The judge replied:

That’s what “all” means counselor.

Share this: