Photo Source: Stock.xching

Throughout history there have been some very strange court cases and sometimes the cost of winning them was a bit high. No one would know this better than a very successful lawyer named Clement Laird Vallandigham. Vallandigham was a pro-Confederate Democrat, and a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from May 25, 1858 to March 3, 1863. More importantly he was a successful lawyer and was in demand. An interesting aside is the Vallandigham broke the law by criticizing Lincoln and the War. A directive had been issued against this type of behavior. He was sentenced to two years in a military prison, but instead Lincoln had him sent to the South. This in itself was strange enough, but years later when he had returned to Ohio after the war, he was defending a defendant in a murder case. His defense was that his client did not murder the victim, but that the victim had shot himself. He stated that the victim had drawn his gun from a certain position thus making it easy for it to discharge and the victim shot himself. To demonstrate this he got into that position and drew a gun. He thought that it was unloaded, but it wasn't. The gun went off and killed Vallandigham, but his client was released.

Clement Laird Vallandigham
Photo Source: Public Domain

I saw a similar event personally. While not as deadly it was still interesting never the less. It was a civil case where someone was suing because they tripped over an oil hose that went across the sidewalk while filling a home tank. The lawyer for the oil company came in with a bright yellow hose. First of all, these hoses are usually black and dirty and if they did have yellow markings they are so worn most of the time and covered with oil and dirt that you can hardly see them. I wondered why the judge would allow this and why the plaintiff's lawyer didn't complain and subpoena the original hose? Right away I knew that something was wrong. As the case went on, the attorney for the oil company stretched out the yellow hose across the courtroom floor and told the jury that you would have to be blind or an idiot to trip over it. As he began to walk away he tripped over the hose and fell on the floor. At this point the case was lost and that should have been a real feather in the cap of the plaintiff, but the judge declared a mistrial. That means that the trial would start over and this spared the oil company and their lawyer. Clearly more was going on here than meets the eye.

Sometimes really stupid questions are asked when people are on the witness chair and you have to wonder where some of these lawyers got their education. Here are a few examples:

LAWYER: Was this the same nose that you broke as a child?
WITNESS: I only have one, you know.

LAWYER: Can you describe what the person who attacked you looked like?
WITNESS: No he was wearing a mask.
LAWYER: What was he wearing under the mask?
WITNESS: Er..his face.

LAWYER: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
WITNESS: No.
LAWYER: Did you check for blood pressure?
WITNESS: No.
LAWYER: Did you check for breathing?
WITNESS: No.
LAWYER: So then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
WITNESS: No.
LAWYER: How can you be so sure doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
LAWYER: But could the patient have still been alive nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law somewhere.

LAWYER: Mr. Slatery, you went on a rather elaborate honeymoon, didn't you?
WITNESS: I went to Europe, sir.
LAWYER: And you took your new wife?

Queens Supreme Court, New York City, NY
Photo Source: Me

A very unusual case of criminal murder was tried a couple of months ago in Philadelphia. A man had shot a cop in the course of his duties and the cop had died. The problem was that the cop had died 41 years later. What had happened was that the bullet lodged in the cops spine causing him to be paralyzed. The prosecutor stated that the bullet was the ultimate reason that the cop had died. For his defense, the man who was a habitual criminal and was in jail again, said through his attorney that he did not kill the policeman, that many years of mistreatment, three car accidents, two falls from his wheelchair and neglect by the nursing home he was in caused his death. The jury agreed and the defendant was acquitted. Yes a wild case after so many years, but if the cop hadn't been shot in the first place none of this would have happened.

There is an old saying among lawyers and that is never put a witness on the stand if you don't know how they are going to testify and you don't know the answers to your questions. Inexperienced lawyers often call witnesses and then are hurt by their testimony. Their character also has to be analyzed. You wouldn't want to call a witness that can easily be intimidated by the other side, or gets so nervous about testifying that you can't rely on them. In medical malpractice cases both sides usually hire what are know as expert witnesses. They are usually doctors that are willing to testify with the same point of view as the side that hired them. A doctor once said to me that lawyers have ruined the medical profession. I couldn't help but think to myself that it was really the doctors who readily testify against each other for money that might be responsible.

Sometimes people in the audience influence witnesses by sending them some type of signal when they are asked questions. This is exactly what happened during the corruption trial of Alaska Senator Ted Stevens. An attorney who was sitting in the audience was accused of using signals to influence a witnesses' testimony. It was called to the judge's attention. The attorney denied doing it and didn't return the next day. The judge stated, "fortunate he went out [the front] door and not the back door with the marshals."