"My Cousin Vinny" legal question

[zamboniracer]

@robby

[li]My key question: Vinny made the objection after approaching the bench. Is his objection part of the trial record? Is the judge’s apparently capricious overruling of the objection part of the trial record?[/LIST][/li]Thanks!

Yes to both questions. Statements made in low tones of voice at the bench are to keep the discussion away from the jury, but not from the trial record. The court reporter and/or the court taping system are to record such things, in order to make them part of the trial record.

[Asimovian]

@zamboniracer

Yes to both questions. Statements made in low tones of voice at the bench are to keep the discussion away from the jury, but not from the trial record. The court reporter and/or the court taping system are to record such things, in order to make them part of the trial record.

To add further to this, it is comical to be sitting in a quiet courtroom with nothing but the tone of whispers of the lawyers and the judge at the bench to hear, and to suddenly have the court reporter yell out, “I’m sorry; I couldn’t hear that” in a normal voice. You want to see a room full of people jump?

I should note that in some hearings, I’ve seen the court reporter scoot over to join the discussion, but in some court rooms, the judge and attorneys stand around a microphone directed at the court reporter, who listens from his/her station via headphones. It is in the latter scenario that the situation I described above occurs.

[robby]

@zamboniracer

Yes to both questions. Statements made in low tones of voice at the bench are to keep the discussion away from the jury, but not from the trial record. The court reporter and/or the court taping system are to record such things, in order to make them part of the trial record.

@Asimovian

To add further to this, it is comical to be sitting in a quiet courtroom with nothing but the tone of whispers of the lawyers and the judge at the bench to hear, and to suddenly have the court reporter yell out, “I’m sorry; I couldn’t hear that” in a normal voice. You want to see a room full of people jump?

I should note that in some hearings, I’ve seen the court reporter scoot over to join the discussion, but in some court rooms, the judge and attorneys stand around a microphone directed at the court reporter, who listens from his/her station via headphones. It is in the latter scenario that the situation I described above occurs.

Thanks! That’s exactly what I was wondering watching the scene.

[Bricker]

@mlees

I don’t recall, and IANAL:

Do “rebuttal witnesses” brought forth by the prosecution need to be announced to the Defence well before hand?

Was the subject matter expert a rebuttal witness?

(If the answers to the above questions are “No” & “Yes”, respectively, than possibly that is a valid reason to overrule the lucid, intelligent, and well thought out objection.)

The expert was not a rebuttal witness, because he was offered as part of the prosecution’s case-in-chief. Remember that Vinny later recalls the man during the defense’s case, to bolster Lisa’s testimony and further impeach the man’s prior testimony.

[Miller]

@RickJay

Within the context of the movie, the purpose of the scene is to demonstrate that Vinny is in fact not the idiot he first seems to be, and is learning. The judge’s comment that the objection was reasonable - even though he overrules it - serves to confirm to the audience that Vinny’s objection is not merely bafflegab but in fact demonstrates that he knows something, and has impressed the judge.

Without this scene, the later scenes of Vinny pounding the prosecution’s case into hamburger would come out of left field; one minute he’s a fool, and then suddenly he wins? Wouldn’t work. This scene shows him growing towards victory.

I think you’re misremembering the movie. By this point, he’s already beaten all of the prosecutions witnesses into hamburger, and Vinnie’s long since demonstrated that he’s a lot smarter than he initially appeared. The FBI expert is the last witness called by the prosecution.

One of the really interesting things about this movie is that, like a lot of movies based around a Southern/Northern culture clash, one of its central themes is class conflict. Unlike just about any movie set after the Civil War, though, in this film its the Southerners who are upper class, and the Northerner who represents the working class “everyman.”

[StusBlues]

@Miller

I think you’re misremembering the movie. By this point, he’s already beaten all of the prosecutions witnesses into hamburger, and Vinnie’s long since demonstrated that he’s a lot smarter than he initially appeared.

True, but he’s done so largely on “street smarts” up to that point. He’s shown he’s a logical, canny arguer, but not that he’s a competent lawyer. By *finally *managing a cogent objection using conventional legal vocabulary, he’s thoroughly surprised the judge–who promptly overrules him.

And you’re right about classism. Very interesting. It really turns the “common-sense country boy upends the city slickers” trope on its head.