I was wondering about this. I’ve had jury duty a couple times where we waited around for hours only to have them settle. Apparently defendants often choose not to settle, then lose their nerve at the last minute as they see all the people assembling and the trial looks more real. Or, perhaps, they were hoping some critical participant wouldn’t be there, and they lose their nerve when that person shows. It’d be nice if I could know that before making the early morning trip there, but I don’t think that’s possible.
That was pretty common in my experience. I’d tell my client he or she has no chance of the cop or victim showed up, but if they didn’t, the prosecutor would have no case. For minor offenses, the prosecutor didn’t put as much effort in getting the necessary witnesses to court, and the witnesses weren’t as motivated to come anyway
Here is a thread started by me when I was in a similar situation. In my case I think it was someone who got caught on security video breaking into a bunch of cars on my block one night including mine. I wasn’t going to be much of a witness since I didn’t see anything, and all I could say was that I kept $40 in emergency cash in my car that was not there when I checked after the incident. I’m not even sure that it was about this since all that was on the notice was the time and place I needed to show up, and the name of the defendant which I didn’t recognize. I’m assuming this is what it was because that was my only brush with law enforcement.
The end result (not included in the thread) was that shortly before the trial I realized that I had lost the paper that told me when and where I should go. I tried calling the court to ask, but they didn’t seem to have any way to look me up, so I ended up not going. Other than that first piece of paper in the mail (non-certified) no one ever contacted me.
One fellow told me about the time they were going to court over an arson charge - some guy burned down the local club building. The court was held a substantial distance away, well over an hour drive. When the time came for the court hearing (at 9:45Am, one of several on the docket) the defendant was not there.
Friend said he asked the organization’s lawyer what was going on. The lawyer said “wath. The judge won’t issue a bench warrant unless the defendant is not there by adjournment at noon, so they’re playing chicken, hoping nobody shows up, or they leave. The judge doesn’t care, he’s being paid overtime as a retired judge because they’re short of judges.”
Apparently, sure enough, just before noon the defendant shows up, and the trial is held over until the afternoon, meaning the judge got paid for a full day not a half day. The guy still got convicted, but it was worth it for him to see if the witnesses gave up and left.
How did the court know how to find you/mailing address?
Anyway, this doesn’t seem to be an FQ but I’d disregard the letter.
I imagine it’s on the police report. If OP gave a witness statement to the police, the police would’ve put their contact info with it.
Giving the simplest, most direct, and least helpful answers to questions during a deposition can be a fun game to play with the attorneys.
It can also turn a 1 hour deposition into a 4 hour one.
Not really an FQ answer and seems like bad advice in general.
It does bring up an interesting question though. What, legally speaking, is the worst that can happen to you if you are an intentional asshole like this during a deposition?
If you refuse to cooperate with a deposition, the deposing attorneys can seek to have you held in contempt of court. There may be other sanctions applicable based on jurisdiction.
I was subpoenaed once in a traffic accident case. While driving, I was behind a co-worker in his own vehicle who was broadsided by a car who ran a red light. I got out to see if he was ok, and of course he knew who I was. The other driver didn’t have insurance, so my co-worker’s insurance company decided to sue him. I was the only witness.
I got the subpoena in the mail. My co-worker was not present at the hearing, nor was the other driver. I ended up not having to testify because the court simply issued a summary decision* in favor of the insurance company because the other driver failed to show up to the hearing.
*That’s my recollection anyway. It was a long time ago and IANAL.
I did that once. The plaintiff’s lawyer was both happy & amused with my answers as I stymied the d-bag defense attorney at every question I could in the deposition. I even politely called him a dirtbag when he tried to accuse me of something.
Most judges know all those “cute” tricks, and don’t allow them.
I should have never been a part of it in the first place. My (homeowner’s insurance) lawyer tried to get me removed as a defendant as it was a slip-&-fall case that didn’t even occur on my property. The plaintiff’s attorney agreed that I shouldn’t be a part of it & had no issue with me being dropped but the d-bag defense attorney refused my attorney’s motion to have me dismissed. I had to sit for the deposition & then she filed another motion with the judge to state the obvious, that I had nothing to do with this & he finally agreed that I should be dropped. We were going to file a bar association complaint against him for ‘frivolousness’ but he left the firm, & the case before I got dropped from it so she said there was no point.
With regard to being an “asshole” in a deposition, I think it would be hard to top the lawyers. In all my years of work by far the meanest and most disrespectful I was ever treated was by lawyers during depositions.
These are my two favorite examples of depositions that got out of hand.
It’s entirely possible that the fellow in the first video had never heard the term “photocopy” used in regular office parlance. I don’t know why the lawyer did not jump straight to the “put in a paper, push a button” question when the guy seemed confused about what a photocopier was.
The other lawyer seemed to be up on his photocopy technology parlance. So it’s odd he never used the term during the prep time, with the fellow being deposed. OTOH, the fellow seems a tad slow and it’s possible some offices only had recently got a photocopier/Xerox in the last few years before this happened. IIRC in the 70’s they used to be massive behemoths, centrally located in the mail room until the Xerox patent ran out. There was a time when photocopies in my university’s library were 25¢ each.
The comments on the “What is a photocopier?” video suggest that the guy was coached to be evasive, which is why he keeps glancing at his attorney.
Well, first of all, that’s obviously a dramatization. In the real deposition, the guy was just sticking to his coached replies but was not nervous or tentative…
“My game plan became to see how far he’d go with what I perceived as a charade caused by the way his lawyers had prepared him to be deposed,” said Marburger. “The purpose of stringing it out was to show that he’d go to great lengths to avoid admitting the obvious, which would then make the recorder’s office look bad in the eyes of the Ohio Supreme Court justices.”
Marburger, a partner at Cleveland-based BakerHostetler, said Patterson played right into his hands as he sat back in his chair and kept delivering questions in a bemused manner. And he said Patterson wasn’t nervous or intimidated, either.
“I actually wanted him to keep up what I perceived as a charade. Once he chose the path that he took, I didn’t want a straight answer; I wanted him to keep it going,” said Marburger. “That was why I kept pushing over the course of 10 pages of transcript. To me, the testimony became too good to be true. It was perfect.”
It’s this, exactly. He was coached to be evasive, and likely took it to a level even his attorney didn’t anticipate. If that witness testified in court, I can picture an impatient judge putting a stop to that in a hurry. “Do you have a coffee maker in your office?” “Can you define coffee maker?” Come on.