Sunday, September 30, 2007

children, grand juries, and big career prospects

Some random thoughts from a weekend spent reading too much law:

  • In the legal world, it seems that children and the mentally insane are often grouped in the same category. In a way I feel badly for BOTH demographics in this comparison. Though I guess it makes some sense when you consider that you probably wouldn't trust testimony coming from either a schizophrenic or a 2-year old.

  • I enjoy the term "grand juries". It makes the jury sound so regal, like they were picked specially for a higher calling than the rest of us, particularly those of us unlucky to end up on just a regular, plain jury. I like to imagine the grand jury sitting around a table in ballgowns and tuxes, drinking tea brewed by the judge in his mahogany chambers... which he also lets the grand jury (but never oh NEVER the regular jury) hang out in all the time.
  • In my civpro book, in discussing expert witnesses, the author provided some examples of who experts can be. Here's the quote... and my subsequent analysis with my brother:
"On a given point, the needed expert may be a doctor, a chemist, a fingerprint specialist, a musician, a carpenter, or anyone with a specialty"
Me: What a random assortment of jobs to pick. And it sort of rhymes!
My Brother: They should have dipped into Nursury rhymes...."A expert can be a butcher... a baker..... a candlestick maker..."

If only my whole book was written my Mother Goose... and the cases were about spiders frightening Ms. Muffett and dishes running off with spoons. I think that is what I am going to do with my law degree - write the very first nursery-rhyme centered textbook. Look for it on shelves in three years.

2 comments:

Unknown said...

An expert is a person recognized in her/his field who possesses knowledge greater than the average person on a particular subject that, and here's the important part, will assist the triers-of-fact in coming to a determination on liability or damages because the triers-of-fact don't know anything about that particular subject either. While the expert should be impartial and should never be paid dependent on the outcome of the trial, it's obvious that a party would not hire the expert unless the person agreed with the party's position. (I have a big section in my book on the subject, which your law school would let you tap into at no charge to you.) Love - Dad the Expert

L said...

I think your nursery rhymed text would be a valuable study tool!