High court hang-ups

Jorath Calar · 10-21-2002, 03:31 PM

This guy should be released just because aof his sense of humor...

http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=342639

'Why did you steal 40,000 hotel coat hangers, knowing that hotel coat hangers are designed to be useless outside hotel wardrobes?'
Miles Kington
15 October 2002
A most extraordinary trial is going on in the High Court at the moment in which a man named Chrysler is accused of stealing more than 40,000 coat hangers from hotels round the world. He admits his guilt, but in his defence he claims that – well, perhaps it would be simpler just to bring you a brief extract from the trial. We join the case at the point where Chrysler has just taken the stand.

Counsel: What is your name?

Chrysler: Chrysler. Arnold Chrysler.

Counsel: Is that your own name?

Chrysler: Whose name do you think it is?

Counsel: I am just asking if it is your name.

Chrysler: And I have just told you it is. Why do you doubt it?

Counsel: It is not unknown for people to give a false name in court.

Chrysler: Which court?

Counsel: This court.

Chrysler: What is the name of this court?

Counsel: This is No 5 Court.

Chrysler: No, that is the number of this court. What is the name of this court?

Counsel: It is quite immaterial what the name of this court is!

Chrysler: Then perhaps it is immaterial if Chrysler is really my name.

Counsel: No, not really, you see because...

Judge: Mr Lovelace?

Counsel: Yes, m'lud?

Judge: I think Mr Chrysler is running rings round you already. I would try a new line of attack if I were you.

Counsel: Thank you, m'lud.

Chrysler: And thank you from ME, m'lud. It's nice to be appreciated.

Judge: Shut up, witness.

Chrysler: Willingly, m'lud. It is a pleasure to be told to shut up by you. For you, I would...

Judge: Shut up, witness. Carry on, Mr Lovelace.

Counsel: Now, Mr Chrysler – for let us assume that that is your name – you are accused of purloining in excess of 40,000 hotel coat hangers.

Chrysler: I am.

Counsel: Can you explain how this came about?

Chrysler: Yes. I had 40,000 coats which I needed to hang up.

Counsel: Is that true?

Chrysler: No.

Counsel: Then why did you say it?

Chrysler: To attempt to throw you off balance.

Counsel: Off balance?

Chrysler: Certainly. As you know, all barristers seek to undermine the confidence of any hostile witness, or defendant. Therefore it must be equally open to the witness, or defendant, to try to shake the confidence of a hostile barrister.

Counsel: On the contrary, you are not here to indulge in cut and thrust with me. You are only here to answer my questions.

Chrysler: Was that a question?

Counsel: No.

Chrysler: Then I can't answer it.

Judge: Come on, Mr Lovelace! I think you are still being given the run-around here. You can do better than that. At least, for the sake of the English bar, I hope you can.

Counsel: Yes, m'lud. Now, Mr Chrysler, perhaps you will describe what reason you had to steal 40,000 coat hangers?

Chrysler: Is that a question?

Counsel: Yes.

Chrysler: It doesn't sound like one. It sounds like a proposition which doesn't believe in itself. You know – "Perhaps I will describe the reason I had to steal 40,000 coat hangers... Perhaps I won't... Perhaps I'll sing a little song instead..."

Judge: In fairness to Mr Lovelace, Mr Chrysler, I should remind you that barristers have an innate reluctance to frame a question as a question. Where you and I would say, "Where were you on Tuesday?", they are more likely to say, "Perhaps you could now inform the court of your precise whereabouts on the day after that Monday?". It isn't, strictly, a question, and it is not graceful English but you must pretend that it is a question and then answer it, otherwise we will be here for ever. Do you understand?

Chrysler: Yes, m'lud.

Judge: Carry on, Mr Lovelace.

Counsel: Mr Chrysler, why did you steal 40,000 hotel coat hangers, knowing as you must have that hotel coat hangers are designed to be useless outside hotel wardrobes?

Chrysler: Because I build and sell wardrobes which are specially designed to take nothing but hotel coat hangers.

Sensation in court. More of this tomorrow, I hope

Downunda · 10-21-2002, 03:53 PM

Gotta love a smart, smartarse

RevRuby · 10-21-2002, 04:06 PM

oh i do hope there is more tomorrow i wanna laugh that hard again.

Horatio · 10-21-2002, 04:11 PM

LOL!!!!

Ronn_Bman · 10-21-2002, 04:15 PM

That the guy I want representing me in court!

Charean · 10-21-2002, 04:18 PM

Oh that is a good one. ROFLMAO

Kudos for digging up this gem!

10-21-2002, 03:53 PM	#2
Downunda Set - Egyptian God of Chaos Join Date: January 7, 2002 Location: Christchurch, New Zealand Age: 45 Posts: 2,975	Gotta love a smart, smartarse __________________ \"Doing stuff is overrated, like Hitler, he did lots of stuff, but doesn\'t everybody wish he\'d just stayed at home and smoked pot?!?\"

10-21-2002, 04:06 PM	#3
RevRuby Fzoul Chembryl Join Date: July 11, 2002 Location: Limbo Age: 43 Posts: 1,720	oh i do hope there is more tomorrow i wanna laugh that hard again. __________________ peek-a-boo

10-21-2002, 04:11 PM	#4
Horatio Ma'at - Goddess of Truth & Justice Join Date: September 19, 2001 Location: Behind these metal bars Age: 41 Posts: 3,117	LOL!!!! __________________ I <b>am</b> the party!!<br /> [img]\"http://zert0.net/iuti/img2/1381585-vi.gif\" alt=\" - \" />

10-21-2002, 04:15 PM	#5
Ronn_Bman Zartan Join Date: March 11, 2001 Location: North Carolina USA Age: 57 Posts: 5,177	That the guy I want representing me in court! __________________ [img]\"http://home.carolina.rr.com/orthanc/pics/Spinning%20Hammer%20Sig%20Pic.gif\" alt=\" - \" />

10-21-2002, 04:18 PM	#6
Charean Hathor Join Date: March 6, 2001 Location: Waxahachie, TX Age: 60 Posts: 2,201	Oh that is a good one. ROFLMAO Kudos for digging up this gem! __________________ And then there were 6.

10-21-2002, 03:31 PM	#1
Jorath Calar Harper Join Date: October 6, 2001 Location: Iceland Posts: 4,706	This guy should be released just because aof his sense of humor... http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=342639 'Why did you steal 40,000 hotel coat hangers, knowing that hotel coat hangers are designed to be useless outside hotel wardrobes?' Miles Kington 15 October 2002 A most extraordinary trial is going on in the High Court at the moment in which a man named Chrysler is accused of stealing more than 40,000 coat hangers from hotels round the world. He admits his guilt, but in his defence he claims that – well, perhaps it would be simpler just to bring you a brief extract from the trial. We join the case at the point where Chrysler has just taken the stand. Counsel: What is your name? Chrysler: Chrysler. Arnold Chrysler. Counsel: Is that your own name? Chrysler: Whose name do you think it is? Counsel: I am just asking if it is your name. Chrysler: And I have just told you it is. Why do you doubt it? Counsel: It is not unknown for people to give a false name in court. Chrysler: Which court? Counsel: This court. Chrysler: What is the name of this court? Counsel: This is No 5 Court. Chrysler: No, that is the number of this court. What is the name of this court? Counsel: It is quite immaterial what the name of this court is! Chrysler: Then perhaps it is immaterial if Chrysler is really my name. Counsel: No, not really, you see because... Judge: Mr Lovelace? Counsel: Yes, m'lud? Judge: I think Mr Chrysler is running rings round you already. I would try a new line of attack if I were you. Counsel: Thank you, m'lud. Chrysler: And thank you from ME, m'lud. It's nice to be appreciated. Judge: Shut up, witness. Chrysler: Willingly, m'lud. It is a pleasure to be told to shut up by you. For you, I would... Judge: Shut up, witness. Carry on, Mr Lovelace. Counsel: Now, Mr Chrysler – for let us assume that that is your name – you are accused of purloining in excess of 40,000 hotel coat hangers. Chrysler: I am. Counsel: Can you explain how this came about? Chrysler: Yes. I had 40,000 coats which I needed to hang up. Counsel: Is that true? Chrysler: No. Counsel: Then why did you say it? Chrysler: To attempt to throw you off balance. Counsel: Off balance? Chrysler: Certainly. As you know, all barristers seek to undermine the confidence of any hostile witness, or defendant. Therefore it must be equally open to the witness, or defendant, to try to shake the confidence of a hostile barrister. Counsel: On the contrary, you are not here to indulge in cut and thrust with me. You are only here to answer my questions. Chrysler: Was that a question? Counsel: No. Chrysler: Then I can't answer it. Judge: Come on, Mr Lovelace! I think you are still being given the run-around here. You can do better than that. At least, for the sake of the English bar, I hope you can. Counsel: Yes, m'lud. Now, Mr Chrysler, perhaps you will describe what reason you had to steal 40,000 coat hangers? Chrysler: Is that a question? Counsel: Yes. Chrysler: It doesn't sound like one. It sounds like a proposition which doesn't believe in itself. You know – "Perhaps I will describe the reason I had to steal 40,000 coat hangers... Perhaps I won't... Perhaps I'll sing a little song instead..." Judge: In fairness to Mr Lovelace, Mr Chrysler, I should remind you that barristers have an innate reluctance to frame a question as a question. Where you and I would say, "Where were you on Tuesday?", they are more likely to say, "Perhaps you could now inform the court of your precise whereabouts on the day after that Monday?". It isn't, strictly, a question, and it is not graceful English but you must pretend that it is a question and then answer it, otherwise we will be here for ever. Do you understand? Chrysler: Yes, m'lud. Judge: Carry on, Mr Lovelace. Counsel: Mr Chrysler, why did you steal 40,000 hotel coat hangers, knowing as you must have that hotel coat hangers are designed to be useless outside hotel wardrobes? Chrysler: Because I build and sell wardrobes which are specially designed to take nothing but hotel coat hangers. Sensation in court. More of this tomorrow, I hope

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
High Court to Hear Big Tobacco's Challenge to Punitive Damages	Timber Loftis	General Discussion	4	06-27-2006 02:52 PM
High court: Juvenile death penalty unconstitutional	Grojlach	General Discussion	7	03-03-2005 03:29 PM
High Court Considers Pledge of Allegiance Case	Dreamer128	General Discussion	20	04-03-2004 03:22 AM
Massachusetts high court: Same-sex couples entitled to marry	Rokenn	General Discussion	282	03-05-2004 06:09 AM
High Court Gives Campaign Finance Preview Ruling	Timber Loftis	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	0	06-16-2003 12:30 PM