What Was Your Most Bad A$$ Escape?

what was the most badass escape you've ever made there's a case clock made in the 18th century that has been in my family for over a hundred years the firstborn child normally inherits the clock that is until my grandparents had my uncle my uncle has been a frick up since he was a teenager and always has relied on his parents to help him out no matter his age when he was in his late 20s he flew to taiwan and spent all of his money on stupid crap and needed to have my grandmother wire him money for a plane ticket all the time that he couldn't pay his mortgage on a house that he could never afford and also quit his job expecting my grandmother to pay for it she gave him 20 k in agreement that if he didn't repay her then he give up his right to inherit the clock over the years he seemed to forget that the clock would never be his and had a friend appraise the clock with the appraisal calling it uncle's name clock uncle never repaid the money he borrowed he peed my grandmother off enough for her to write him out of the wolf or tangible personal property aka items the clock he takes the executor of the estate my dad to court for the clock my dad just has his attorney represent him uncle wants to be allowed in the courtroom with his attorney but my dad's attorney says no that's not fair since my dad isn't there judge agrees but uncle pout about it and accepts the trial lasts no longer than 10 minutes the will is evident saying that uncle has no claim to the clock uncle's attorney submits the appraisal but my dad's attorney gets it thrown out because it's not proof of ownership and it was written by my uncle and his friend attorneys and judge agree that he has no claim to the clock my uncle is allowed in but wants to go on the record even though the case is settled my dad's attorney roles arise but agrees he states that they were in court because he was supposed to inherit the clock but did not dad's attorney states that he has no legal claim to it uncle's words were well i suppose it was always just matter of ethics and legality my dad's attorney baffled states then what are we doing in court homeboy got clock blocked when i was clarking for a judge in my first year as a lawyer we had a case that centered around if a person could lawfully shoot a dog that is attacking his chickens the law said that he could shoot him if the dogs were bothering or wounding the chickens plaintiff was suing for the value of his dogs that were killed in emotional distress his argument was that the dogs were not bothering or wounding the chickens because they were running away when the farmer came outside with the shotgun he then argues that wounding has to be active so he gave an example if the dog has a chicken in his mouth you can shoot if he drops it but the chicken is floundering right in front of him you cannot shoot as the wounding has ended picks it back up shoot the mutt lightly pause at it not wounding it was ridiculous and inconsistent with case little i wrote the opinion awarding defendant summary judgment here comes my favorite part plaintiff asks for a reconsideration based on a single word i used in a throwaway line in the eight-page opinion i said it was reasonable to assume that the dogs were still a danger to the chickens during the reconsideration the partner from the firm comes for plaintiff instead of joe schmo and says frankly judge i have always thought you were the finest attorney in the region so i'm shocked you got this so wrong it's baffling to me judge didn't react but i was plenty offended on his behalf so i am tasked with writing the reconsideration opinion i wrote a two-page summary of the hearing with no indication on the two pages which way we were leaning then pasted the original eight pages but with the sentence about reasonableness submitted i wish i could have watched that lawyer read three pages deep to realize it was the exact same decision as before in child support your honor i already have three children that i pay for i can't pay for a fourth are you the father of this fourth child yes and i cannot afford her i have three others order to pay full support for the fourth child to the surprise of no one in spousal support i'm an iron worker by trade but i work in kohl's why don't you work as an iron worker certainly it pays more they expect me to work weekends that ain't happening order to pay full spousal support on an imputed income of an iron worker in criminal court for harassment i sent pictures of my testicles to her xgf to see if she thought one looked too big it was medical not harassment what about the picture of your dong same i thought it looked weird like i was sick i needed advice is your ex gf a medical professional number what is her profession she's a kindergarten teacher turning your attention back to the pictures you texted you said there were medical inquiries made to your kindergarten teacher xgf correct yes what about this photo with the caption suck my dong was that also medical in nature defendant wanted to take back his guilty plea arguing that the only reason he pled guilty was because he had to take a huge crap at the time but didn't want to do so at the courthouse another defendant argued that his was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his defense counsel permitted him to plead guilty to a dui 20 years ago after the guy crashed his car into a wall and was drunk off his butt at 5am in january his defense was that he crashed his car then in the 30-minute one-hour waiting for the police walked in the freezing cold to a liquor store and drank a whole bottle of whiskey and so he wasn't technically driving while intoxicated but became intoxicated afterwards the judge described the guy as either highly courageous or highly foolhardy for offering that story the different defendant claimed his guilty plea was not knowing intelligent and voluntary and therefore invalid because he was high as crap of sea and alcohol when he came into the courthouse at 9 00 am i've responded to countless motions from defendants who've said that they didn't know they'd be deported if they pled guilty even though the judge explicitly told them exactly that one defendant claimed that he couldn't have committed the robbery by climbing through the bathroom window because he has arthritis and knee and hip problems he testified to this despite knowing that we had security footage of him climbing in through a window of a church also to rob it then jumping up and climbing out and despite knowing that the judge was going to allow us to show it to the jury if defendant opened the door to such evidence non-citizen defendant who's a level 3 highest didler argued that his designation should be lowered removed because he was deported and therefore he doesn't present a danger to the community anymore lawyer here as well literally anything that the constitutionalists pro-we are you detaining me sovereign citizens makes this stuff goes back a long time 20 years ago i was getting the there impeding my freedom to travel and now it's the i'm a corporation arguments i really wish people would stop believing that the law consists of magic words and incantations that lawyers have hidden from you it isn't they don't exist you are driving us all nuts and you make the judges angry at you ridiculous argument i made client was arrested for failing to appear she fell asleep under the trailer of a truck at a carnival she traveled with and they drove off and left heather on the ground argument your honor she didn't miss court to disrespect the court she's just stupid right you're not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed client sheepishly nods judge drops the charge in an aggravated assault case there was a clear video from the walmart parking lot of the defendant getting him the passenger side of a car riding a little ways and then hopping out to rob a guy ultimately shot victim in the stomach police stopped the car soon after was called and the guys were arrested the defense refused all offers for plea deals and went to trial based solely on the defense that the driver and passenger switched seats with the car still moving in the 10 seconds between him hopping in and hopping out it was his third violent offense and the defendant got life in prison so an important part of any legal case is that both sides be able to depose the other side's witnesses this usually includes the plaintiff my client was a very elderly woman who was hit by another car in a parking lot she was not in good shape and had trouble getting around twice during the case the other side scheduled a deposition twice during the case my client showed up at our offices on time for the deposition and both times the other side did not appear they never informed us or our elderly disabled client so she made the 30-minute trip to our office for nothing at no point were any depositions cancelled from us or our client those were the only two attempts made by the defendant after the second time they cancelled the deposition they filed a motion in court to get our case dismissed on the grounds that they didn't have a sworn statement from our client yet again this was entirely the defendant's fault but they filed a motion to dismiss the case against our client when asked of the motion why they cancelled the second deposition they even said that the attorney responsible had a personal conflict thankfully the judge didn't even give it a second thought and denied their motion a lawyer here i sued the local sheriff in charge of running county jails here for not providing a voter registration application to inmates who request it instead the sheriff had them fill out another form requesting both the application and a pen his attorney initially argued that it's because the inmates don't have access to a pen when i pointed out that a voter registration application can be filled out with a pencil he changed his argument saying that they don't have access to her pencil either so i asked him how do inmates fill out the request form for a pencil then with their blood he dropped that argument and settled ha i'm a lawyer i should win right there anyway we were in trial and opposing counsel was objecting to a document i was trying to enter into evidence through one of their witnesses but the witness had identified it as one of their business records but opposing council objects a jury is in the courtroom so the judge has us approach we do and opposing counsel argues the authenticity of the document i was a little surprised so my response was your honor this is their exhibit is council stating they submitted an authentic document to this court judge turns to council are you submitting non-authentic documents opposing council stammers out and know when the document goes in i was a little surprised they wanted to argue their own document wasn't authentic just to keep me from getting it to the jury this happened like a week ago the criminal defense attorney representing a guy who stabbed his wife several times and then beat her with a frying pan and then stabbed her again tried to argue that it is an affirmative defense to attempted murder if you take your victim to the hospital after he claimed it's impossible to attempt to murder somebody if you save her life after he got bench slapped pretty hard one for the horrible legal argument and two for continuously saying this guy saved her life after he tried to kill her i am a lawyer this was a petition rather than an in court appearance when i was a pro se clerk a pro se clerks handle petitions from prisoners this was a state case and the petitioner claimed that because our state awards good time credits for every 30 days you serve without problems you get 10 days off of your sentence for all sentences even sentences of life he had accumulated x years of credit against his sentence further according to the actuarial tables he would be dead in x years therefore he was eligible for release so far this is a clever argument even if it is bound to failure what made it ridiculous was that he was not serving one life sentence but two consecutive life sentences plus 20 years therefore under his own analysis he needed to serve more than his own lifespan before becoming eligible for release as an added bonus i dismissed his petition as lacking standing until he actually died and we could properly calculate his sentence not mine but my old mock trial instructor and how do we know that witness s testimony is reliable to witness you wear need to wear glasses correct yes so doesn't that mean that you are legally considered to have impaired vision yes prosecution proceeds to build most of their cross-examination on this leg painting the witness is unreliable because of poor vision finally defense gets a chance to question again you wear glasses mister witness is that correct yes so whenever you're wearing glasses you have 20 stroke 20 vision correct yes thank you no further questions i wear glasses and you would be amazed the amount of people who seem to think i can't see as well as them when i have my glasses on i wear them for a reason i was a state witness in a parental neglect trial as an lcsw i worked for a mental health substance abuse hospital evaluating children and teens for admission the state was was asking to have the kid removed from the home in part due to information i reported as i had interviewed and admitted the kid on three separate occasions during one eval the mother shows up so high she can barely talk the kid admits he gets all his drugs from her the other evidence comes from info gathered during the kids impatient stays so there's a very rural area with only two hospitals in the entire state as such i didn't work in the hospital nor was i part of the inpatient staff i lived three hours west of it covering the 22 counties on the west side of the state the prosecution had sworn statements and records from the inpatient staff and called me because i lived in the jurisdiction of this court and could testify in person so all of this information was introduced the minute i took the stand the defense lawyer basically repeats all of this and then proceeds to try get me to support his defense that the inpatient treatment was inadequate how this relates the mother giving the kid drugs no one ever figured out he has absolutely no witnesses of his own no character references no other hospital staff nothing but the state's evidence and me he repeatedly asks if i agree with his statements that x occurred in treatment or that if why would have been a better option after like the sixth time of me stating i was not able to answer the question the judge cut him off and asks if he has any other line of questioning the mother whispers in his ear and he says yes he has one more question do i think the mother is a fit parent i was stunned i looked around at everyone and asked him are you asking me in my professional capacity if i think the mother is fit a parent i see the state just kind of smiling and shaking his head the defense is certain and says that's what he's asking i look at the judge who smiles and nods at me to answer so i say no in my professional opinion she is not currently fit to parent everyone else is trying not to laugh but the defense looks so disappointed i almost felt sad for him i don't know wtf they were thinking but needless to say the state won not a lawyer but my dad was and this came directly from him it's the late 70s early in my old man's career clan gets done for speeding ticket says 90 in a 55 cop states that he assessed the speed by tailing client for over a mile before pulling him over my dad what kind of car do you drive cop crown vic we all have crown vics dad and how high does the speedometer go in your crown vic cop 85 dad so how can you be sure my client was doing 90 dismiss ticket and the cop and my dad had a good laugh about it afterward cop said he'd never heard of a going too fast defense before this wasn't so much a bad argument but an example of terrible questioning this was a circular case cleanup of polluted groundwater and soil a witness a former manager of the polluted property was asked the following at a deposition queue did you ever see anything strange at that point a number of objections to the question were made by the attorneys present hey what did i ever see anything strange is your question q yes sir did you ever see anything strange ay yes i saw a man with boobs q you saw a man with boobs at the site a number i saw a man with boobs and new orleans once for the lawyer in the post ask a stupid question get a stupid answer there was this defendant that was running a ponzi scheme with a story about going into depleted mines in south america with new technology to recover previously unrecoverable gold he was actually using half of the money to buy gold bullion to dazzle investors and pocketing the other half when they arrested him they found a crap ton of gold under his bed at his sentencing hearing a few years later around 2011 it was argued that his sentence should be significantly reduced because in the intervening time the gold that had been seized had greatly appreciated in market value such that the investor victims would be mostly paid back in full showing that his investment was actually prudent that actually seems like a worthy argument not a lawyer did work experience with one back in high school he had to go speak to someone in the court cells where i wasn't allowed so i went and sat in one of the courtrooms while he did that there were a few cases but the one that stood out were the two guys who both had some injuries and claimed the other one had attacked their mum provoked neither wanted any representation there was no evidence apart from them blaming each other and when the lawyer i was with came to find me they were literally just stood in front on the judge screaming he didn't know he did it over and over again another story from a close friend who's a defense barrister her client was a building firm that had done shoddy work on an open roof that had led to it collapsing causing the open head injury and fractured hip so were being sued she said the damages were wildly inflated in value by the prosecution but her client was even more ridiculous with their offer her research had shown her that the minimum they should have been offering for the collapse of the roof alone without the additional injuries should have been pound symbol 4000 they refused to offer more than 1 600 pounds on the grounds that they expected her to die before anything happened as a result of their work she said she'd never felt more embarrassed than when she had to tell the judge this in front of the prosecution and their client not a lawyer but was involved in recording proceedings of a case the case was a major fraud case it was multiple organizations involved and a lady was defrauding them through bad checks she also had the irs on her since she would use the receipt she got for the bad checks from charities to add deductions to her tax bill i don't remember the exact amount of the money taken but i remember it being something astronomical that made me surprised she hadn't been busted well before then she was writing checks that she didn't have the funds to cover to charities she would also write checks to herself deposit it and banks typically allow you to recover part of the check typically 200 300 bucks until it's fully processed and go through and she would pull that money out of the atm and use it for whatever so there was a massive case built up against this lady by the state and these organizations and she was facing several years in jail and instead of pleading the fifth she took the stand and her defense was that since she was able to withdraw those amounts it's the banks fold the money is missing and not hers for the stolen withdrawals she also tried placing blame on the charities for her irs scam since they gave her a receipt to use total lack of remorse or responsibility about misuse of her checkbook to defraud organizations her defense lawyer managed to get the case drug out over months that guy must have somehow been getting paid to delay the trial as much as he did to keep her out of jail lawyer bill not a trial lawyer corporate so i never go to court i will however relay a story on of my colleagues told me this lawyer and a more senior lawyer were representing a defendant on some matter and part of their argument he relied on the plaintiff not mitigating their damages with respect to if i recall correctly a car accident the plaintiff claimed that they were not able to get their car repaired because no shop in the city had time to do the repairs or some flimsy argument so during cross-examination the senior lawyer from our firm asks the plaintiff which mechanic shops they had contacted the plaintiff basically stammered and said they can't recall lawyer well let's see if we can refresh your memory pulls out a yellow pages phone book drops it on the desk and flips to the mechanics section lawyer starting with the first shop did you call this shop plaintiff no lawyer goes to next shop in the phone book did you call this shop plaintiff no lawyer goes through the entire section in the phone book asking if the plaintiff has contacted any of the shops in the city the answer is invariably no to each one basically demonstrating that the plaintiff had taken no steps to mitigate damages lawyer i'd like to enter this phone book into evidence judge denied on the grounds that i'm pretty sure we already have one around here somewhere not a lawyer but was jury form in one a particular case it involved a college-age kid potentially going to the big house for carrying an illegal weapon long story short the kid was from out of state and got pulled over and the officer saw the weapon but the kid was arrested in court the defendant attorney introduced a document to where the kid that was riding in the passenger seat admitted it was his but he would not come back to our state because he knew he would get arrested council starts reading off confession after it was over the prosecution objected to the document being presented both parties approached the judge and the argument ensued judge dismisses us because the courtroom was too small to keep the conversation quiet enough for us not to hear after 10 minutes we were called back and everything proceeded after all was done we found the defendant not guilty counsel had an opportunity to question our decision afterwards and prosecution asked me why we felt the way we did i said the letter that was presented was enough to give us a reasonable doubt to the weapon being his prosecution was baffled they said we were supposed to disregard that letter because of whatever the issue was i said but we came back into the room and everything continued nobody ever said for the jury to disregard we heard what we heard and nobody said to disregard it they ran back and sifted through the transcripts and sure enough they failed to inform the jury myself in particular to disregard the letter thus we used it to find the guy innocent i am a corporate lawyer but did my debuts in criminal law and heard the most ridiculous defense from our client in a physical shaming assault charge in a nutshell he was accused to have assaulted a young girl by inserting his finger in her private parts this all happened at a party when the girl was trying to go on stage and he was kindly helping her to do so his defense i didn't do it on purpose she was wearing a short skirt and my middle finger just slipped in her glory hole the best parts spending hours with my colleague trying to find a rational explanation of how his fingers would have slipped and found itself in there and plead this in court never felt so embarrassed i was in probate litigation over my father's will against my brother who was the executor he was pros and attempting to argue the interpretation of my father's ambiguous self written will in such a way that it benefited him immensely when the judge told him that he didn't think it could be reasonably interpreted the way my brother wanted my brother argued with a raised voice that the judge was wrong and it was so obvious a third grader could understand it there was a gusp in the courtroom at such a flippant remark the judge kept his cool and said well you don't have a third grader you've got me by the end of the case the judge removed my brother as executed due to mismanagement of estate assets still surprised he didn't get fined or thrown out right there for insulting the judge in open court tldr insulting the judge's intelligence is not a compelling argument if you are new to the channel you can subscribe i publish new videos every day until then check another video [Music] bye for now

Channel: On Tap Studios

Views: 5,316

Rating: 4.5688624 out of 5

Keywords: #updootst, updoot, reddit, r/askreddit, askreddit, ask reddit, r/, \r, r\, best of reddit, reddit stories, reddit story, top posts, funniest posts, funny, funny posts, funny askreddit, reddit funny, askreddit funny, askreddit stories, sub, reddit cringe, memes, comment awards, dankify, toadfilms, updoot everything, updoot reddit, chill, story, stories, reddit on tap, escape stories, reddit escapes

Id: VyBCGb-CyV4

Length: 25min 37sec (1537 seconds)

Published: Sun Aug 16 2020