240 replies to this topic

[Menelaus]

Objection your honor, I would like the prosecution to refrain from retelling what the witness just said. The jury already heard it from the witness's mouth, they don't need a reiteration about it. If they wish to restate the testimony, the closing would be the best time.

[Medium of Mystery]

Mela... you must be a glutton for punishment.

Edited by Medium of Mystery, 05 April 2008 - 02:48 PM.

[teej]

Overruled. There's nothing wrong with re-iteration. Many things will be said more than once in this court-room, if I said it was not allowed, it'd like I was presiding over this case with an Iron Gavel (it's made of copper, iron sucks!). The times a piece of evidence has been stated is inconsequential, unless it is disruptive in nature, which in this instance, it isn't.

Please proceed, prosecution, to bring all evidence you deem necessary to light, or ask the defense to cross-examine if you are done.

[Sapphire]

This will be all the evidence I will bring up in the court for now, Your Honor. The prosecution rests. The defense may begin its cross-examination at any time.

[Menelaus]

Detective Donat, I would like to first direct you to your first piece of evidence, the photograph. You said that there are only splinters, ruins, and a foundation. Yet when I look at this photograph, I see this rather large door looking, unburnt piece of wood. Would you care to explain why you didn't think it was necessary to tell the court this?

[mdonut281]

Ah, my mistake, I forgot to mention the plank... I haven't had my morning cup of joe, you'll have to forgive me, Mela-chan. ;_;

Just a plank, I see no reason why it'd be out of the ordinary. Do you remember the lab incident from way back when with Robo and the gang? Man, that was crazy stuff, the explosion blew up the lab but there were some pieces of debris that weren't charred, just scattered.

Also, why didn't you say anything back when I was talking about it? I totally would've brought it up if you had told me...

[Medium of Mystery]

You... forgot?

Detective Donut, perhaps you are aware of this, but an explosion is a mass of energy, destroying anything in its path in flame and sheer pressure. Tell me, do you know how it would be possible for, in the face of so much gunpowder and other explosives, one plank remained unharmed while the others were blown to splinters?

[mdonut281]

You tell me, MoM. I didn't major in forensics nor science, I'm just a writer, a Dreamer, and a Captain.

[Menelaus]

(Edit)

Please refrain yourself to not answer my questions with another question, going off on random tangents, and to keeping your anger in check.


If you didn't major in forensics, how did you become the main investigator of this case?

Edited by Benjamin L. Matlock, 05 April 2008 - 03:31 PM.

[Sapphire]

The prosecution would like to request that the defense stop badgering the witness. He's explained what the wooden object is in the crime scene photo, there is no need to add more pressure on him. You've gotten your answer, now let's move on.

Also, I'd like to remind you that this detective is always with me working on a case, so he would have had no relation or grudge wth/against the defendant.

Edited by Trucy Wright, 05 April 2008 - 03:32 PM.

[Medium of Mystery]

As long as there is a contradiction the defense has the right to solve it!

Edited by Medium of Mystery, 05 April 2008 - 03:33 PM.

[Menelaus]

And we are not badgering the witness your honor. We are merely asking the witness reasonable questions based on what the witness has said.

Edited by Benjamin L. Matlock, 05 April 2008 - 03:34 PM.

[Sapphire]

Then I would like to ask the defense what contradiction there is.

[Menelaus]

If the prosecution can not see this contradiction then they are blind your honor. It is obvious to see what it is.

[Medium of Mystery]

*turns to Mela*

Detectives and Forensic scientists are different things Mela.

But speaking of the crime scene, I've set the grounds for you, do you want to explain the contradiction about the plank or shall I continue?