Some real good ones in this thread 
http://tdcaa.infopop.net/4/OpenTopic...5&m=4583020357
A new twist on "second hand smoke"
Years ago, the late Jimmy James was sitting as a visiting judge in the court to which I was assigned. I had a defendant who was on a ten year probation for PCS and hadn't managed to do very well. At the hearing on the motion to revoke, I presented evidence she had violated a variety of conditions, including failing to report, failing to work at suitable employment, failing to pay various fees, and continuing to use cocaine while on probation.
She testified and actually provided what appeared to be very persuasive explanations for her various failures. However, I noticed the defense attorney did not ask her to explain the multiple UA results that were positive for cocaine metabolite. Naturally, I was curious and explored the issue on cross.
She swore she had not been using cocaine, but her boyfriend used it constantly. I asked her if she expected us to believe she had gotten cocaine into her system as if it were "second hand smoke." She said, "Of course not. Cocaine isn't like that." I told her I didn't understand what she was getting at. She paused and then said, "Well, my boyfriend and I are very ... active."
I just kind of sat there. Judge James perked up, looked down at her, and, in his signature impatient tone of voice, slowly asked, "Are you saying that your UAs were positive because you had sex with your boyfriend?"
She looked up at him and, after a moment, said, "Well, I swallow."
It was the only time I ever saw Judge James at a loss for words. After another long pause, he looked at me, and I just said, "I'll pass the witness, Your Honor."
http://tdcaa.infopop.net/4/OpenTopic...5&m=4583020357
A new twist on "second hand smoke"
Years ago, the late Jimmy James was sitting as a visiting judge in the court to which I was assigned. I had a defendant who was on a ten year probation for PCS and hadn't managed to do very well. At the hearing on the motion to revoke, I presented evidence she had violated a variety of conditions, including failing to report, failing to work at suitable employment, failing to pay various fees, and continuing to use cocaine while on probation.
She testified and actually provided what appeared to be very persuasive explanations for her various failures. However, I noticed the defense attorney did not ask her to explain the multiple UA results that were positive for cocaine metabolite. Naturally, I was curious and explored the issue on cross.
She swore she had not been using cocaine, but her boyfriend used it constantly. I asked her if she expected us to believe she had gotten cocaine into her system as if it were "second hand smoke." She said, "Of course not. Cocaine isn't like that." I told her I didn't understand what she was getting at. She paused and then said, "Well, my boyfriend and I are very ... active."
I just kind of sat there. Judge James perked up, looked down at her, and, in his signature impatient tone of voice, slowly asked, "Are you saying that your UAs were positive because you had sex with your boyfriend?"
She looked up at him and, after a moment, said, "Well, I swallow."
It was the only time I ever saw Judge James at a loss for words. After another long pause, he looked at me, and I just said, "I'll pass the witness, Your Honor."
Comment