“Your honor, I was not being influenced by the drink I had. It did not say or act in any way such that my behavior would change. Secondly, I was not driving while intoxicated. Intoxicated as defined by the dictionary literally says ‘stupefied by alcohol.’ that cannot have happened because at no point was I stupid.”
Sometimes they do, but I wouldn’t try that method. I have been complimented by three different judges for properly parsing and answering their conflicting questions.
Defendant: Nuh, uh. Everyone knows it’s called “DWI”—driving while intoxicated—which doesn’t really help me either, does it?
“Your honor, I was not being influenced by the drink I had. It did not say or act in any way such that my behavior would change. Secondly, I was not driving while intoxicated. Intoxicated as defined by the dictionary literally says ‘stupefied by alcohol.’ that cannot have happened because at no point was I stupid.”
Judges LOVE smartasses.
Eh my assumption is that this woman doesn’t realize she’s being a smart ass to begin with.
Sometimes they do, but I wouldn’t try that method. I have been complimented by three different judges for properly parsing and answering their conflicting questions.