Suppressing the Evidence

One time I was a juror in a trial.  both sides made an open­ing statement.

• Side one:  a hand­some man and a beau­ti­ful woman, each per­fectly coiffed, dressed, and spoken
• Side two:  a plump, almost inar­tic­u­late guy and an attor­ney with a poly­ester tie and a crum­pled check­ered suit

The argu­ment?

• side one:  the plain­tiff was hurt because of improper actions by the defendant
• side two:  the plain­tiff is only mak­ing this claim because the defen­dant has deep pockets

My think­ing, as a juror?  After open­ing argu­ments I was com­pletely going with the gor­geous defen­dants rather than the kind of dumb-​​looking plain­tiff and his hick-​​looking lawyer.

Then we got to wit­ness tes­ti­mony.  After the third wit­ness I had com­pletely changed my think­ing.  I now believed the right side was the side I had orig­i­nally been against.  The dif­fer­ence was the tes­ti­mony.  In other words, the evidence.

It is this, the evi­dence, that the Democ­rats don’t want us to see in their health care delib­er­a­tions.  They don’t want us to see the tes­ti­mony, on C-​​Span or any­where else.

I won­der why.

Duh.

Copy­right secured by Digiprove © 2010

Tags: Political Maneuvers