Disregard That Statement: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
m (revise quote template spacing)
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 4:
'''Judge:''' The jury will kindly disregard the defendant's entire opening statement, with the exception of "Thank you."|''[[My Cousin Vinny]]''}}
 
A kind of [[Courtroom Antic]] wherein thewhich one lawyer asks or says something totallyhighly inappropriate to the rules of the courtroom, inmost commonly a [[Loaded Question]], as a ordermeans to get the jury to think of something a certain way. ANaturally, classicthe opposing lawyer examplewill isobject, and the Judge will say, without fail; "HaveThe youmembers stoppedof beatingthe yourjury wifeare yet?instructed to disregard that statement." The original lawyer smirks because apparently only he realizes that people cannot voluntarily induce amnesia. If he's ''really'' being smug, he'll withdraw the statement before the other lawyer can finish objecting.
 
In the real world, this is a good way to lose the right to practice law; never mind using it as a common tactic. Lawyers refer to this method as "ringing the bell," because you can't un-ring a bell.
Naturally, the opposing lawyer [[That Was Objectionable|will object]], and then the Judge will say, without fail; "The members of the jury are instructed to disregard that statement." Original lawyer smirks because apparently only he realizes that people cannot voluntarily induce amnesia. If he's ''really'' being smug, he'll withdraw the statement before the other lawyer can finish objecting.
 
In the real world, any lawyer who tries this is likely to be disbarred.
In the real world, this is a good way to lose the right to practice law; never mind using it as a common tactic. Lawyers refer to this method as "ringing the bell," because you can't un-ring a bell.
 
WhenFor when the opposing counsel attempts to [[Invoked Trope|invoke this trope]] without a proper reason, it'ssee [[That Was Objectionable]].
 
{{examples}}
 
== Comics ==
 
* In one ''[[Mad Magazine]]'' issue where they examined the legal system, the prosecutor asks the defendant "Did you kill [victim]?" and the defendant replies that he did. The defense attorney immediately objects on the grounds that the prosecution is leading the witness, and the judge has the statement stricken from the record. They get an acquittal.
** Also an instance of [[You Fail Law Forever]], since the only time the prosecution would be asking the defendant questions would be on cross-examination, where leading questions are allowed.
 
{{examples|pre="|suf="}}
== Film ==
 
* [[Lampshade Hanging|Lampshaded]] in ''[[Anatomy of a Murder]]'', when Jimmy Stewart's client directly asks him how the jury can just choose to forget an "inappropriate" question, and Jimmy casually admits they can't.
* ''[[Chicago]]'': Billy Flynn goes off on a (seemingly) wild rant while cross-examining the [[Surprise Witness]] about Roxie's diary, where he flat-out accuses the District Attorney of planting evidence. (Of course, he phrases it as hypothetical question, so in movie-land he doesn't get disbarred.)
Line 33 ⟶ 26:
** Also hilariously: "Objection! Strangling the witness!"
 
== Live -Action Television TV ==
 
* Used by a rival lawyer in ''[[Shark]]'', with incriminating photographs.
* Happens all the time in ''[[Law & Order|Law and Order]]''.
** Particularly blatant example in an episode where Jack McCoy is cross-examining an expert witness testifying on the mental disorder of the defendant. He gets her to admit she is not a licensed psychologist but instead hosts a radio show that discusses this disorder among others.
{{quote|'''McCoy:''' So in other words, you're not a psychologist but you play one on the radio?
Line 50 ⟶ 42:
* In ''[[Community]]'' ''Basic Lupine Urology'' Annie and Lt. Colonel Archwood do this by making a wildly loaded question then saying "withdrawn", using this to call someone respectively a wife-beating, drug-using virgin, and a Holocaust-denying, 9/11 pedophile. They get away this this because they aren't really in a courtroom, but rather a bizarre faux-trial presided over by the biology teacher to determine who ruined a school project.
 
== Newspaper Video GamesComics ==
* In one ''[[Mad Magazine]]'' issue where they examined the legal system, the prosecutor asks the defendant "Did you kill [victim]?" and the defendant replies that he did. The defense attorney immediately objects on the grounds that the prosecution is leading the witness, and the judge has the statement stricken from the record. They get an acquittal.
** Also an instance of [[YouArtistic FailLicense Law Forever]], since the only time the prosecution would be asking the defendant questions would be on cross-examination, where leading questions are allowed.
 
== ComicsVideo Games ==
* Pulled at least once in The ''[[Ace Attorney]]'' games, when Franziska von Karma shows off an illegally acquired photograph, not as formal evidence (since that would ruin her Perfect Record, after all), but just to give the judge and audience something to think about. Too bad for her [[Cloudcuckoolander|the implications fly completely over the Judge's head.]]
 
== WebcomicWeb Comics ==
 
* Pulled in a [[Kangaroo Court]] in ''[[Looking for Group]]'', when the prosecutor brings up Richard saving the life of a small child (it ''is'' a trial of demons, after all), then [http://www.lfgcomic.com/page/155 immediately withdraws the question].
 
== Western Animation ==
 
* Parodied in ''[[Futurama]]'', where the jury (a DOOP war-crimes tribunal) were all witnesses (to the destruction of DOOP headquarters). The rival lawyer asks the jury to point out the person they saw committing the act, and are told by the judge to disregard their own statements.
* Hilariously parodied in ''[[Batman: The Animated Series]]'', where Batman is being held on trial by a [[Joker Jury]].
Line 66 ⟶ 59:
 
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Dialogue{{PAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Artistic License Law]]
[[Category:Courtroom Antic Tropes]]
[[Category:Disregard That StatementDialogue]]