That prompt was incorrect. They didn't get kicked off the jury they got an ENTIRE jury pool kicked off the jury. Put respect on the name

@johnhurtme

2 жыл бұрын

Also worth noting, the man was not "defending himself" he was PROSECUTING himself. Big difference between defense and plaintiff. If you can't get an ambulance chaser to take on a liability or injury case, it's a pretty weak case

@personinousapraham3082

2 жыл бұрын

@@johnhurtme uh not quite buddy, "prosecuting" is in criminal cases, where the state prosecutes a defendant. In this sort of a civil case, he is *representing* himself as the plaintiff

@johnhurtme

2 жыл бұрын

@@personinousapraham3082 will pardon me council. I did say plaintiff in the second sentence. The fact remains that it was a crap case or he wouldn't be by himself trying to prosecute it. Every ambulance chaser crap attorney would be all over it

@Weneedaplague

2 жыл бұрын

Pretty sure they came back after the lawyers realized the jury would never agree with them and made a deal

@michellenguyen203

2 жыл бұрын

I don't understand, anyway to make it easier for me to understand. 😅

How do you judge a trial fairly and impartially when the trial itself is not? 😐

@zechariah22

2 жыл бұрын

Right?? It's nutty out here

@lewiswood1437

2 жыл бұрын

It's likely that the old man declined a lawyer from the state. Every person who goes to court has a right to a lawyer. That being said, most state lawyers are overworked and often don't care much about each case.

@samirmussa1

2 жыл бұрын

@@lewiswood1437 state lawyers are trash

@Lyk0ss

2 жыл бұрын

@@lewiswood1437 only in criminal cases, not in civil cases. He likely did not have the funds.

@lewiswood1437

2 жыл бұрын

@@Lyk0ss if he was the defendant he 100% would have been offered a lawyer

Jury selection: Do you have any empathy? Jury: yes Js: ok then bye

@Bleats_Sinodai

2 жыл бұрын

Literally. They actually remove you from the pool of potential juries if you show not being aligned with the views of the judge.

@andrewcook2625

2 жыл бұрын

Well duh, sorry but the question of whether or not you're guilty of a crime, or should be liable for for damages should be based on facts of the case and evidence provided, not whether you buy into a sob story The only time empathy should come into play is jury nullification, where the jury agrees that the defendant committed the crime but that the law is wrong

@tatiana4050

2 жыл бұрын

@@andrewcook2625 but normal person would have some form of empathy. Jury made up of people without empathy would be psychopaths.

@andrewcook2625

2 жыл бұрын

@@tatiana4050 its not having empathy in general thats the issue, its having confirmation bias because of your empathy that is the problem You need to be able to check your empathy and adhere to the facts of the case over how you feel about indivduals in the case... otherwise you end up with kangaroo courts that are just show for a lynch mob

@3ratsinatrenchcoat342

2 жыл бұрын

@@andrewcook2625 always remember life is about balance. Without empathy as one person said you'll have a jury of psychopaths/sociopaths who look at things as black and white. With only empathy and no reason you'll have people who do things based off what they believe but not consider the facts that could easily change their perspective if given a chance. Nothing is one or the other so it's good to practice being both 🧍🏾‍♂️

Sounds about right, given how Erika was in Game Changer: Survivor. :D "I told you I would *burn this building down* rather than go against *these two men* that I love!!"

@arilovesbingus8626

2 жыл бұрын

riot jury

@jamesmayle3787

Жыл бұрын

Please read at least three books of the Bible. The first book of each testament and one you chose yourself. As you do practice forgiveness. It’s an important step most skip. The Bible is truth. Jesus Christ is Lord;

@ja_cow_ski

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesmayle3787 what

@wildmoose3979

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesmayle3787 hail satan, archangelo

@veronica_sawyer_1989

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesmayle3787 why are you here.

"You paused what was that about?" You want me to think and give an honest answer or just regurgitate the word yes? Give me a goddamn second.

@cryofpaine

Жыл бұрын

Exactly. It's a court of law, of course I'm going to give the question the consideration it deserves.

@DeltaEntropy

Жыл бұрын

If you have to think about whether or not you’re going to be fair and impartial you shouldn’t be on a jury…

@P4rz1va1

Жыл бұрын

@@DeltaEntropy you obviously have to think before answering any question or it's not a real answer.

@DeltaEntropy

Жыл бұрын

@@P4rz1va1 so when someone asks you your name you have to think about it? You don’t just answer?

@P4rz1va1

Жыл бұрын

@@DeltaEntropy that's obviously an exception. Any question can be a variable but your name never changes.

i got called in for jury duty and its this guy who was on death row and they just went around the room and asked if we supported the death penalty and everyone who said no was dismissed.

@DragonHenO

2 жыл бұрын

That’s pretty fucked up

@NickTheDM

Жыл бұрын

That kinda makes sense. The jury is there to determine whether someone broke the law or not, not whether that law should be a thing. If you come in already believing that there is no situation that could justify that sentence, you’re not actually judging the case anymore. For the record, I don’t support the death penalty either, I also would have been dismissed. I just think I get why.

@lonefire333

Жыл бұрын

@@NickTheDM but the people more likely to support the death penalty are more likely to see a criminal of deserving of death and unfairly give more support to the prosecution. That's how the laws are built to reinforce a prison state

@NickTheDM

Жыл бұрын

@@lonefire333 That’s true, the laws aren’t well constructed. But that’s not the point of the trial. Not everyone who believes in the death penalty will think that the person on trial deserves it. But everyone who doesn’t would definitively not, meaning they’re no longer looking at the case objectively regardless of the facts. It’s not a pleasant reality, but there isn’t really another way to have an actual fair trial on the laws as they’re written. It’s the defendant on trial, not the law.

@ADogNamedStay

Жыл бұрын

That's a mistrial.

I still remember the time a jury member took one look at the person being accused of a crime and going "um, I actually can't be here," and after multiple times of pushing as to why with her constantly going "I can't say," till she finally lamented "I was on a previous case where he was found guilty," and because you aren't allowed to know if this person has a record in order to be impartial, everyone got dismissed. So they didn't want to dismiss her without a good reason and ended up getting everyone dismissed in the process.

@jessamynroguski9649

Жыл бұрын

Youd think they'd have a record of who was a jury member for previous cases to prevent situations like this

@ma-rl6ce

Жыл бұрын

@@jessamynroguski9649 or just check with her in a private convo after she said she can't be there multiple times

@psycomachia

Жыл бұрын

I know this comment is 7 months old but the word is relented not lamented, unless she was really sad.

@jessamynroguski9649

Жыл бұрын

@@ma-rl6ce right? Like cmon you had solutions, fucking use them

@ImAlsoMerobiba

11 ай бұрын

Wow summoned for jury duty twice?

Ladies and gentlemen, the American justice system.

@hf4229

2 жыл бұрын

What are you implying about the justice system that would've made the situation better? He chose to represent himself. It's not like they didn't give him the option to have a lawyer present. So he either didn't seek legal counsel, which the state provides for free in cases sueing for damages when an individual has low income, or he took the legal counsel, decided not to get a lawyer to represent him, and went in defending himself.

@thermostance1815

2 жыл бұрын

@@hf4229 it's not free, plus even with provided free counsel -> it's still not any match to a team of real estate lawyers.

@Grrtmyr23

2 жыл бұрын

Which country are you from?

@emretekmen1602

2 жыл бұрын

@@hf4229 yeah, it costs money. if you don't think the system is broken from the ground up, you ARE THE PROBLEM

@austinrk30

2 жыл бұрын

@@emretekmen1602 how is this random KZread commenter the problem? LMAO this guy hasnt contributed to the so called "problem" of the justice system. Stop using buzz words that don't apply.

Honestly, of course it was Erika

@jamesmayle3787

Жыл бұрын

Please read at least three books of the Bible. The first book of each testament and one you chose yourself. As you do practice forgiveness. It’s an important step most skip. The Bible is truth. Jesus Christ is Lord;

@titouanangeard8202

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesmayle3787 who asked ?

@jamesmayle3787

Жыл бұрын

@@titouanangeard8202 some people go to church, some churches go to people.

@titouanangeard8202

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesmayle3787 yeah I went to church all my life before there were people telling me that I was going to rot in hell because of who I am

@titouanangeard8202

Жыл бұрын

@@jamesmayle3787 so please stay in you churches

The fact she thought about her answer first means she was evaluating her own biases before answering, she was the fairest one in that courtroom!!

“Have you ever heard of jury nullification?”

@acgeewhiz

2 жыл бұрын

As a bit of nerd, that’s the first thing I thought of, lol.

@JamesNewham

Жыл бұрын

Oh God don’t tell Grey this happened

@TheJanitorIsIn

Жыл бұрын

Yeah but she nullified the jury

As soon as the prompt started to appear I immediately went,” yeah that’s gotta be Erika”

@adamstewart5188

Жыл бұрын

Absolutely. But I expected it to be for talking about jury nullification.

She's an absolute Chad for doing that.

@qxnza

2 жыл бұрын

Nah she a chaliña

@marreco6347

2 жыл бұрын

Or she could've been quiet and brought that up when it was a better time, making the old man win the case. Learn the difference between looking good and doing good.

@jimstoesz3878

2 жыл бұрын

@@marreco6347 except her keeping quiet would have been both pointless and illegal. The old man was never going to win in that scenario, and lying about her ability to be unbiased when asked is a criminal offense.

@lennyjenkins9931

2 жыл бұрын

@@jimstoesz3878 So a Chad for kicking out an entire jury pool? You do know the proceedings still happened right?

@MrGowose

2 жыл бұрын

@@lennyjenkins9931 She didn’t kick them out. It’s not her fault that the rest of the jury decided to speak up against the case. She never forced anyone to speak up, if none of the other jury members said anything about it then she would’ve been the only person to be kicked out.

"Viva la revolution baby ☕️😎" So bad ass bro 🤣🤣🤣

Well, GG College Humor, my feed is now inundated with nothing but clips from your shows and I have been forced to subscribe to Dropout. I hope you're happy >:(

@Zachary_McLaren

2 жыл бұрын

They fucking got me too, absolutely diabolical.

@harrymansfield6189

2 жыл бұрын

Well as someone else with a Dropout subscription, I’m happy because it’s heckin amazing

@chiaseed7974

2 жыл бұрын

I can still resist

@notyourdaughter666

2 жыл бұрын

i need to do it but i’m BROKE

@Summer_Lee

2 жыл бұрын

Welcome to the fam~

The more I learn about Erika, the more I love them

@ASithLordd

Жыл бұрын

same

"will you judge the trial fairly and impartially?" "uh, yes I will. I will judge it fairly and impartial as an unfair and partial trial" "omg you're so right, this ISN'T really an even trial!" "So that's when we decided that they weren't gonna be an impartial jury. They just like the old man too much to make this fair, what can I say."

@deusdamnit

9 ай бұрын

The jury doesn't get a say in the process. The reason that your jury must be unbiased (for or against either party) is because both the claimant and the defendant have the right to a fair trial. Fair, here, being not in the nature of someone's class, but in the handling of both parties by the court. You think you're highlighting a hypocrisy, but this is actually the fairest and most appropriate way to handle exactly this situation. It is necessary that the government is not injecting bias into the trial, and the government has the responsibility to ensure the jury is unbiased as part of that process. Generally speaking, jury trials are largely fair. It's possible to bias juries and judges, that is human nature, but that's why this particular process is so rigorous, and why there are so many outlets for both claimants and defendants to declare new motions or appeals throughout the process. Similarly, there are many state and federal assistance programs for legal aid, many charities that offer aid to LIC people, and most lawyers will work on a contingency basis where they draw their income from the court award if the suit is successful.

@ilyte1

6 ай бұрын

So the jury is wrong for having empathy rather than the trial being wrong for being unbalanced AS YOU POINTED OUT? Got it

@theeternalsith9702

5 ай бұрын

@@deusdamnit The was a lawsuit with and elderly man going up against two powerful teams of lawyers. Yeah real fair here you sociopathic ignoramus. The system is broken and you’re just trying to justify it so that you don’t feel like a POS.

@sheepketchup9059

5 ай бұрын

​@@deusdamnit how's jury gonna be unbiased when the trial is partial?

How dare she expose the inherent flaws in our justice system

@censors_starve

Жыл бұрын

What flaw? That you can go to court without a lawyer? If you had to get a lawyer then people would complain that it's unfair and discriminates based off of income. Lawyers don't typically work for free

@davidtaylor142

Жыл бұрын

@@censors_starve first of all, there are many, many flaws with the American justice system. You could (and people have) filled many books with them. Secondly, you know public defenders exist, right?

@censors_starve

Жыл бұрын

@@davidtaylor142 first the topic of flaw being discussed is the person not having a lawyer. That is not a flaw. Second public defenders are only if you were charged with a crime.

@censors_starve

Жыл бұрын

@@RinnzuRosendale and does that number of cases equal to or greater than the number of cases where people can't afford a lawyer? Or if they make too much money they won't qualify so it may be a matter of saving money because lawyers aren't cheap. Especially if you want to fight your case all the way through a trial and then you have appeals. If a person is willing to represent themselves they have every right to.

@winningsince1992

Жыл бұрын

@david taylor you realize it wasn't a criminal case right? And the old man was the one suing and was not a defendant

That's how you get out of jury duty

@ladykoiwolfe

2 жыл бұрын

Well, that's one way.

@dazeyndrowsy

2 жыл бұрын

I'm gonna commit this one to memory lmao

@Deadflower019

2 жыл бұрын

The other one is knowing about the existence of Jury Nullification.

@Caelinus

Жыл бұрын

"Yes, I will fairly judge guilt in this trial. By making sure the police state supporting psychopathic prosecutor's prove their case well enough to overturn my entire belief system, on the pentalty of me refusing to find anyone guilty of anything ever." Yep, that will get you out of it.

@eerielakeerie

Жыл бұрын

pro tip if they ask “will you take the arresting officer at his word without question,” and you say no, they’ll dismiss you.

If you told me with no context that Erika Ishii once tried to start a revolution, I would 100% have believed you

the story is told in a joking way but that’s like super dystopian

sounds like the jury of peers DID reach a decision and the decision was "man fuck this"

When watching the episode for the first time I thought “I don’t really know much about the other three, but I 1000% believe Erika would do that.”

Love how impartiality and equality in front of the law in America means that if there is clearn as daylight injustice the jury gets dismissed.

I love how gay everyone looks on this show

@blackspark

2 жыл бұрын

I mean many members of CH are part of the LGBTQ community

@vibin.-

2 жыл бұрын

Yessss

@evunee

2 жыл бұрын

Sameee

@riccardozanoni2531

2 жыл бұрын

This show is literal bi panic from start to finish lol

@ash.whothat

Жыл бұрын

Literally what i first thought lol

every time i learn something new about erika they become the coolest person ever in my head

He wasn't defending himself, he was representing himself......

@winningsince1992

Жыл бұрын

Exactly the lawyers where representing the defendants

@Glmorrs1

9 ай бұрын

Semantics, you know what she meant even if she didn’t use the technically correct word. Don’t be that fucking pedantic.

@Devon297

6 ай бұрын

Yeah, he was sueing, it wasn't criminal defense. Something sounds strange here.

@Roe97

6 ай бұрын

@@Devon297it doesn’t sound staged. It sounds like Erika chose the wrong word while drinking during an unscripted chat with her friends. Trust me. With the fact checker on that platform if it was staged they would’ve gotten the wording right.

The music fits so perfectly for the reveal part

I'm loving the way she said "viva la revolucion baby"

Sounds about right!

Literally tainted a jury pool by making sense, new favorite college humor person

She’s so fucking badass

I don't know this show but I love her

@cryofpaine

2 жыл бұрын

It's a new spin-off of Game Changers. On the Dropout streaming service.

@brookelynnenewcomer943

2 жыл бұрын

@@cryofpaine thanks I check it out

For anyone wondering, you’re allowed to request a jury for a civil trial but you don’t here about it very often because it slows things down and the outcome is less(for both sides) with no jury. Being an old man with no lawyer though your greatest asset is empathy. He was probably advised by a legal consultant to request a jury.

I really wish they could've secretly gone like "so... we're gonna vote for the old man right? no matter what?"

@bremjo7929

Жыл бұрын

And make the justice system even worse, what a great idea. I think every case should be solved by pity points and who you like more. Let popular and well liked people get away with crimes! They’ve been getting convicted for too long!

I just have to say the idea that you wouldn't be allowed to defend yourself is immensely more terrifying then the idea that you might have to defend yourself.

I swear to god, it's like all of the women in college humor are straight up badasses

@pastel4k

Жыл бұрын

almost like they stuff they say is embellished for entertainment value. what a crazy concept

@benja1378

Жыл бұрын

Erika is gender-fluid , so yeah not really the best to say they're a woman

@itsgonnabeanaurfromme

Жыл бұрын

They clearly try too hard to be "against the system" while working for basically a corporation and taking money from advertisers and companies.

@itsgonnabeanaurfromme

Жыл бұрын

​@@benja1378 gender-fluid BS is a trend and an insult to actual trans people

@zanderclark1461

Жыл бұрын

​@@itsgonnabeanaurfromme"You're against society and yet you participate in society, how interesting." This is a pretty well known fallacy by now.

Her being the voice acted for Valkyrie makes this even more believable

Erika is a Brujah thru and thru

Erika Ishii is one of my favourite people. She's crazy fun in everything

He isn't defending if he is the one bringing the lawsuit.

fun fact that's because of some legal reasons. i wont say any specifics in case someone here wants to be on a jury lol but read this comment at ur own risk when people are chosen for jury duty, they always ask that question to find out if someone knows about a loophole. if they know about it and reply in a way that lets other jurors know or convince other jurors to use the loophole, judge's will dismiss them all. feel free to look it up if u want, but if u lie about knowing the loophole and get found out, u can be charged for it (so i don't recommend it)

@sourwitch2340

2 жыл бұрын

Wait, is that about a specific loophole or loopholes in general? Since this is the comments below your comment, I doubt anyone without intent to know it will be here, so would you mind just naming or something what it actually is?

@420vapemaster69

2 жыл бұрын

@@sourwitch2340 it's called jury nullification, but know that u legally have to tell them that u know what it is if u get picked for jury duty and they ask

@420vapemaster69

2 жыл бұрын

@@sourwitch2340 also love the username

Not kicked off, "poisoned" the whole room of potential jurors Sometimes you can get fined for that, hope she didn't

I agree to a point. The issue is that there have been situations like this where the guy thinks he can get millions when he can't and at a certain point it's so far beyond damages.

When I thought I couldn't love Erika more ❤

why is nobody talking about bex being there ??? i love them

I was on my 3rd day of the possible jury selection of this murder trial where they were going to argue part of it was for Santaria (a Christian and pagan practice of a type of witchcraft, kinda). It just so happened that I believe in a type of paganism in faith, but I don't believe any of the current practices in the US, allow for the actual human sacrifice. Nor would it get in the way of my being more apt to follow the rules of the court BECAUSE the defendants were trying to use this aspect of their religious beliefs to try to escape murder charges. But they chose not to go with me. Poor both sides of that case...because it sounded like a night where a huge mistake on the victims part led to at the least, accidentally killing the victim, but no excuse for the victims gf who was a witness. Also, cases like this are why Wiccan and pagans get looks. But carrying out justice for the dead is its own good. The defendants had enough money for good lawyers (not great ones), but I looked up the case a few times for the next year; the defendants were charged with guilty (various degrees).

That's one way to never get jury-duty again

The prompt was incorrect. She was not "on the jury" to even get kicked out of. That question is during jury selection. How could a person get "kicked off of a jury" when they weren't "on a jury" to begin with. It's like saying, "yea I got expelled from private school, during the interview to get in."

Last bro was bassiacally me and my older cousins Whenecer we are going so.ewhere they always run away with the damn shoe 💀💀

That is the most Erica thing I have ever heard in my life.

I remember hearing this prompt and thinking, “Erika... who else would it be...”

With all the people talking about "how can you be fair when the trial is unfair"... Look. The older guy is the one suing. He is starting and bringing the fight. If he hasn't shown up with a lawyer, that is 100% on him, not the defendants. You should show up prepared if you are starting it ffs. (And if youre worried that he couldn't afford a lawyer; if the case really was that open and shut, any number of lawyers wouldve taken the case pro-bono). Anyways. You still can be fair and impartial in that scenario. If you think the team of lawyers are going to be spewing bullshit, then be critical about what they say. The reason you got kicked off the jury is because you had already decided that the older guy was right. And then you poisoned the jury pool by spreading the idea that the case was unfair. You said you could be fair when you had already decided who was right in the case: you lied, and lied under oath at that, because you were already biased.

hope that man got the justice he needs and deserves!

@avi2578

Жыл бұрын

He probably didn’t. Seeing as he was representing himself and the defendants had high-powered attorneys.

"We're going to force a bunch of people to appear in this court room over and over until we get a set of people who are going to agree with us" -United States Legal System

If he is suing, he’s not defending himself (there’s no charge against him), he’s representing himself. It’s not a good idea, for exactly the reason that the property owner & their insurance company are going to have trained attorneys on the case. He would probably be MUCH better off hiring an “ambulance chaser” lawyer, than representing himself. Insurance companies are RUTHLESS about defending their interests. That’s their job.

peak bisexual gargoyle behavior

@redacted6090

2 жыл бұрын

After reading this I have decided to drink bleach

@griffinwetzel3059

2 жыл бұрын

@@redacted6090 it’s a reference to an erika quote from a game changer episode

@redacted6090

2 жыл бұрын

@@griffinwetzel3059 still cringe

@griffinwetzel3059

2 жыл бұрын

@@redacted6090 literally who tf are u

@redacted6090

2 жыл бұрын

@@griffinwetzel3059 why does it matter lol, who are you?

If you’re defending yourself at trial it’s because you chose to regardless of the objections of the court. It’s his right to have legal counsel just as it’s his right to deny himself legal counsel.

@jacobfrench6987

Жыл бұрын

Thank you. Thought I was going insane reading these comments. He sued them. If you can figure out how to sue you can figure out how to hire an attorney if you want one.

@timdunn0

Жыл бұрын

@@jacobfrench6987 In other words, civil justice is unavailable to the poor.

Sometimes you just can't judge both fairly and impartially

Ahh Bex Taylor I love her!! I didn’t know she had ever been on here before that’s awesome 😁

I got an entire jury dismissed once because when asked that question I said "I can try, but I know what Jury Nullification is".

How is this inciting a revolt?

@hf4229

2 жыл бұрын

I don't think people understand how the justice system works in the US, but she probably screwed that guy over by getting the entire jury dismissed, and having the case get pushed back even further. They're presenting it like she's courageous and just fought the system or something. These are the type of people who go to a protest so they can post on social that they went to a protest.

@gavindy_Sv2

2 жыл бұрын

It’s not. She was booted because she already made up her mind. Can’t do that

@katvloom6542

2 жыл бұрын

It's just going against what government says is okay, and considering they got multiple people with it... it's a bit extreme wording

@hf4229

2 жыл бұрын

@@katvloom6542 it's not even really going against what the government says, she basically admitted to siding in favor of the old guy regardless of the details of the trial. She doesn't even know why the old guy didn't have a lawyer, hell, the lawyer may not have even shown up yet, or there were details she wasn't aware of. For all we know the older guy suing broke the door and it fell on him. She assumed the situation way before having any of the details and made up her mind solely based on trying to be self righteous. It's more self centered than it is heroic.

@Fanimati0n

2 жыл бұрын

@@hf4229 look, Idc about the reasoning, I'd side with him too, purely because corporate attorneys are scum & don't deserve nice things.

Never mention you know about it, but always know that jury nullification is an option

How to get out of jury duty 101 😂

She was kicked off because In her mind she already chose the winner. Same as the other. Not because she was inciting a revolt.

@e.d.5766

2 жыл бұрын

Being biased doesn't necessarily mean choosing a winner, and I don't think it did in this case based on the "We all know how this is going to go" comment (suggesting that, since one side is far more familiar with the law, the actual case itself matters far less than the differing abilities to present it, so the actual lawyers are going to win). Also, all of the statements presented are slightly embellished versions of the actual story. If you wanted to be annoyed at this, the better take is "Why would you lie about being able to judge the case fairly and impartially?"

@videoarchiveseries4365

2 жыл бұрын

Watch it again

@kardz1848

2 жыл бұрын

@@videoarchiveseries4365 no

@kardz1848

2 жыл бұрын

@@e.d.5766 what?

@a1shahh

2 жыл бұрын

@@kardz1848 theyre saying she didnt choose a winner, the court already decided that from the beginning when its 2 professional lawyers against the elderly man sueing them, obviously the lawyers are going to win because theyre more familiar with the law and can easily work their way through loops and holes. theyre also saying everything said in the video is was put into a more sophisticated manner, and if you were going go be annoyed, a better reasoning would be "why would you lie about being able to judge fairly and impartially?" hope that clarified.

What happened to “If you cannot afford an attorney, an attorney will be assigned to you?“

@tuxieblue_onyxshadow_adahm201

2 жыл бұрын

To my knowledge that's only if you get arrested. If you're in small claims court (or something similar) then you either represent yourself or forfeit the case if you can't afford a lawyer to represent you. Happened with my parents who were being sued for credit debt by a company who bought their debt and my parents did not receive any correspondence from them about this and what was going on. They ultimately had to file bankruptcy because they weren't able to pay at the time.

@faimynth6030

2 жыл бұрын

Some older people are also just stubborn and refuse to take on a lawyer or simply don't know this, I know a lot of people don't actually know that you can receive one through the state so it's very likely he didn't know his rights

@kimberlyabbott2767

2 жыл бұрын

i could be wrong but im thinking that's only for criminal cases, not civil

@hannahkolb5929

Жыл бұрын

That only applies for criminal court

Absolute icon

I AM SO IN LOVE WITH BEX, I'M SO HAPPY TO SEE THEM HERE!!!!!

Perhaps I'm just confused, the old man was harmed and is bringing suit against two parties. Each of the parties being sued has the right to a defense. I don't see how that is unfair or how the elderly man is defending himself he is the person bringing the lawsuit against both of the parties.

@crownforce489

2 жыл бұрын

Has the right to a defense =/= free lawyer. And even if it was a free lawyer, that lawyer would probably give 0 shites about defending the old man. The old man likely couldn't afford having a lawyer

@beastminer147

2 жыл бұрын

@@crownforce489 Every US citizens has the right to counsel and if you cannot afford one, you will be given a FREE public defender. HE CHOSE TO REPRESENT HIMSELF

@TheRCSoldier

2 жыл бұрын

@@beastminer147 oh come on, everyone knows a "public defender" isn't gonna do shit. The more money you have, the better a lawyer you can afford. It's never been about justice. Even with a lawyer that man wasn't gonna win.

@gtbarsi1103

2 жыл бұрын

@@crownforce489 The old man was not the defendant, the two people / entities he filled a civil lawsuit against are. The fact that they each hired their own lawyers is their right. In a civil matter I don't believe you can get a public defender. I hope that old man had good representation, as that aspect was not clear, just that the defendants had fancy looking lawyers representing them.

@gregorymorales1

2 жыл бұрын

Old man was not defending himself. He was acting as his own lawyer, he could have found a lawyer. Probably a sign that no personal injury lawyer would take his case.

i think now it’s a good time to mention how Incredibly Gay i am for erika

@vocalvortexstudios2058

2 жыл бұрын

It's also a good time to mentions how incredibly straight I am for Erika

@larcenfoster7900

2 жыл бұрын

@@vocalvortexstudios2058 valid tbh

I was picked to be on a Jury panel back in February. The other jurors and I started talking about some of the lawyers because they were being UGLY. They would make faces while the other lawyers were talking, they would whisper and laugh at each other. It was nasty. Another juror and I started giving them nicknames. Then I was curious, I asked him if any of them got into a brawl who would win. We both came to the same conclusion,then we asked other jurors and they pretty much thought the same. They saw the lawyers behind ugly too and started using the nicknames we gave them when we would talk. At the end of the trial I asked the judge and the bailiff on who they thought would have won. The bailiff answered with the person most of us jurors thought would win. The judge laughed and said she couldn't answer that. She asked who we thought and we told her the lawyer's nickname and which lawyer that was. She laughed so hard and told us if we had seen her making faces the whole time we were there.

Attempting? Sounds like she successfully incited a revolt. Good for her. That's goals.

If she'd have composed herself and dealt with the situation with due reverence and care, being a court of law and all, she could've actually had a bearing on the verdict. A court isn't twitter, you're there as a juror of your peers to carry out justice, not indulge yourself.

@gavindy_Sv2

2 жыл бұрын

Indulgence seems to be a hallmark of our modern society.

@beastminer147

2 жыл бұрын

Well she's a leftist so anything for a bit of grandstanding and virtue signaling. The story is also probably completely exaggerated to the point of being untrue.

@od1401

2 жыл бұрын

@@beastminer147 Yeah I got that impression too. They tend to be irreverent, arrogant, foolish and ignorant such as was displayed in this scenario.

@pennyforyourthots

2 жыл бұрын

If they found out that she was hiding this opinion later on in the case, then she would have gotten in trouble for it. That's the whole point of jury selection. So, the justice system is inherently unjust, so being on the jury is just for show anyway. Most Cases don't even get in front of a jury.

I'm confused, why was the old man defending? Wasn't he the plaintiff, being the one suing? Does she mean representing himself? Wouldn't dismissal mean the old man's lawsuit vs the owners was dropped?

@hannahkolb5929

Жыл бұрын

Correct, he was representing himself, not defending. Although, dismissing the jury doesn’t end the lawsuit, they just bring in the next pool to choose from

And here I thought I couldn’t love them any more.

Poisoning a Jury, my favorite

I’ve got jury duty in a few days. Let’s see if I can pull an Erica.

@desertranger3199

2 жыл бұрын

Don't

So you're surprised that a trained lawyer found out you were being emotional and wouldn't judge the facts.? Weird. It's like he knew you were a weirdo

¡Viva la revolción, baby!

"Fairly? Yes, absolutely. Impartially? Hmm, that's a bit more open for interpretation."

I grew a little bit gayer when she did that mmmm women

@ezachleewright2309

Жыл бұрын

I thought they were NB?

And then everyone stood up and clapped

You know they just filled that court room with a bunch of unsympathetic goobers after that and beat that old man blind 😢

Erika Ishii is a living legend. Viva la revolution.

Damn she shouldn't have said anything. I hope the old man won regardless.

@candylide

2 жыл бұрын

What? I don't think the man won, it's pretty imposible

@gummy5862

2 жыл бұрын

Do you honestly think that the opinions of jurors matters that much? They’re not the ultimate judge.

@fos1451

2 жыл бұрын

@@gummy5862 The opinion of jury kinda are important, one person could literally foil everything

All I said was the N-word and never got Jury Duty again.

This just made me love Erica even more! I am the goddess of chaos!

the Brujah inciting a riot say it isn't so

They look so woke

@Moracher

2 жыл бұрын

Ikr? Its great

@ZebraLuv

2 жыл бұрын

She looks more like post apocalyptic cosplay.

@Moracher

2 жыл бұрын

@@ZebraLuv exactly, stylish and badass

@jibjibs9401

2 жыл бұрын

Yess aren’t they great?

@andalidreali1771

Жыл бұрын

Wow you took that as a compliment

She’s my hero now

Comrade Erika

Poisoned the entire jury pool Respect 👏

He wasn't defending himself, if he was the one sueing then he wasn't on the defense now was he

idk if I've seen this episode or not, I don't think I have, but I heard the question and immediately thought of Erika LOL

I doubt there ever was a jury trial because everyone would automatically be on the old man's side. I'm guessing that after 4 total jury dismissals, they settled out of court.

That's such a valk thing to do

The biggest issue is that IS an impartial and fair judgement, of an unfair situation

Actual legend Erika Ishii.

ERIKA I LOVE YOUUUU

I’d be like “oh I can judge this fairly alright. 👁️ 👁️ I promise”