A court of law is a serious place. We think of courtrooms as places that serve justice, where people act with composure and focus on logical decision-making. Yet sometimes, judges face cases and arguments so ridiculous that it can feel like a hidden camera is watching.
Plenty of ridiculous lawsuits have plagued the U.S. court system. For example, PETA tried to prove, albeit unsuccessfully, that a monkey can own a copyright to its own selfie. Michael Jordan and the Nike CEO have been sued by a self-proclaimed look-alike, citing damages for emotional pain and suffering.
Absurd reasoning is a staple in court hearings too, it seems, as many lawyers have shared plenty of funny stories when one netizen asked, “Lawyers of Reddit, what’s the most ridiculous argument you've heard in court?” From trying to justify running a red light because the sun was in their eyes to claiming responsibility simply because they drive a Prius, these folks really should’ve used a better defense in court, because theirs was pretty laughable.
#41
Not a lawyer, but I was in traffic court and a cab driver had got a ticket for running a red. He argued that it was really difficult to see because the sun was rising (morning) right where the light was. He was traveling west.
Report
8points
#42
Wasn't the other lawyer, but his client. Took the stand in a retail theft trial. Claimed he didn't steal a couple salmon filets on purpose, he was just so flustered by a phone conversation with his girlfriend that he accidentally slipped them into the pockets of his jacket (in a part of the store the loss prevention officer called "shoplifter alley" because it's a blind spot for the cameras) and walked out without realizing it.
It's not like it was a candy bar or something small, it was two salmon filets! I asked him, "have you ever done that before?" Him: "No." Me: "Have you ever seen anyone, anywhere, ever put fish like that in their pocket in your entire life?" Him: ".....No."
Mercifully, the jury did not buy his ludicrous story and found him guilty.
It's not like it was a candy bar or something small, it was two salmon filets! I asked him, "have you ever done that before?" Him: "No." Me: "Have you ever seen anyone, anywhere, ever put fish like that in their pocket in your entire life?" Him: ".....No."
Mercifully, the jury did not buy his ludicrous story and found him guilty.
Report
8points
#43
I wasn't a lawyer, but a law clerk working with the prosecutor's office. This guy was caught on the highest quality security cam video I've ever seen st**bing a store clerk like 15 times (she survived), and then was tackled a block away from the scene not 5 minutes later by a man who had see him flee and followed him, 25 feet from the knife and the jacket he'd been wearing that was covered in blood with a receipt with his name on it in the pocket.
It was the literal definition of a slam dunk case. The guy chose to proceed to trial without his lawyer instead of having the case postponed after his attorneys house was broken into and all his files were stolen.
This guys's main argument was that it wasn't him because in the statement of probable cause written by the officers after the incident they misspelled his highly unique lastname by adding a T in the middle (e.g. Johnson became Johnston). He spelled his name out at every opportunity with much emphasis. He also argued it couldn't be him because the man on the video tied a t-shirt around his head so that the distinctive tattoos there would be hidden, but he would never cover over his tattoos like that because he was proud of them and they represented his heritage as a Korean man.
The jury took less than a half hour to return a guilty verdict.
It was the literal definition of a slam dunk case. The guy chose to proceed to trial without his lawyer instead of having the case postponed after his attorneys house was broken into and all his files were stolen.
This guys's main argument was that it wasn't him because in the statement of probable cause written by the officers after the incident they misspelled his highly unique lastname by adding a T in the middle (e.g. Johnson became Johnston). He spelled his name out at every opportunity with much emphasis. He also argued it couldn't be him because the man on the video tied a t-shirt around his head so that the distinctive tattoos there would be hidden, but he would never cover over his tattoos like that because he was proud of them and they represented his heritage as a Korean man.
The jury took less than a half hour to return a guilty verdict.
Report
8points
#44
I am a lawyer. Colleague argued that it wasn't animal cruelty to sh**t a dog because the dog didn't suffer. This wasn't like a euthanasia situation, rather a robbery gone bad. The judge entertained it for a second and then came to her senses.
Report
8points
#45
Car accident case where the Plaintiff was clearly trying to ham it up. Brought friends and family for back up and the stories were all inconsistent. Cried on the stand. It was a small accident and the Plaintiff wanted a lot of money for sprains. The attorney said "Yeah there are inconsistencies and crazy stories. But you don't believe the person who tells you the same thing every time. That is the person pulling the wool over your eyes." Um, no. Honest people are consistent. The attorney also had his client testify that no interpreters were used when they were and that there was confusion about a question regarding a prior accident when that question was never asked.
Edit: Am a lawyer.
Edit: Am a lawyer.
Report
8points
#46
My parents are both lawyers.
Was in court with my dad when I was younger. Dad is throwing out objection after objection at the opposing counsel during cross examination. Judge is sustaining all of them. Several hours into this, the judge is getting restless and asks the opposing counsel to hurry it up.
Opposing counsel responds: "Well if Mr. Surname would stop objecting perhaps I could get through my examination."
Judge did not like this. She lays into the guy: "If you would stop asking objectable questions Mr. Surname wouldn't have to object! Hurry this I am not going to sit here all day."
Was pretty cool to watch as a kid. Dude got roasted. Dad won that trial.
Was in court with my dad when I was younger. Dad is throwing out objection after objection at the opposing counsel during cross examination. Judge is sustaining all of them. Several hours into this, the judge is getting restless and asks the opposing counsel to hurry it up.
Opposing counsel responds: "Well if Mr. Surname would stop objecting perhaps I could get through my examination."
Judge did not like this. She lays into the guy: "If you would stop asking objectable questions Mr. Surname wouldn't have to object! Hurry this I am not going to sit here all day."
Was pretty cool to watch as a kid. Dude got roasted. Dad won that trial.
Report
8points
#47
There was this defendant that was running a Ponzi scheme with a story about going into depleted mines in South America with new technology to recover previously unrecoverable gold. He was actually using half of the money to buy gold bullion to dazzle investors, and pocketing the other half. When they arrested him, they found a s**t-ton of gold under his bed.
At his sentencing hearing a few years later (around 2011), it was argued that his sentence should be significantly reduced because, in the intervening time, the gold that had been seized had greatly appreciated in market value such that the investor victims would be mostly paid back in full, showing that his "investment" was actually prudent.
At his sentencing hearing a few years later (around 2011), it was argued that his sentence should be significantly reduced because, in the intervening time, the gold that had been seized had greatly appreciated in market value such that the investor victims would be mostly paid back in full, showing that his "investment" was actually prudent.
Report
8points
#48
A taxi driver was charged with a*****t for pelting stone at a bus driver after a minor accident between both vehicles.
Defense lawyer: Your lordship the bus driver was injured on right side of his neck, it is not possible for my client to cause that injury. The bus is right hand drive and the door on left side of the bus was open and driver was in driver's seat...
State: Your lordship, is counsel unaware that buses have windows?
Defense: The window was closed.
Judge: Really? How many times in this ~very hot and humid Indian city~ have you seen a bus drive around with windows closed unless it was raining?
Defense: I request adjournment your lordship.
Defense lawyer: Your lordship the bus driver was injured on right side of his neck, it is not possible for my client to cause that injury. The bus is right hand drive and the door on left side of the bus was open and driver was in driver's seat...
State: Your lordship, is counsel unaware that buses have windows?
Defense: The window was closed.
Judge: Really? How many times in this ~very hot and humid Indian city~ have you seen a bus drive around with windows closed unless it was raining?
Defense: I request adjournment your lordship.
Report
8points
#49
Currently studying law. One of my tutors told me about a case he had while working for the state, where the defendant tried to claim that being an orphan had given him severe PTSD and mental illness and he was unfit to stand trial.
Unfortunately, he was on trial for m***ering his parents, so it didn't really fly.
Unfortunately, he was on trial for m***ering his parents, so it didn't really fly.
Report
7points
#50
Not a lawyer but I testify in criminal court regularly due to my job.
Anyway, one morning I was sitting in a misdemeanor courtroom and watched a well-dressed mid-30's Polish lady step up when her name was called. She was charged with the crime of...failure to pay bus fare (about $2). Instead of just paying the minimal fine, she went full r****d and decided to defend herself pro se against this clearly heinous charge. She then proceeeded to give a 45 minute oral argument that stretched my understanding of reality. At various points in this impassioned speech she dropped to her knees and prayed, invoked the Archangel Michael, and began flapping her arms like wings.
The judge was not amused and sat there listening with his head in his hands, but he couldn't stop her of course. Eventually she finished, and he immediately found her guilty and ordered her to pay something like $40 to the clerk. This only made her angrier, and she began the whole flapping of the arms thing again and arguing with the judge. At this point, the judge explicitly stated: "I want you to leave the court room now. If you make ONE SINGLE NOISE on your way out, the deputies will take arrest you for contempt." Two deputies started inching closer to her (they never get much action working courthouse duty, so they were excited). She looked defeated and began to exit, but just at the door she turned around and opened her stupid mouth once more to call the judge a "cursed demon." Everyone applauded as she was dragged out in cuffs.
Anyway, one morning I was sitting in a misdemeanor courtroom and watched a well-dressed mid-30's Polish lady step up when her name was called. She was charged with the crime of...failure to pay bus fare (about $2). Instead of just paying the minimal fine, she went full r****d and decided to defend herself pro se against this clearly heinous charge. She then proceeeded to give a 45 minute oral argument that stretched my understanding of reality. At various points in this impassioned speech she dropped to her knees and prayed, invoked the Archangel Michael, and began flapping her arms like wings.
The judge was not amused and sat there listening with his head in his hands, but he couldn't stop her of course. Eventually she finished, and he immediately found her guilty and ordered her to pay something like $40 to the clerk. This only made her angrier, and she began the whole flapping of the arms thing again and arguing with the judge. At this point, the judge explicitly stated: "I want you to leave the court room now. If you make ONE SINGLE NOISE on your way out, the deputies will take arrest you for contempt." Two deputies started inching closer to her (they never get much action working courthouse duty, so they were excited). She looked defeated and began to exit, but just at the door she turned around and opened her stupid mouth once more to call the judge a "cursed demon." Everyone applauded as she was dragged out in cuffs.
Report
7points
#51
Not a lawyer but I once heard the worst argument of all time being made by this kid and his father to their attorney. It goes something like this:
*I only drive this car while I'm at home and I have a different one at school. When you drive this car it accelerates much faster than you realize and you easily lose track of your speed.*
No s**t Sherlock, some cars are fast and we have this magical gauge that tells you your exact speed! Jesus Christ.
*I only drive this car while I'm at home and I have a different one at school. When you drive this car it accelerates much faster than you realize and you easily lose track of your speed.*
No s**t Sherlock, some cars are fast and we have this magical gauge that tells you your exact speed! Jesus Christ.
Report
7points
#52
I was involved in a trespass case where the defense argued the security supervisor of casino didn't have the legal authority to make somebody leave. They didn't argue the facts of the case, just questioned the supervisor on his own understanding of the trespass law and his powers as a member of the security department.
Report
7points
#53
Waiting for my case to be called I heard a wild argument. It was a Domestic Violence case and the Petitioner (person seeking protection) was accusing Respondent (ex-boyfriend) of a***e, specifically he head butted her. Respondent argued back by saying "seriously, honestly judge, I couldn't have because look at my head, it's huge. A head this big would leave a mark. Honestly judge look at my head." To which the judge responded, "Son, I have a big head. Look at my head." This went on for a minute.
Now the story doesn't stop here. It just gets better. The Respondent then argues that Petitioner "is keeping him from seeing their daughter, and that she went as far as putting her uncle as the baby's father on the birth certificate."
At this point I look around with shock, the clerk's mind is slowly grasping what he said, and the judge nods his head with a "typical Tuesday" smirk.
Now the story doesn't stop here. It just gets better. The Respondent then argues that Petitioner "is keeping him from seeing their daughter, and that she went as far as putting her uncle as the baby's father on the birth certificate."
At this point I look around with shock, the clerk's mind is slowly grasping what he said, and the judge nods his head with a "typical Tuesday" smirk.
Report
6points
#54
Not a lawyer, but I thought this was a very strange defence. Gary Heidnik had a history of mental illness, but none the less made a fortune in the stock market and had enough to retire indefinitely. In the late 80s, he decided to kidnap five women and chain them to the wall in the basement where he r***d them every day, as well as t****red them (he was fond of electrocuting them) for not getting pregnant. When one of the women starved to d***h, he forced the other women to eat her body mixed with dogfood.
Another women, when getting her routine electrocution t*****e, was accidentally electrocuted to d***h. One of the remaining three victims asked if she could visit family if she promised to come back. He agreed and she called the police. In court, he claimed that he had committed no crime because the women were already chained in the basement when he moved in.
Another women, when getting her routine electrocution t*****e, was accidentally electrocuted to d***h. One of the remaining three victims asked if she could visit family if she promised to come back. He agreed and she called the police. In court, he claimed that he had committed no crime because the women were already chained in the basement when he moved in.
Report
6points
#55
Not mine, but my old Mock Trial instructor:
"And how do we know that [witness]'s testimony is reliable? *(to [witness])* You wear need to wear glasses, correct?"
"Yes."
"So doesn't that mean that you are legally considered to have impaired vision?"
"Yes"
(Prosecution proceeds to build most of their cross examination on this leg, painting the witness as unreliable because of poor vision. Finally, defense gets a chance to question again)
"You wear glasses Mr. [witness], is that correct?"
"Yes"
"So whenever you're wearing glasses, you have 20/20 vision, correct?"
"Yes"
"Thank you. No further questions.".
"And how do we know that [witness]'s testimony is reliable? *(to [witness])* You wear need to wear glasses, correct?"
"Yes."
"So doesn't that mean that you are legally considered to have impaired vision?"
"Yes"
(Prosecution proceeds to build most of their cross examination on this leg, painting the witness as unreliable because of poor vision. Finally, defense gets a chance to question again)
"You wear glasses Mr. [witness], is that correct?"
"Yes"
"So whenever you're wearing glasses, you have 20/20 vision, correct?"
"Yes"
"Thank you. No further questions.".
Report
6points
#56
A guy on probation was arrested because he was late at night in a Park and seemed drunk. The judge asked him what he was doing there in the middle of the night and he answered "I was doing Yoga". He was obviously lying, the judge asked him to name a Yoga position and some lawyers behind him whispered a Position to him which caused the whole Court room to laugh. The judge then let him go.
Report
5points
#57
My uncle did malpractice defense. Well one year he had to defend a surgeon, the patient said after his elbow surgery he couldn't play tennis anymore.
They went through weeks of work trying to figure out what went wrong and why all the sudden this guy couldn't play tennis, because according to all the evidence the surgery went fine and he should be good.
Then, right before a recess, my uncle stopped and asked "sir...have you ever played tennis before?" The guy said "well...no but I've always wanted to"
The case got dismissed.
They went through weeks of work trying to figure out what went wrong and why all the sudden this guy couldn't play tennis, because according to all the evidence the surgery went fine and he should be good.
Then, right before a recess, my uncle stopped and asked "sir...have you ever played tennis before?" The guy said "well...no but I've always wanted to"
The case got dismissed.
Report
3points
#58
Hands down the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard was a Constitutionalist, *pro se* defendant trying to explain why the Court lacked jurisdiction over him.
I was prepared for the standard arguments about "freeman on the land," non-corporate natural person, admiralty court, etc... But this one was different. This particular defendant was part of a Jehovah's Witness compound and happened to be Marshallese-American (i.e. he was black).
After the Court patiently explained to him that it has jurisdiction over all persons in the county, the defendant promptly piped up that, under the *Dred Scott* decision, he wasn't a person and the Court had no jurisdiction.
I was prepared for the standard arguments about "freeman on the land," non-corporate natural person, admiralty court, etc... But this one was different. This particular defendant was part of a Jehovah's Witness compound and happened to be Marshallese-American (i.e. he was black).
After the Court patiently explained to him that it has jurisdiction over all persons in the county, the defendant promptly piped up that, under the *Dred Scott* decision, he wasn't a person and the Court had no jurisdiction.
Report
3points