This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.
Important notes on articles:
- Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
- Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
- If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.
Post being replied to
It's what a witness should say if he doesn't recall. by John@Indy
If he does recall and says "I don't recall," then he's committed perjury. The plausibility of Swarbrick's lack of memory varies. For instance, I find it plausible that he didn't remember the specific number of times he had talked to a person or the specific year that something happened. But the idea that he couldn't even approximate doesn't hold water. As noted by others, this deposition is a perfect illustration of how not to handle a slippery witness. The attorney could have kept hammering and either obtained some useful information or made Jack look (more) ridiculous. An attorney who gets that answer to a question the witness should be able to answer shouldn't just shrug his shoulders and move on.