JewelryMart: Extracting the Pearl from the Oyster

Jeffrey Rodman
Jul 21, 2017 · 1 min read

(Note: This is one of a series of technical blogs about my recent experience on the jury of the 7-week trial for the 2013 “Jewelry Mart” murders in San Francisco. I will try to minimize unnecessary graphical descriptions.)

On day three, I was still getting accustomed to the conversational style of witness examination. Although it may have its merits, I have not yet tried to apply it in business meetings.

When you picked up the salt and pepper, did you…

— Objection! No proper foundation.

— Judge: Sustained. The jury will disregard the question.

Did you pick up the salt and pepper?

— Objection! Compound question

— Judge: Sustained.

Did you pick up the salt?

— Objection! Leading the witness

— Judge: Sustained.

What did you do with the salt?

— Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence

— Judge: Sustained.

Was there salt?

— Objection! Leading the witness

— Judge: Sustained.

What was there?

— There was salt and pepper.

What did you do with the salt?

— I picked it up.

— Court reporter: Was that “up” or “uck” ?

— “Up.”

— Thank you.

What did you do with the pepper?

— I picked it up.

So you picked up the salt and pepper?

— Objection! Asked and answered

— Judge: Sustained

When you picked up the salt and pepper, did you…

— Judge: It’s twelve o’clock, I think this would be a good time for our lunch break.

)
Jeffrey Rodman

Written by

Polycom's Co-founder and Chief Evangelist is at root a pixel 'n' sample geek + pianist. I speak and write about natural communications over unnatural distance

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade