Tap to unmute

Defense witness: Don't put words in my mouth

  • Жарияланды 2012 ж. 2 Жел.

Пікірлер • 7 856

  • huh8b7b
    huh8b7b  Жыл бұрын +2241

    Moral of the story:
    In a court, never say things that you think are probably true, only say that things that you know for a fact are true whenever you're a witness

    • Marlon Smith
      Marlon Smith 6 ай бұрын

      ​@huh8b7b 💯👍🏾

    • Woozy
      Woozy 8 ай бұрын

      Why does he give Dr. House vibes

    • Emrah Ekinci
      Emrah Ekinci 10 ай бұрын

      Francisco III J Dy When did you apply ?

    • brmbkl2015
      brmbkl2015 10 ай бұрын +3

      @Mousazz "Yeah, so? What's wrong with that? Isn't that what the court is trying to figure out?"
      are you kidding? the court is trying nothing, it's the lawyer that tries to have the witness underscribe the narrative he's trying to spin. that's how it works. ppl here are saying the doctor is unnecessarily combattive, just answer! I would call those people naive.

    • Mousazz
      Mousazz 10 ай бұрын

      @Akaash Nayak
      “saying “I don’t know, I’m not aware of other doctors' care” doesn’t really stand up in court."
      “I don’t know, I’m not aware of other doctors' care” is a _completely_ different answer to "I don't know, I have not judged the *quality* of other doctors' care". I don't see why the latter answer wouldn't stand.
      "whenever you take on a new patient, you must look at their previous history and doctors’ notes and factor that into your treatment plan."
      And yet the doctor has a policy not to qualitatively judge the work of his peers. Nothing about that implies that the doctor doesn't looks at their patient's previous medical history _at all_ in general, and if cross-examination implies that, then re-direct would have an opportunity to clarify.
      "i get that it’s frustrating to see him bunt every question thrown at him, but he’s being as specific as he can be"
      No, he's not just being "as specific as he can be", he is being evasive and refusing to answer questions. The judge was fully within the right to reprimand and scold the witness for his unwarranted non-cooperative hostility, even if he ultimately took a lighter tone.

  • Lyle
    Lyle 3 жыл бұрын +4613

    The judge seemed like a chill dude

    • Coimbra Law
      Coimbra Law 5 ай бұрын

      So what?

    • O
      O 9 ай бұрын

      The judge seemed to dislike the lawyers arrogance also.

    • Gyp
      Gyp 10 ай бұрын

      2 year old comment aged like milk for all to see . Nice

    • Ahmed Twam
      Ahmed Twam 10 ай бұрын

      @FavouriteSongs chill out dude

    • Fish Tank Cleaner
      Fish Tank Cleaner 11 ай бұрын

      @Geoff Poole no. It makes you look bad and if you care about the side calling you, it just hurts that cause. There are ways to be snippy and make the lawyer look bad but it can only happen when they ask a dumb question. Rittenhouse did a great job when Binger asked him why he was rushing to put out a fire. "Umm........it's a fire?"

  • Dmitri Rivera
    Dmitri Rivera 3 жыл бұрын +3189

    Legend has it to this day that he is still asking how many hours he has worked in dialysis

    • Patrick F
      Patrick F 7 ай бұрын +1

      @jewsco wrong by this doctor's own testimony he works between 6-10 hours a week on it.
      "A fee hours Monday, a few hours Tuesday"
      It's very clear its easy to estimate how much time he spends
      In fact if the lawyer wanted to could get the doctors records and find out exactly

    • Mike Luit
      Mike Luit 7 ай бұрын

      Oh, great comment!

    • Taekwondo Time
      Taekwondo Time 8 ай бұрын

      All I know is that doctors (like any professional) track their hours. He could tell you how much time he wasted trying to get his office printer working last week or how much he spent on stationary. Doctors track everything. They have to track everything. They're like engineers. If I'm working on a project my boss wants to know how much time I'm spending on development, testing, requirements, computer upgrades, etc. Everything is time-boxed and tracked. In the case of doctors, they usually have an assistant(s) to do it for them whereas I have to do my own time tracking.

    • Taekwondo Time
      Taekwondo Time 8 ай бұрын +1

      ​@Moto Matt Doctors (since they are paid so much) track every hour they spend on everything. My expectation from a doctor (which they could easily meet) is not only to tell me how many patients they saw on any given day, but also every last detail on what problem they had, the prescription given to treat it, etc...
      I should be able to ask a doctor: "Out of all the patients you saw last week, how many did you treat for broken bones?" I would expect to get an exact number.

    • Moto Matt
      Moto Matt 8 ай бұрын +1

      @Taekwondo Time your average Doctor won't find it easy to answer such a question. They work VERY long hours, and as long as needed.

  • Carlos Godoy
    Carlos Godoy  Жыл бұрын +1051

    “I never want to embellish what I do by denigrating what a colleague does.” - good quote

    • Carolyn loughran
      Carolyn loughran 5 ай бұрын

      Not in this case.
      The doctor doesn’t sound intelligent. He sounds like a difficult person who is trying too hard to “be right”. He thinks he’s clever but he simply sounds like he’s impossible to deal with.

    • Annon Nimous
      Annon Nimous 9 ай бұрын +1

      @sahn deeahgo Seem like he was being deceptive the entire time, and people only do that when they have something to hide.

    • Annon Nimous
      Annon Nimous 9 ай бұрын

      @ATM THANK YOU. It is a good quote, but in his case, B.S.

    • Arctain
      Arctain 9 ай бұрын +1

      The good doctor later negated his earlier testimony by saying that he has seen people who received poor care, and believes he has helped the addicted.
      Good job by the attorney to keep at it - made the good doctor look arrogant and full of bullshit.

  • Angelus_Solus
    Angelus_Solus 3 жыл бұрын +4067

    This is why they say, it's not who's innocent or guilty, it's who has the better lawyer.

    • Jerry Wayne
      Jerry Wayne Ай бұрын

      And meanwhile in Seattle DA’s don’t give a fuck

    • Angelus_Solus
      Angelus_Solus 7 ай бұрын

      @John Lewis In many cases, no pun intended, you're very correct.

    • John Lewis
      John Lewis 7 ай бұрын

      You are so right. Justice depends on the quality of the lawyers involved and Defence lawyers are allowed so much more latitude than Prosecution lawyers in my experience..

    • Jemand Jemand
      Jemand Jemand 9 ай бұрын

      the american court system is just trash. thats it

    • NotEminemsBurnerAccount
      NotEminemsBurnerAccount 10 ай бұрын

      @WHY WONT YOU SING seriously without a great lawyer Casey Anthony would have life behind bars and not out here making videos and smiling and enjoying life

  • Shazza Payne
    Shazza Payne 10 ай бұрын +46

    Love how this guy does not feel intimidated by the lawyer, and that he is both confident, comfortable to temain true to his profession whilst giving evidence. I also feel the judge in this trial can see that too ⚖

    • Jack Rodway
      Jack Rodway Ай бұрын +1

      @Viking9 The flat truth isn’t always what matters in a courtroom. Of course a defence witness is going to be more guarded when being cross-examined by the prosecution. Because even if the witness or the defence did absolutely nothing wrong, it’s literally the prosecution’s job to trip them up, twist their words, and make it appear as though they did. It’s what they get paid for. They need the win and at the end of the day, that’s what matters.

    • Viking9
      Viking9 Ай бұрын +1

      I don't understand why more people don't just see what's going on here. This doctor is a DEFENSE witness. When the defense was questioning him, there was no animosity, no parsing of statements, no insistence upon "specific" questions. He had no problem whatsoever explaining himself in rather boring detail to any and all defense questions which were, just like with this prosecutor, complex and multi-layered questions requiring complex and multi-layered responses. Now all of a sudden he wants to get his Irish up and do this ridiculous song and dance to avoid answering the prosecutor's questions by insisting on a yes or no format? The judge should have held him in contempt and sent him to County for 30 days just to refresh his memory of how easy it is if a witness simply....TELLS THE TRUTH!!!

    • Taylor Boudreaux
      Taylor Boudreaux 10 ай бұрын +2

      I was watching this and realized my wife works with him in dialysis. I’ve been listening to stories about him for the past 7 years and they all now make sense.

    • Timberwolf Mountaineer
      Timberwolf Mountaineer 10 ай бұрын +8

      Interesting observation. My life experience made me understand that doctors who work in drug addiction treatment field are used to deal with liars, manipulators, deceivers, frauds and tricksters of all sorts. And that is why this Doctor is not intimidated by the lawyer, since lawyers, just like most drugs addicts, are pathological liars, tricksters and professional manipulators. If lawyers said the truth they'd end up in "Liar Liar" movie.
      Doctor simply treated him like one of his patients.

  • Mike Lawrey
    Mike Lawrey 4 жыл бұрын +5268

    The judge seems kind and fair.

    • Coimbra Law
      Coimbra Law 5 ай бұрын

      That’s your brilliant observation?😂

    • King Ayy
      King Ayy 8 ай бұрын +1

      I liked how he explained that cross examination is basically "putting words in" the witnesses mouth, for them to accept or deny.
      His kids probably enjoyed having him around growing up, explaining life lessons in ways that are easy to understand.

    • EL P U T A S
      EL P U T A S 8 ай бұрын

      He does

    • Jahid Samed
      Jahid Samed 8 ай бұрын

      That's what white judges supposed to do

    • Blakken
      Blakken  Жыл бұрын

      You havent seen a lot of trials I guess.

  • Johnathan T
    Johnathan T 2 жыл бұрын +659

    If you’re ever dealing with a lawyer, this is a very strong and clear way to approach them. Answer no ambiguous questions, and allows no room for the lawyer to interpret your answers.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын +4

      This guy's an expert witness. He's directly hurting the defense (who hired him) by arguing with the prosecutor over stupid shit like the approximate hours he works per week. Each time he does that the jury (who by this point in the case is over it) believes what he said on direct a little bit less.

    • Patrick F
      Patrick F 7 ай бұрын +3

      Umm imo the doctor seemed evasive on everything.
      Asking how many hours a week he usrd the machine a week just his own admission between 6-10 hours a week
      "A few hours Monday, Tuesday" etc
      Wasn't that hard
      To me it felt dishonest and pointlessly arugumentive
      And for a doctor that deals with addiction
      The lawyer asked the same question at the end 3 times before the doctor answered
      And after the lawyer asked the judge to step in then asked the same question in the most broad way imaginable.
      To then follow up with pointed questions rapid fire and answers them with no issues, which was the exact same questions

    • Lechenaultia
      Lechenaultia 8 ай бұрын +5

      'How many hours a week do you work in dialysis' is not an ambiguous question!

    • Valscorn01
      Valscorn01 8 ай бұрын +1

      This, exactly. unless you get an attorney to tell you otherwise

    • Severus Snape
      Severus Snape 10 ай бұрын +6

      Good advice, to be honest. People tend to forget that "Anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law."

  • empire
    empire 3 жыл бұрын +3542

    Can't tell me this guy isn't a defense witness for the mob.

    • Daniel Page
      Daniel Page 10 ай бұрын

      @dragonore2009 define what you mean by "work"? and "mob"?

    • David Footman
      David Footman 10 ай бұрын


    • Joel Njuguna
      Joel Njuguna  Жыл бұрын

      On point

    • Waltuh
      Waltuh 2 жыл бұрын

      The philosopher

  • KentuckyBucky
    KentuckyBucky  Жыл бұрын +5

    As a person who has been in treatment this Doctor is absolutely correct. Medically Assisted Treatment is very situational to the person. Some doctors can help one patient and fail with another. It all depends on the person and their mental structure. A world famous Doctor can fail with a patient because that patient has outlying circumstances that cause recovery to be extremely difficult. Also this stigma against MAT patients and programs needs to end NOW. These options save peoples lives. It saved mine.

  • Efrain Quevedo
    Efrain Quevedo 3 жыл бұрын +1009

    Great Judge! He is calm and even corrects the DA when he calls the Dr. by Mr.

    • Rowgue51
      Rowgue51 10 ай бұрын +1

      @Sweet Patate
      That's actually inappropriate. There are no rules of judicial conduct that require you to refer to somebody by their chosen title. And directing an attorney that he has to do it in front of the jury adds a false weight to his testimony.

    • Sweet Patate
      Sweet Patate 10 ай бұрын

      From this video I can say that I like the judge

    • paul m
      paul m 10 ай бұрын +1

      @Reddkatt wrong... simply wrong

    • Reddkatt
      Reddkatt 10 ай бұрын +1

      @paul m You do realise that Dr IS an honorary title for a medical degree? Medical "doctors" who do not hold a PhD are honorary only. Does this guy hold a PhD? If he does then he deserves the title. If he does not then to call him Dr is simply historical etiquette and cannot be enforced.

    • Biggus Balluz
      Biggus Balluz 10 ай бұрын

      @uxtbI Mr. is ok if you do not know that he is a Dr. but in the case that you do know, Dr. is the respectful term.

  • Rudder Steering
    Rudder Steering  Жыл бұрын +8

    as a prospective juror I was once badgered by an attorney like this in a civil case, I looked to the judge who did nothing - I was dismissed and a dozen big corporate attorneys on the other side all smiled and licked their lips at how poorly that guy handled the jury pool

  • Nutrition Facts
    Nutrition Facts 3 жыл бұрын +3843

    I’d hire the doctor as a lawyer...

  • Ryan Trice
    Ryan Trice 3 жыл бұрын +2950

    Imagine if this guy is married.
    *Wife:* where were you last night?
    *Doc:* What do you mean by last night?
    *Wife:* where exactly were you and what were you doing last night?
    *Doc:* it depends on what hour of the night you're referring to.

    • Savalicious gamerz
      Savalicious gamerz Ай бұрын


    • JD Bimmer
      JD Bimmer 5 ай бұрын

      Oh my gosh! The Judge is so calm & respectful!❤

    • KEELY Fletcher
      KEELY Fletcher 7 ай бұрын


    • ZeroLosses4Nero
      ZeroLosses4Nero 10 ай бұрын +1

      Sounds exactly like a woman I know

    • Milton Turner
      Milton Turner 10 ай бұрын

      Bad anology...the Lawyer was an ass and trying to trap the Dr. into saying something he wanted to hear.
      That has nothing to do with your scenario.

  • Casey James
    Casey James 3 жыл бұрын +110

    Any answer anyone gives to a lawyer can and will be spun in a way to achieve the goal the lawyer wants. Wether it's right or wrong or at the detriment of the the interviewee. This doctor is very good at answering or not answering questions that protect himself. I wish I saw more of this interview.

    • James Casey
      James Casey 10 ай бұрын

      Me too

    • Elite Ayanokoji
      Elite Ayanokoji  Жыл бұрын +8

      @T H yeah so if it a prosecutor says something like "however you interpet it" the witness ask for a rephrasing because he's trying to trap him and use words against him (later) off of speculation. If he had a lawyer he would say objection because you cant speculate
      If the prosecutor wants clear cut answers then provide clear cut questions

    • T H
      T H  Жыл бұрын +3

      Its not up to the witness to determine what questions he needs to answer. Its up to the defense/prosecution to ask the right questions in order to present their case the way they want it.

  • BonesTheCat
    BonesTheCat 2 жыл бұрын +161

    Amazing how well he reads lawyer traps. He a special forces witness.

    • Tim Moore
      Tim Moore  Жыл бұрын

      @Geoff Poole Expert witnesses are paid and that is normally brought out in direct examination.

    • Tim Moore
      Tim Moore  Жыл бұрын +2

      @Cherry Blossom He was an expert witness; opposing counsel is cross examining him after his initial testimony. From the questioning, the implication could be that he did very little medical practice.

    • Geoff Poole
      Geoff Poole 2 жыл бұрын

      @Cherry Blossom Probably paid.

    • Cherry Blossom
      Cherry Blossom 2 жыл бұрын +11

      Not even sure why he showed up. He's of NO USE. A waste of the court's time 😭😭😭

  • Chris Quinn
    Chris Quinn 3 жыл бұрын +2576

    " Approximately how many hours a week do you work in dialysis?" "Like, between eleventy-three and twentyteen."

    • The Doggy Wayy
      The Doggy Wayy 10 ай бұрын

      Ayo u got the whole squad laughing

    • unlokia
      unlokia 10 ай бұрын

      Even if he’d only worked half an hour, that’s half an hour more than the lawyer had worked all year 🤣

    • Riyad Deis
      Riyad Deis 10 ай бұрын

      Funky 😘😘

    • No_One
      No_One 10 ай бұрын

      Ohhh thiss is greatt.. God bless you ... I laughed thank u

    • mi3helle707
      mi3helle707  Жыл бұрын


  • David Hensley
    David Hensley 2 жыл бұрын +1138

    "How many hours per week do you work in dialysis"
    "All of them."

  • JohnnyWishbone85
    JohnnyWishbone85 4 жыл бұрын +1742

    I like that judge. He seems very reasonable.

    • Nover
      Nover 9 ай бұрын

      @ShadeExposure Well if we talk about statistic....

    • JohnnyWishbone85
      JohnnyWishbone85 9 ай бұрын

      @Coogan Alaska *TL;DR:* The prosecutor was bad at his job, and it's not the judge's business to tell him that he's doing a bad job. For the most part, he asked stupid questions, and he got the stupid answers that he deserved. The doctor, as a witness being cross-examined, has no obligation whatsoever to help the prosecutor be better at his job.
      **Longer Explanation** -- I understand why you would say that, but there are good reasons why it went the way it did. This cross-examination may look like a conversation, but it isn't. It's a verbal chess-match where the prosecution tries to trip up the witness, and the witness tries to deflect the prosecution's questions. That doctor has been coached by his own lawyer to be as unhelpful to the prosecution as possible. This is how most cross-examinations go.
      What's interesting in this case is that the prosecutor is clearly kind of an idiot. In the first part of the video, he's asking dumb questions. That doctor doesn't charge by the hour, he charges by the procedure or per consultation, so he has no reason to track his hours. The prosecutor doesn't seem to understand that. It's like asking an electrician if he charges his clients for using a bomb-sniffing dog. An electrician obviously doesn't use bomb-sniffing dogs, so it's a nonsensical question. The prosecutor here is asking similarly nonsensical questions, and he gets nonsensical answers.
      Now, if it were a normal conversation, the doctor could explain that hours aren't really that relevant to his practice, and so forth, but again, this isn't a normal conversation. The doctor has no obligation to help the prosecutor do a better job of prosecuting him, so if the prosecutor asks stupid questions, like he is doing here, he's going to get a stupid answer, and that's just tough cookies. He should have done his homework.
      In the second part of the video, the prosecutor is just asking mushy, poorly-phrased questions that invite mushy non-answers. It's only in the last few seconds of the video that the prosecutor wises up and asks straight questions with a straight yes/no answer, and the doctor gives him straight answers.

    • Coogan Alaska
      Coogan Alaska 9 ай бұрын

      That judge is a jellyfish. He should have rightly held that witness in contempt for his narcissistic refusal to answer straight and reasonable questions.

    • henry Posadas
      henry Posadas 9 ай бұрын

      @ShadeExposure what statistics and who made them?

    • henry Posadas
      henry Posadas 9 ай бұрын

      @ShadeExposure fact? Your racist comment is not "fact". "Facts" is one of the most overused word these days.

  • Alex
    Alex 3 жыл бұрын +22

    Well that doctor’s been in court before. I’d be willing to bet that going to court is a major part of his professional life, actually. I’m more impressed at the prosecutor who managed to get an incredibly stubborn witness to provide coherent answers than at an evasive doctor who was very clearly brought in by the defense...

  • Toto 88
    Toto 88 3 жыл бұрын +83

    The problem that some lawyers overlooked about doctors is that the latter have a bunch of studies in psychology in dealing with patients. Probing and asking technically correct questions are part of their profession. This doc here proves that. He knows how to answer and filter questions.

    • robert broad
      robert broad 9 ай бұрын

      They don’t have much instruction in patient psychology

    • side kick
      side kick 10 ай бұрын +2

      The witnesses job is simply to answer questions asked truthfully.
      As an expert witness he has a duty to be independent and simply state the truth.
      He was being so disingenuous and evasive it made him look untrustworthy.

    • Keshi
      Keshi  Жыл бұрын +5

      Its called leading questions and thanks to my classes in psychology I dont fall for this sht.

  • John Flynn
    John Flynn 10 ай бұрын +3

    I love this doctor who is simply not going to be drawn into a trap or say anything to criticise or condemn a fellow practitioner I would guess hes a hard working conscientious and honourable man keeping loyal to his profession and not allowing himself to be dragged into a debate about someone else's practices. Odd they called him or was he a defence witness turned hostile by the prosecutor ?

  • Dion Lindsay
    Dion Lindsay 2 жыл бұрын +29

    If the defence witness is working in the field of addiction medicine, he will be meeting people with a lot more difficult thought processes than the counsel here. I'm not surprised (though I am impressed) that he's able to keep his cool under this kind of questioning. It must seem easy compared to the stressful discussions he has with addicts. More power to him!

  • Kenton Shepard
    Kenton Shepard 6 ай бұрын +17

    I don't know why I like this doctor's testimony so much but I rewatch this every once in a while.

    • David Rauch
      David Rauch 5 ай бұрын +1

      Same. I think it's absolutely hilarious. So many aspects of it crack me up

  • Rumplestiltskin
    Rumplestiltskin 4 жыл бұрын +2446

    By the way the doctor answered the lawyers questions, it seemed like he has appeared in court many times before.

    • Noni Leon
      Noni Leon 9 ай бұрын

      @Adam Johnson it still needs to be very specific. I have heard "full time" by people meaning 30 hours whereas I would . Literally just heard this last week. Need to define even something as simple as that to avoid interpretations and confusion. If you add up my off time, including sick, vacation, and holiday, I may very well average 30 hours a week during a year

    • brmbkl2015
      brmbkl2015 10 ай бұрын +1

      @Robert O'Neil " He was a horrible witness with absolutely no credibility."
      horrible for the DA, yes. because he didn't play along.
      explain to me precisely why that doesn't work in his favour?

    • csrboltfan
      csrboltfan 10 ай бұрын

      Are you implying the doctor is dirty?

    • BADASS
      BADASS 10 ай бұрын +1

      People sue doctors, especilally in usa, for total bullshits, so its good that he was well prepared ;o

  • D T
    D T 3 жыл бұрын +472

    I wish I was this well-spoken under stress or "on the fly".

    • Slooderman
      Slooderman 2 жыл бұрын +1

      You can do it! Just practice having conversation and learn how to stay calm when someone is confrontational. I’m no expert at all, but it’s a good trait to have in daily social interaction

    • Propa_Ghandi
      Propa_Ghandi 2 жыл бұрын

      @Jan Werner same

    • Propa_Ghandi
      Propa_Ghandi 2 жыл бұрын

      Just takes practice.
      People think debate and school politics are lame and nerdy but it actually provides incredible real world skill.

    • Jan Werner
      Jan Werner 2 жыл бұрын +5

      all it takes is a good education and practice..trust me, i used to be the most shy/quiet person until i had to take speech class 4 times in college because i was too afraid..my school was harsh, if you didnt do 1 speech, you failed the course

    • John
      John 3 жыл бұрын +9

      Get some life experience and you will be much calmer in stressful situations

  • Panta Rei 83
    Panta Rei 83 3 жыл бұрын +227

    He is doing it correctly because if the lawyer repeats himself its to catch you in a lie!

    • Rosetta Stoned
      Rosetta Stoned 2 күн бұрын

      @UUB Repus well no, cause i don’t know what this case is even about

    • UUB Repus
      UUB Repus  Жыл бұрын +2

      @Liam Pitout You shouldn't be in court,, they're going to dismantle you..
      you couldnt even catch the lie ?

    • Liam Pitout
      Liam Pitout  Жыл бұрын

      What lie in this case?

  • petersoncello
    petersoncello 2 жыл бұрын +3

    I do admire and respect Dr. Waldman's clear-minded refusal to answer vague questions in ways that could be misconstrued. Having said that, I really think that he might have been able to give some kind of specific answer to the question of how many hours he worked, even if it's a pretty wide range, like "always more than 15 hours a week, but never more than 80."

  • Jeff Smith
    Jeff Smith 3 жыл бұрын +23

    Had the lawyer just asked the last 3 questions in that way this would've been simple. However, the doctor is 100% correct that the lawyer was trying to get him to say a specific thing that the doctor didn't want to say. Well prepped as a witness.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын

      Bet you a beer that had he asked those questions in that way up front, the doc would've objected to them, too.

  • Doug Aylward
    Doug Aylward 10 ай бұрын +2

    Doctor cares about people no matter what.
    Lawyer cares about winning no matter what.
    This is a great example of the difference in type of people who choose a type of profession.

  • Steven Bass
    Steven Bass 4 жыл бұрын +471

    As a former LEO I must say that this Dr. did a damn fine job in not letting this attorney lead him by the nose.

    • Comrade Hartliss
      Comrade Hartliss 4 жыл бұрын

      @SherlockHolmes This information is so obvious that you don't even need to comment it.

    • Happy Meal
      Happy Meal 4 жыл бұрын

      SherlockHolmes Buddy chill out

    • That1Guy
      That1Guy 4 жыл бұрын +3

      Nah this lawyer got what he wanted. The doctor looks super shady now to the jury

  • Evets Zerimar
    Evets Zerimar 3 жыл бұрын +505

    This is a very helpful judge. More like a moderator lol

    • Jahid Samed
      Jahid Samed 8 ай бұрын

      They go way back

    • mark paterson
      mark paterson 2 жыл бұрын +4

      Judge: "Would you care to elaborate? Or not? Don't feel pressured. Oh, by the way, tea anyone?"

    • pax und peace
      pax und peace 2 жыл бұрын +6

      This is his fucking job.

    • DaZzorb Idouo
      DaZzorb Idouo 2 жыл бұрын +1

      HHHHHHHHHHHHH. Man, your comment made my day. HHHHHHHHHHH

    • Titanosaurus
      Titanosaurus 2 жыл бұрын +23

      That's pretty much a judge. And then after everything, he brings down the hammer.

  • random 4815
    random 4815 3 жыл бұрын +60

    "I never embellish what I do by denigrating what a colleague does"
    Great statement. In Healthcare we have patients all the time that complain about where they were seen before, what some other provider didnt do.
    And they try and get us to validate their criticisms.
    I never dignify it with a response that throws another provider under the bus.
    I treat what is in front of me based on my history and exam. That's my job.
    Now I might see notes from a previous visit and disagree with a part of the treatment decision, usually for minor reasons. If need be I might contact them to clarify a decision.
    And unless I'm testifying in a malpractice suit, or concerned a patient was a victim of malpractice, I'm not throwing others under the bus.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын

      @Diana Watton Huh, none of my colleagues seem to have gotten the memo.

    • Diana Watton
      Diana Watton 9 ай бұрын

      It's an unwritten law doctors always cover each other's back no matter what

    • random 4815
      random 4815 9 ай бұрын

      @robert broad there's a difference between covering up and denigrating colleagues unprofessionally.
      There are professional ways to go about advocating for patients when there is reason to suspect potential malpractice.

    • robert broad
      robert broad 9 ай бұрын

      That’s why you are not an advocate for the patient. Cover up mistakes of colleagues

    • Amelia Kyle
      Amelia Kyle 10 ай бұрын

      @Jez I AM not recieving proper care can be caused simply because the patient failed to inform the Doctor of something they needed to know or something was not readily apparant at the time that would make it clear what was needed.

  • Cascaret That's right
    Cascaret That's right 2 жыл бұрын +5

    You can tell he’s no stranger to courts and lawyers.

      RPG AIRMAIL 28 күн бұрын

      Addiction dr is a hard profession to be in. They have a high rate of lawsuits bc the addicts themselves either think it’s easy money for more substances or that it’s entirely the doctors fault if they go back to it.

  • Nick Marsala
    Nick Marsala 3 жыл бұрын +5

    The Judge seems like an awesome guy. I wish more judges were like him.

  • The Lost One
    The Lost One 2 жыл бұрын +22

    I respect him asking for specific meaning to his questions. When your on the defence your very freedom is on the line, why would you accept a vague line of questioning leading to vague answers that could be twisted to condem you.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын

      He's an expert witness for the defense. Someone else's freedom was on the line, and he hurt his credibility with the jury by arguing over stupid shit. This was day 19 of the Michael Jackson doctor trial, and I'm pretty confident that the jury wouldn't have been pleased with him wasting even more of their time.

  • Kunaal Thakur
    Kunaal Thakur 3 жыл бұрын +6392

    I think the most overlooked aspect in this video is the mic quality.

    • Yamato Wolfgang
      Yamato Wolfgang 10 ай бұрын

      another underrated comment

    • John Donadio
      John Donadio  Жыл бұрын

      @Gumshoe Beaumont Judges paneling

    • negusdawoo
      negusdawoo  Жыл бұрын


    • JT
      JT 2 жыл бұрын

      @J T 😂

    • J T
      J T 2 жыл бұрын +1

      @JT lol, yeah it’s me.

  • Dustin Burke
    Dustin Burke 2 жыл бұрын +1056

    I feel like I just walked in on season 3. I need more.

  • Mr. Golden
    Mr. Golden 2 жыл бұрын +140

    Legend says he still didn’t say how many hours he worked last week

    • JD Bimmer
      JD Bimmer 5 ай бұрын

      I heard he’s still calculating!😂

  • JD Bimmer
    JD Bimmer 5 ай бұрын +1

    The Dr is good at answering questions but the lawyers is equally good at rephrasing the questions until he got the answers that he wanted! I wanna watch the entire movie! Feels like we skipped seasons here!😂

  • Gary Holt
    Gary Holt 7 ай бұрын +1

    I like the way this doctor was very specific in the language he used when answering questions. I am certain that lawyer was looking for a way to turn around some of his answers to work against him

  • IbizaIZ
    IbizaIZ 5 ай бұрын +3

    This doctor has been overworked; similar to many others. Thank you to all of the dedicated doctors who work so many hours to care for patients. ❤️

  • random user
    random user 3 жыл бұрын +11410

    you don’t find this video this video finds you

    • Neto
      Neto 7 ай бұрын

      I come back to this video is so addictive…..

    • Jahid Samed
      Jahid Samed 8 ай бұрын


    • Lamar Putney
      Lamar Putney 9 ай бұрын


    • Emrah Ekinci
      Emrah Ekinci 10 ай бұрын


    • Drago Musevini
      Drago Musevini  Жыл бұрын

      what do you mean by finds you and how does it find you?

  • amari mohamed
    amari mohamed  Жыл бұрын +4

    “I believe YOU’RE exactly correct, I THINK experience is important” the way he answers these questions make me wonder just how much his lawyer costs 😂😂😂

  • p0tts
    p0tts 2 жыл бұрын +7

    Doc is smart. Asking him to rephrase led to less specific questions, entailing less specific answers, er go less viable evidence if intended to be used as such.

  • Dave Halpern
    Dave Halpern 9 ай бұрын +3

    The witness will be addressed as doctor. I believe he earned it.

  • The Grisly Bennet
    The Grisly Bennet 3 жыл бұрын +1

    I like that guy. He didn’t let the prosecutor walk all over him and he made it very clear what he was answering. The dr left no room for interpretations which is the safest bet in court.

  • Stevie Darling
    Stevie Darling 2 жыл бұрын +233

    I wouldn’t have the patience to be a lawyer. I’d start throwing chairs and my parents would have wasted all that money on law school.

    • X. Fonti
      X. Fonti 9 ай бұрын +2

      @Cortney Petty arrogant creep??? How about highly intelligent & confident man???

    • X. Fonti
      X. Fonti 9 ай бұрын

      @Jay O really ???😅🤣😂

    • X. Fonti
      X. Fonti 9 ай бұрын


    • Jaclyn Perez
      Jaclyn Perez  Жыл бұрын

      Omfg same i would have flipped shit on that guy Jesus Christ

  • Niko
    Niko 5 жыл бұрын +9123

    For people saying he should have just answered the questions as the lawyer asks them, should probably watch a few cross examination processes first. It's basically a game of chess. If a laywer is asking those questions, he's doing it to discredit the witness. And the witness is one move ahead of the lawyer every time in this instance. It might seem like he's being 'petty' when what he's actually doing is side-stepping the trap that the lawyer is putting out. If that lawyer is good at his job (and I've no doubt he is) the questions are designed to push the witness into saying something that will undermine his testimony. He's every right to give his answers in a way that doesn't unfairly prejudice his testimony.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын

      @MT account lol. glad you're not my attorney.

    • George Jamo
      George Jamo 3 жыл бұрын

      Or watch more than a few minutes of this trial

    • CallioNyx
      CallioNyx 4 жыл бұрын

      When asked how much he works, to me his answers sound like someone who works a few hours a week trying to sound like they work 100. That is not confidence inspiring.

    • Jonas C
      Jonas C 4 жыл бұрын

      An example of this? You're just saying stuff without anything backing it up. How would saying how many hours he works in dialysis discredit the witness?

    • TESTIMONY ALLEY Marc Strusa
      TESTIMONY ALLEY Marc Strusa 4 жыл бұрын

      Or he could just tell the truth.
      I work 8-10 hrs per week.

  • M F
    M F 3 жыл бұрын +39

    He's being super reasonable in his hesitation to answer the questions. This hack lawyer is just used to bullying his narrative through witnesses and this guy wasn't having it one bit

  • Dan Banks
    Dan Banks 2 жыл бұрын +7

    The doctor has a good point regarding a patient's prior history of addiction treatment. As I recovering addict myself I have been treated in the past by experts who are very competent, but I wasn't going to stop until I was ready. No addict will stop until the pain of losing everything finally outweighs the pleasure of the drug of choice, which is why addiction is so hard to treat,

    • Geoff Poole
      Geoff Poole  Жыл бұрын

      A lot of people who are not addicts think it's as "easy" as turning up to an AA meeting and starting the 12-step programme.

  • ShutUpAndBump
    ShutUpAndBump 2 жыл бұрын +34

    45 seconds in and I’m laughing uncontrollably!! This attorney is annoyed and im enthused!! 😭😂😂

  • Your Bond Best
    Your Bond Best 2 жыл бұрын +245

    It seems to me like the witness is cross examining the attorney.

  • Lechenaultia
    Lechenaultia 8 ай бұрын

    Props to counsel for his patience.

  • Horror Tackle Harry
    Horror Tackle Harry 4 жыл бұрын +991

    No-one's in court for a friendly chat. When on the stand, you need to be like this doctor- require the attorney to precisely define EVERY freakin word in EVERY question s/he asks. If you don't, your words will be twisted into falsehood later on. Doesn't matter a damn how 'annoyed' you make anyone at the time.

    • Kelli Danielle
      Kelli Danielle 3 жыл бұрын

      @sophocles He's a doctor being asked how many hours he spends on a subset of his duties.
      He's not being asked how many hours he works at Burger King, but how many hours he spends dropping fries.

    • Doc Savage
      Doc Savage 4 жыл бұрын +1

      Very true. If you don't make them ask exact and speficic questions or give general and vague answers, they will twist your words.

    • Ding Dong
      Ding Dong 4 жыл бұрын

      @Rick Cruz "You're"

    • Rick Cruz
      Rick Cruz 4 жыл бұрын +1

      Your right! If you give them an inch they're gonna take that mile !

  • Wesley Rogers
    Wesley Rogers 2 жыл бұрын +1

    The prosecutor is having such a hard time proving the witness incompatible! This is how a witness is supposed to work the questions!

  • Arminsaf2
    Arminsaf2  Жыл бұрын

    As someone who’s gone through both courses of schooling, average Doctors are insurmountably more intelligent than lawyers.

  • Zev Allison
    Zev Allison 6 ай бұрын +2

    The prosecutor was asking questions that are not easily answerable as a doctor, which a lawyer may not understand. Unlike lawyers, we don't get paid by the hour. We (usually) don't get lunch breaks or weekends off or get a bonus for going to dialysis one more day. We (try to) do what patients need when they need it, which varies from week to week; there's no "average" amount of time in clinic, research, hospital, ICU, etc. because there's no such thing as an average week.

  • Sherudons
    Sherudons 3 жыл бұрын +2

    As someone who used to do hours like this guy, yeah, you don't track the hours, you just keep going until the jobs done, 15 hours can vanish just like that when your constantly moving.
    After a few years it just blends together and you can actually struggle to remember anything, really messes up your mind long term also.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын

      I bet you could still say something like "on average 50 - 70 hours a week" instead of being evasive like this guy.

  • alex fentaw
    alex fentaw 6 ай бұрын +4

    This is a brilliant and quest doctor; he exceeds the prosecutor. How active and fair is the judge. Long live, Doctor and Judge!

  • Brown 25
    Brown 25 4 жыл бұрын +1863

    Folks , this guy was likely an "expert witness" called by the defense. This probably wasn't his first time in the courtroom so he knows exactly how to "work" the questioning.

    • Whitestguyuknow
      Whitestguyuknow 3 жыл бұрын

      Yes he I was thinking he was very well trained. But you're right. This seems more instinctual to him and he's very quick with what he needs to respond with and doesn't flub up anything as far as I can tell. Albeit this is only 5 minutes

    • J C
      J C 3 жыл бұрын

      Is he a Great Doctor or Great Arrogant?

    • Billy Mac
      Billy Mac 3 жыл бұрын

      But yet he doesnt know the difference between "dispersions" and "aspersions" (3:41)

    • Fiercest Cow
      Fiercest Cow 3 жыл бұрын

      Seabass Cribel There was a study a few years ago that actually showed witnesses that were percieved as arrogant or jerks were more likely to be believed by jurors. Something about believed less incentive to lie if they didnt care what others thought of them.

    • Walker Bulldog
      Walker Bulldog 3 жыл бұрын +1

      Seabass CribelAre you 12 years old? This is an adversarial process.

  • Shahid Naqshbandi
    Shahid Naqshbandi 3 жыл бұрын +3

    That judge has a lot more patience than I do

  • Tree House
    Tree House 3 жыл бұрын +1

    Live and learn. Now this is how to be a witness.

  • m1charljacksonfang1rl
    m1charljacksonfang1rl 2 жыл бұрын

    For anyone wondering, this was the Conrad Murray Trial (Michael Jackson’s doctor) and this is a testimony from a witness or someone of relevance

  • My Open Mic
    My Open Mic 2 жыл бұрын

    This Doc is the greatest defense witness ever. I wish all expert witnesses were this tough on cross.

  • Doge
    Doge 2 жыл бұрын +39

    When you go to medical school but went to law school instead.

  • Mel Man
    Mel Man 4 жыл бұрын +1093

    The Doc is making the attorneys job difficult. I really dislike how lawyers attempt to manipulate witnesses. He is to be admired.

    • Ed Diaz
      Ed Diaz 4 жыл бұрын

      @Jndthree I agree, he should of asked the doctor, "how many hours did you work on dialysis, yesterday?, A: ? Q: How many hours did you work on dialysis the day before yesterday. (Then you can ask that question directly for every day of the week). Then you can ask if those hours are the median amount of hours he works on dialysis per week? But then the doctor would ask "What do you by median", And that's when you theatrically bring out the heavy thick old style book version of the great Webster's dictionary (or a Medical Dictionary) pop it open and read the definition of Median out loud. That would discredit this evasive "doctor".

    • Ed Diaz
      Ed Diaz 4 жыл бұрын

      The "doctor" was paid big $$$ to evade questions. This lawyer works for the State, he is a civil servant. True, he could of been a better lawyer by asking more poignant questions, but I don't see why someone who evades questions, is to be admired. At least truth prevailed, the defendant was found guilty, and justice prevailed.

    • Mark Pope
      Mark Pope 4 жыл бұрын

      Domonic Hill I love the comments on this video. The average commenter can’t even use English properly but they get real specific about the use of language. These are the same idiots that serve on juries except that jurors are pissed they are having their time wasted for $5 a day, something this doctor has no clue about. Guilty!

    • Mark Pope
      Mark Pope 4 жыл бұрын

      Flowmasta Flam You’re not forced to do anything including make yourself look credible in front of the jury. This doctor thought his job was to look smart instead he came off as a smartass to the jury. I am pretty sure the Verdict was guilty. I would think that a doctor would be smart enough to know that the goal is to convince the jury not to come off as smarter than the lawyer.

    • Mark Pope
      Mark Pope 4 жыл бұрын

      Mel Man I think the verdict was guilty, so if that’s a win for this doctor the defendant will beg to differ. Did the judge actually make him call him doctor instead of Mr. Cause he sure wasn’t acting like a doctor should. 4 out of the 5 doctors I’ve been saying lately are all assholes Not really deserving of the title

  • Jeffrey Burley
    Jeffrey Burley 3 жыл бұрын +33

    As a safety representative in the trucking industry, I had to give a deposition pertaining to an accident one of the companies drivers had. This deposition lasted 2 full days, 10 hours one day, 11 hours on the second day. The room was filled with all lawyers and one recorder of the proceeding. The company had 2 lawyers there as the defendant, the complainant had 7 lawyers in attendance. Questions ranged from any information I might have about the company's history through the experience of the driver involved. A CDL license is obtained through the use of federal regulations, not specific to any one company but to the industry overall. Upon hiring a driver, their license is checked through the federal database to ensure the person does have a legal CDL. During the first day of my testimony, the complainant's lawyers asked me exactly 16 times if as a safety representative for the company, did I research this driver's credentials. The answer each time was yes, I did research his credentials and the driver had a legal CDL. The second question asked of me on the next day of testimony was, again, did I check the credentials of this driver. My answer was this: "This is the 17th time you have asked me this exact same question. I am going on record to say that this is harassment, not allowed by any court, justice or reasonable lawyer. My answer is yes, and if you ask me one more time, I will no longer answer any questions and this deposition will be concluded. Do you understand what I have just stated?" The lawyers for the complainant took a brief recess behind closed doors, then came back to the table. A different lawyer spoke and said, "do I understand that not answering questions could result in a civil criminal complaint filed against me". Finally, one of the company lawyers spoke out and said I have answered that same question multiple times with the same answer and he stated that I no longer needed to answer that question and if asked again, the deposition will stop. This is how lawyers work. If you answer the same question using different words or phrase the answer differently each time, they will state you are lying using the differences as justification.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын

      "And then everybody clapped. The name of that trucking safety rep? Albert Einstein."

    • Daniel Deautriell
      Daniel Deautriell 10 ай бұрын

      Thank for sharing your story. It was quite insightful on how to handle boorish tactics from lawyers.

  • Sandeep Gupta
    Sandeep Gupta 9 ай бұрын +4

    It's clear that doc's been through this shit before. Good job doc!

  • J
    J 2 жыл бұрын +156

    This guy was a hard ass but the lawyer still held his ground and was able to rephrase his questions adequately to get him to answer enough of the questions he wanted him to answer.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын

      @rrickarr The defense lost, and this needlessly evasive expert witness certainly didn't help them by pissing the jury off.

    • Ashiro 아시로
      Ashiro 아시로  Жыл бұрын

      @Robert Trujillo the educated guy can’t even estimate how many hours he works

    • Beejaro
      Beejaro  Жыл бұрын

      @rrickarr the lawyer wanted the doctor to concede that he thinks he sometimes provides better care than others. the doctor was loathe to do so. but the lawyer frustrated him and he gave up. any precision consisted of niceties.

    • rrickarr
      rrickarr  Жыл бұрын +3

      @Beejaro The doctor did not lose. He made the lawyer be precise in what he was asking. This way nothing is misinterpreted.

    • rrickarr
      rrickarr  Жыл бұрын +3

      The lawyer was reduced to a complete loser. Dr. Waldman ruled that entire testimony.

  • Anand Patel
    Anand Patel 3 жыл бұрын +3

    The judge seemed like a super chill guy

  • John Smith
    John Smith 2 жыл бұрын +2

    This guy did an exceptional job "answering" the questions asked. This is a phenomenal job done. I will bet this video is shown in Law Schools.

    • side kick
      side kick 10 ай бұрын

      It will be shown in law schools as an example of how NOT to testify.
      The defence lawyers would have been groaning at how much damage their own witness was doing to their case.

  • As D
    As D 4 жыл бұрын +3024

    A lawyer never asks a question he doesn't know the answer already

    • Bobby Thorman
      Bobby Thorman 3 жыл бұрын

      @Rapscallion73 If the lawyer already knows the answer and you lie,then the rest of your testimony could be called into question.

    • SeraphinaAizen1
      SeraphinaAizen1 3 жыл бұрын

      @Marc Templer That absolutely IS true. Never ask a question you don't know the answer to on cross, and pretty much any lawyer worth their law degree will tell you that. Because you need to know what effect that answer is going to have on your case. You want to elicit a response that is going to get certain testimony into evidence and if you don't know WHAT the testimony is going to be, then it may be better not asking the question.
      Your responses on this issue suggest you don't really know how the trail process works. You don't understand how much takes place before the trial; depositions, discovery, witness statements - both sides of a trial SHOULD have a pretty clear picture of what facts they want to introduce during a trial, what facts they don't want the other side to introduce, and what questions they need to ask to get them there. And if a piece of evidence is introduced that hasn't been mentioned already in a deposition, a witness statement or during discovery then it probably CAN'T be introduced.
      Lean how the legal system actually works before you make yourself look like a buffoon.

    • Jerrell Strawn
      Jerrell Strawn 4 жыл бұрын

      'never?' Only fools speak in absolutes. See; I did it too.

    • manny gomez
      manny gomez 4 жыл бұрын


    • Legal Tyranny
      Legal Tyranny 4 жыл бұрын

      @Namelia I'm not a lawyer but I can tell you now that there are useful situations for making the witness look like a liar or idiot where you won't know their answer, but you will know based on your prior questions you have them boxed in to the point that certain open ended questions that allow for something other than "yes" or "no" let's them dig a deeper hole.
      I cross examined a cop who I've nailed for filing 2 false reports against me, and he's committed perjury (the judge and DA are doing their best to protect him but if you video the videos I link you can see he did exactly what I'm claiming). In my hearing where I got him to commit perjury, it was my 13th or 14th appearance. For the first time after that hearing the DA offered me a plea deal which basically dropped a slew of infractions and would have stopped the case if I agreed to pay like $500. The bitch DA did this no doubt because she knew at the next hearing I was going to keep digging at the cop. And I did, and I got him on more inconsistent statements. That's actually where I did the open ended question. This cop is a sergeant of 14 years. I asked him "based on your training what is proof of registration?", this numb nuts responded by claiming "I've had no formal training on what constitutes proof of registration." HE'S BEEN ON THE FORCE FOR 14 YEARS AND IS A SERGEANT AND THIS GUY IS FEIGNING AS IF HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT PROOF OF REGISTRATION IS?? It's because I didn't register my automobile as I wasn't required to by California law, and while spending time in Hawaii and using my auto, he stopped me, wrote 2 citations and claimed I had registration (the alleged violation he stopped me for requires that I be a registered owner for him to make a lawful stop, so if he checked off that I wasn't the registered owner, which is true, then he would be in trouble for false arrest.). I gave him the bill of sale showing I owned it and a letter from a CHP Captain Commander who said I wasn't required to register it. The prosecutor's in the first hearing lead him with questioning to state "it was his understanding the bill of sale was proof of registration". That document has a statement indicating that the ford was being transferred to me by the previous owner for consulting I did for him. We both signed the document. There's no state seal, no mention of registration, nothing. The Hawaii courts, DAs, and cops are corrupt. The cops less than the BAR members, but the BAR needs to be outlawed everywhere for RICO.
      I haven't posted the chunk of video from the last hearing where he feigns stupidity about what is proof of registration.

  • Tony Sangster
    Tony Sangster 3 жыл бұрын +12

    It's important to be reminded that this is the Conrad Murray (Michael Jackson) case. The dr is well prepared & ...it appears experienced with prosecutors also.

  • ithaca97
    ithaca97 3 жыл бұрын +171

    that objection was the most badass thing i’ve seen in my life

    • 光Zest
      光Zest 2 жыл бұрын

      @drsatanrx I'm refering to the first comment you make in this post. Of course, never said running away from bullet is equal to dodging them. Which is why an objection is badass in my opinion.

    • drsatanrx
      drsatanrx 2 жыл бұрын

      @光Zest there is also missing and deleted comments in here from the past year or so so I don't even know what you were referring to. Either way, running away from bullets =/= dodging all of them

    • 光Zest
      光Zest 2 жыл бұрын

      @drsatanrx hey, you're giving your analogy and I'm giving my analogy. An objection = to running away?

    • drsatanrx
      drsatanrx 2 жыл бұрын

      @光Zest seems like you don't understand what running away means. Especially with an analogy involving prohectiles

  • Monsiemage
    Monsiemage  Жыл бұрын +2

    This man was showed every single video in history about "How you might go jail if you answer one question wrong" He was also likely a IVY league college graduate, this is what you end up with.

  • Great Ninjaman
    Great Ninjaman 3 жыл бұрын

    Props to Dr. Waldman. Well played.

  • tru fom
    tru fom 9 ай бұрын +1

    I'm on the fence after watching this. Sometimes you encounter a person who just cannot answer yes or no to a yes or no question. This doctor may be one of those.

  • cdeford
    cdeford 4 жыл бұрын +735

    Just giving yes or no answers is how prosecution and defence give the jury incomplete and false ideas of what really occurred. They're trying to win, not establish the truth.

    • PDL46 Lundy
      PDL46 Lundy 3 жыл бұрын +3

      Everybody on here saying this is the best system....come up with a better one....ect... Hopefully you never have to be "in this system" cause I guarantee you will change your outlook in a heartbeat on how "great" the judicial system is. And before you comment that you don't engage in activities that would put you in this system....you don't have to have done ANYTHING wrong to end up here. Just my two cents.

    • Irina Sharie
      Irina Sharie 4 жыл бұрын

      Zenith but, but, then courts would be enabled to coerce everyone into accepting plea bargains before trail. Blind Justice - a system of pleadings, as judges describe it. Jury Duty is more of a Hollywood-movies atavism this days.
      The panel of experts is BETTER. But, take Democrat’s vs republics for a second:
      When corruption reaches the “panel of experts” in court - and it wound take too long - different viewpoints will separate ‘experts’ as quickly, as currently ideology does. Then what?
      The defence pleading for the acceptance of their own experts?
      Or, writing down as “The Law of the land” every possible meaningless offense so it is in the books for the judge to decide They’ve done that too.
      I think, the more realistic solution is hiding in plain sight:
      Once the society belongs to view all - possible and imaginable - offenses (unimaginable and ‘evil’ aside for the moment) - as a cry for help, not in a harsh way with mind blowing sentences for what should be treated by doctors - more humane and supportive. Especially, with the young people.
      Nowadays, almost everything is iphone, e-mail, or even Facebook (lol) documented. People should be proactive, making sure to document every little “what if’s”. Store it for later. That extra proof might come handy later. Who knows? Then, if heal breaks loose, one would have tools to prove facts - real evidence, not just “he said or she said” left for the jury.

    • Blaisem
      Blaisem 4 жыл бұрын +3

      @Zenith How feasible is it logistically to supply every court case with a panel of legal experts? How do you keep the people in this panel unpredictable enough to avoid targeted bribery?

    • R V
      R V 4 жыл бұрын

      @davidgm1000 while you're at it, quit being toxic too thanks :)

    • davidgm1000
      davidgm1000 4 жыл бұрын

      @R V including me? Did I actually tell you? Yeah!???......Man, I really must quit drinking!

  • Iggy's Friend
    Iggy's Friend 2 жыл бұрын +2

    This doctor is awesome, he's very specific and lethal in his answers to the lawyer.

  • Señor Lares
    Señor Lares 3 жыл бұрын +1

    What the attorneys do is ask closed ended questions in a way to make your answers look like you are guilty. That is why he was getting frustrated. The Doctor is intelligent.

  • Driver2616
    Driver2616  Жыл бұрын

    He’s obviously a very inexperienced lawyer. He’ll get better as the years go on.

  • GeddyRC
    GeddyRC 3 жыл бұрын +9

    2:58 god the communication breakdown here is incredible. You could see in the eyes of the interviewer - his brain completely shut down for a good two seconds.

  • Just Some Guy with Tattoos
    Just Some Guy with Tattoos  Жыл бұрын +13

    The judge is sitting there like he's watching TV 😂

    • J Shepard
      J Shepard 7 ай бұрын

      He is. This witness is a paid liar and is putting on a performance.

  • simon dawkins
    simon dawkins 5 жыл бұрын +533

    an intelligent man that knew the right answers to the wrong questions

  • AlfaAddict
    AlfaAddict 2 жыл бұрын +16

    I wanna see more of the doctor. He's v.smart and extremely well spoken

    • Ken
      Ken 5 ай бұрын

      Very well spoken

  • Nick Marsala
    Nick Marsala 3 жыл бұрын +32

    I'm happy this guy gave the prosecutor such a hard time.

  • Chris Trickett
    Chris Trickett 2 жыл бұрын

    Attorney : I'm the most tedious person in the world.
    Witness: No you are not, I am.
    Attorney: No, it's me, and I am proving it in this hearing.
    Witness: Sorry to disappoint you.

  • .m.
    .m. 2 жыл бұрын +8

    he was actually a great witness. the goal of cross examination for the other side is to discredit the witness, so by not answering vague questions, he actually succeeded in protecting himself legally

    • CIA Hammer
      CIA Hammer 2 жыл бұрын

      You think he was a great witness? They are trying to show the witnesses qualifications. The only thing the doctor showed was that he has no idea how much he works, and he has completely discredited himself.

  • Moishe Blumenthal
    Moishe Blumenthal  Жыл бұрын

    imagine being treated by this doctor

  • Samson Maximus
    Samson Maximus 4 жыл бұрын +1767

    the attorney was setting the doctor up for something. but the doctor was clever enough to not get caught in what the attorney was trying to accomplish.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын

      @Songbirdstress I'm guessing you could get me within twenty hours of the number. If he'd said "on average 60-80 hours" that've been it.

    • chetmcmasterson
      chetmcmasterson 7 ай бұрын

      @C V This was day 19 of this trial--I'm guessing the jury was wishing he'd just answer the fucking question so they could go home.

    • brmbkl2015
      brmbkl2015 10 ай бұрын +1

      @John Blake "I'm saying that the doctor wasn't actually clever at all. He incorrectly assumed that every question the attorney asked was an attempt to lead him into a trap and that the best course of action would be to act as evasive as possible. "
      incorrectly assumed? if you don't assume that, pretty soon you will be saying things you don't agree with.
      he wasn't evasive, he just didn't answer questions, that were unspecific. if your answer can be linked by the asker to a question you didn't hear (= to interpret the question) you're done.

    • brmbkl2015
      brmbkl2015 10 ай бұрын +1

      @John Blake " - flip the opposing counsel's examination on its head and use it as further opportunity to undermine counsel's argument whilst strengthening their own. If you can't avoid incriminating your side"
      those 2 are two very different things.
      the doctor did the latter.
      useful enough.

    • brmbkl2015
      brmbkl2015 10 ай бұрын +1

      @Dom P " Anybody in that courtroom looks at that guy and sees how evasive he's being"
      you do, not everyone.
      nuance is important, and I respect him for it.

  • CornCod1
    CornCod1 2 жыл бұрын

    As someone who has given similar testimony you have to be careful to not permit attorneys to put words in your mouth.

  • dizceedot21
    dizceedot21 3 жыл бұрын

    Gotta be smart, calm and focused when you sit on the stand... the pendulum swings back and forth with every word you say, every blink you make, and every reaction you have... you do not need to be a lawyer to understand the law... these lawyers will use you as a pawn if you let them...

  • Wobby
    Wobby 2 жыл бұрын +7

    I’ve watched this so many times. and yet I still pay it a visit here and there.

    • Ian Taylor
      Ian Taylor 2 жыл бұрын +1

      They lawyer only has circumstantial reasoning and needs to confirm that, the witness makes a nonsense of such generalised arguments and more importantly destroys their "Bingo ... Bango ... Bongo ..." emotional power (hey jury it's as simple as A leads to be leads to C) ... an act of genus on the part of the witness ... in essence he is saying , prove the specifics of the case and I am going to make you pay for characterization (generalizations) that amount to slurs, in essence you don't have a case because you're making stuff up ...

  • James DeVrees
    James DeVrees 3 жыл бұрын +6

    This was about an addict suing a rehab center for not getting him off meth.
    Waldman was on staff at three different centers in Malibu at the same time.
    The Prosecuting Atty was attempting to trap the Dr. into saying bad things about other rehab centers (of which there are a number in Malibu).

    • Richárd Kovács
      Richárd Kovács  Жыл бұрын +1

      No it wasn't, my goodness. It was Michael Jackson's involuntary manslaughter trial. His doctor, Murray killed him by gross negligence, partly by giving him propofol for 3 months unmonitored - just because MJ needed a treatment for his insomnia. When MJ died, the doctor claimed MJ was a drug addict. Too bad the toxicology didn't support the doctor's claim. Yet the defense brought in an addiction expert witness (this doc in the video) to help their case. His replies are funny, but were less than a help to the defense.

  • ArantosTube
    ArantosTube 2 жыл бұрын +14

    At the end, he ended up answering the two questions... Haha but at least he made it more difficult for the lawyer.

  • officer401
    officer401 4 жыл бұрын +7519

    Love watching lawyers lose their bearing when they're caught off guard by someone intelligent. Haha.

    • Lou V
      Lou V 7 ай бұрын

      But this is not the case!

    • Barbara Hamilton
      Barbara Hamilton 8 ай бұрын

      Many family lots love ones because of prescribed drugs !! Too many!!

    • Barbara Hamilton
      Barbara Hamilton 8 ай бұрын

      @Brian Houck
      He knows he in trouble 👿

    • Barbara Hamilton
      Barbara Hamilton 8 ай бұрын

      @Ed Diaz !
      Are You the drugs lord??

  • X G
    X G 3 жыл бұрын +1

    Lol. I love this Dr.. GD... Lawyers are supposed to be good with words... That's the entirety of their job. Yet this Dr OWNS the hell out of this lawyer simply because he minds his words.

  • James21
    James21 3 жыл бұрын +6

    His defense in answering questions could put any man in a deep state of over thinking lmao

    NOT SO SLIM JIM  Жыл бұрын

    This is a perfect example of being evasive.