Murphy, a dishonest lawyer, bribed one of his client's jurors to hold
out for a charge of manslaughter, fearing the murder charge being
brought by the state. The jury was out for days before returning with
the verdict:
Later, as Murphy paid off the corrupt juror, he asked him if he had a
hard time convincing the other jurors to see things his way.
"Boy, did I!" said the juror. "They kept voting to acquit!"
Posted Comments:
Perhaps John is a lawyer, attorney, judge, barrister, etc., in which case he might not find the humor in this joke. I, on the other hand, thought it was pretty funny.
geegee
Thanks for a nice response. I don't mean to offend peple, but anyone who can fire up a computer should be capable of something more than "huh", don't you agree?
John U K, thanks for explaining! First of all, the 2 first comentators, may be new to the country, the language and speech, therefore find it hard to understand what the rest of us take for granted. I hope your explanations helped them. Ian, don't go judging people just because they wish to remain anonomous and don't want to give their name.
John U.K. Good attempt, but you're wasting your time with nameless people whose comments consist of "huh?" and "wats does dat mean"
AZ. 'anecdote' would be a better spelling.
Dishonest lawyer
'Acquit' means 'let off'; free to go without charge.
The lawyer, defending someone he thought would be likely to get a murder conviction, pays a juror to 'swing' the verdict to the lesser charge of 'manslaughter' (accidental killing). It turns out that the other jurors were going to allow the lawyer's client to walk free; thus, the crooked lawyer's plan backfired - he ended up paying a juror to get his client charged with manslaughter instead of nothing!
This joke ridicules the justice system, implying that the jury is likely to be either too stupid to do the job properly, or more crooked even than lawyers are thought to be.
Comment archive |
Comment FAQ's