The lawyer was shocked and his feelings were hurt when the man told him that Bill or the hack driver was Lutkins himself. Question 19. “He was so open and friendly that I glowed with the warmth of his affection”. How did the young lawyer form this opinion about the hack driver?
He wears a simple jacket with a striped silk belt and is accompanied by his friend, Franklin, who is a wealthy landowner. When it comes to his turn to tell a story, the host encourages him by using legalese. In response, the lawyer says, 'Mine host. . . by the gods, I consent; To break a promise is not my intent.'
The hack driver told the young lawyer that all the four restaurants in the town were bad. He suggested that only for half a dollar his wife would pack up the lunch for them and they would eat at Wade’s Hill. So they did not go to a restaurant. Question 16. Did Lutkin’s mother allow the lawyer to search her house to find Lutkins?
This Lawyer was trying to justify himself to obtain eternal life. He was trying to narrow down the definition of neighbor to make it acceptable in his own mind and maintain his justification before God in his own mind.
Juror #9, an elderly man, was the first to change his vote to "not guilty" in support of Juror #8. What was his reason for doing so? He felt that Juror #8 deserved to be heard.
In the end, Juror 8's calm, quiet demeanor leads the jurors to all vote not guilty. The final juror, #3, threatens him, and Juror 8 remains steady and simply restates his vote of not guilty, compelling Juror 3 to do the same.
Laws coded in language & Legal concepts are accessible only through language. Interviews of Police officers and cases in courts takes place through language. The relationship between partners in contracts is also taken care of by language. Law exerts its control through language.
What was the murder weapon? Q. What fact finally convinces the remaining jurors to vote “not guilty?” the fact that the eyewitness saw the murder through the windows of a passing el train.
Juror #8 (Henry Fonda)'s Timeline and Summary.
The jurors think juror number five changed his vote. Who actually changed his vote? Why? Juror number nine changed his vote because he wanted to hear more from juror number eight.
The proficient use of legal language is important for lawyering. Lawyers use this legal language on various occasions like while discussing what the law means, advise their clients, argue before the court, or question the witnesses.
A common feature of the syntax of legal language is the formal and impersonal written style joined with considerable complexity and length. Complex structures, passive voice, multiple negations and prepositional phrases are extensively used in legal language.
A literary bent helps lawyers argue better and judges articulate better. Critical theory, so central to the study of literature, is also an invaluable tool for the study of law, with both requiring a keenness for detail.
As the final hold-out after the other jurors are able to put reasonable doubt into every witness's testimony, Juror 3 acts as if he alone is going to hang the jury in order to be right, but as he stands alone without an argument, he finally concedes and votes not guilty.
Why does the juror who points this out feel the boy would not have made the stab wound that type of knife? It would take too much time to switch hands.
His name is McCardle (end of movie). He's the last juror to vote not guilty. He's angry because he lost his son. He wears glasses which reminds the old man juror about the woman's testimony.
Have you ever known anyone who, even though they were smart and well-liked, pretended to be something more? In The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, the Man of Law is that person. The Man of Law is sometimes referred to as 'the Lawyer' or 'the Sergeant of the Law' depending on which version of The Canterbury Tales you are reading. He is important and well-respected, which makes you wonder why he pretends to be busier than he is. The Canterbury Tales is a collection of stories about a group of people who are all traveling on the same pilgrimage to Canterbury. They have a contest about who can tell the best story to entertain one another on the journey. Let's learn more about the Man of Law from this story.
In the prologue, the narrator describes each of the characters. The Man of Law is an intelligent and discerning man who has been appointed as a judge. Being sought after by noblemen, he has made a great deal of money. The narrator says, 'So great a purchaser was never known. All was fee simple to him, in effect, Wherefore his claims could never be suspect.' Meaning that not only did he have money, he was pretty good at spending it. His land purchases were made in cash. The narrator provides some criticism in that '. . . he seemed much busier than he was,' but he is described as being very knowledgeable about statutes and talented in his vocation. He wears a simple jacket with a striped silk belt and is accompanied by his friend, Franklin, who is a wealthy landowner.
“ Winning cases can be lost because of a client who lies or exaggerates just as easily as because of a lawyer who tells the client what the client wants to hear instead of what is true.” So when dealing with attorneys, don’t just look for honesty—be honest.
“If you want to improve your chances of securing the best lawyer to take your case, you need to prepare before you meet them,” advises attorney Stephen Babcock. “Get your story, facts, and proof together well before your first meeting.” This not only ensures that you understand your own needs, but it helps a good lawyer to ascertain whether he or she can actually help you. “We want the best clients too. Proving you’re organized and reliable helps us.”
On reading a demand letter, the other person will often say, “this isn’t worth the trouble” and they quickly settle. But here’s a secret from Knight: You don’t need a lawyer to write a demand letter. You can do it yourself. Just make it look as formal as possible, and you may find your dispute goes away—no charge to you.
In fact, a lawyer should try to stay out of court. “In my experience, a good lawyer always finds every opportunity to keep a case from being decided by a judge, and only relents on trying a case before the bench when all alternatives have been exhausted,” attorney, Jason Cruz says.
One despised... A Samarian. This represents the despised One - the Lord Jesus whom the Jews called a Samaritan. ( John 8:48 ). He is the One who had compassion ( Matt 9:36, Mar 1:41) and went out of His way to heal up the broken and give life to the dying.
The man: He is robbed and left for dead. The man represents humanity where the enemy, who comes to kill, steal and destroy, has left mankind for dead spiritually at the fall.
He knew that when the law has done it's work in the heart of a man or women they will come asking for mercy, not for direction on what good things they could do to gain eternal life. We see this quite often in the gospels: If a person comes by the law, Jesus answers them with the law.
1. The Thief: His philosophy of life says, "What you have is mine.". This is socialism or communism. 2.
Instead, it is a Samaritan, one despised in Jewish society, that has mercy and compassion upon the beaten man and goes out of his way (and at personal cost to himself) to see that this man is healed and taken care of.
Luke 10:30-35 NIV In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. (31) A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. (32) So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. (33) But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. (34) He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. (35) The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'
Luke says the lawyer intended to put Jesus to the test, and to do so, he asks two questions.
Only the Samaritan, the despised Samaritan, the one by whom the lawyer would not want even to be touched, only the Samaritan lifted him up, dressed his wounds, cared for his life, helped him move from a place of death to a place of life.
The lawyer depended upon the concepts “love God” and “love neighbor” to remain fixed and stable, a system of religious justification, and, again like most of us, he had found a sweet spot in that religious system that allowed him to be satisfied with himself and his life.
Jesus undermines the lawyer’s standing in order to show that the lawyer, like all the rest of humanity, needs not to stand his ground but to see the face of grace, and then to move, to repent. It is important to keep in view that the story Jesus told the lawyer was a parable, not an example story.
In one breathtaking move, the court is turned upside down. The lawyer is now in the dock; the lawyer is now the one on trial. No longer the solicitor prosecuting the case, the lawyer is now the accused defending his righteousness. So, the lawyer, now suddenly the defendant, seeks to do what every accused person desires.
No, the lawyer wanted Jesus to confess publicly that, while he might seem a tad unorthodox, a bit intense perhaps, whatever he was doing as he made his way from village to village, he was really just waving the flag of the slogan we’ve been saying since we were kids – love God and love your neighbor.
In short, the lawyer, who Luke says “stood up to test Jesus” and wanted “to justify himself,” now finds himself face down beside the road. No longer in the stance of righteousness, he is now in the posture of dire need.
When his secretary says "thanks Patrick" he says "I'm not here". Even the friends of Bateman humiliate him and in the beginning they don't even know which man is Paul Allen. When we see this person, whoever he is, he is drinking himself into an early grave.
According to the Wiki article, the lawyer "mistakes him for another colleague". This is supposed to drive home the fact that although he is somewhat of a narcis sist, he is unimportant to certain people around him. In fact, everyone is unimportant to certain people around them .
Of course the one last concept is indeed Bateman exists as a Phantom and passes from body to body. It's as close to art as film making can ever get and one of the few films out of hundreds of thousands that deserves to be called art.
Patrick Bateman does not exist physically but rather is the narrative occupying the minds of all the characters we see and this is alluded to numerous times. The opening dialog itself states "I simply am not there" which was timed so it's said when he peels off the mask.
The hack driver told Lutkins’ mother that the lawyer represented the court in the city and he had a legal right to search the home. She treated them quite disrespectfully but allowed to search the house. But they could not find Lutkin’s there. Question 17.
Gustaff told the hack driver that he had neither seen Lutkins nor he cared to see him. He asked him that if he finds Lutkins, he might collect the thirty , five dollars which Lutkins owes to him. Question 15. “Let’s go to a restaurant and I’ll buy your lunch ,” the lawyer told the hack driver.
Answer: (i) The hack driver took the narrator to almost all the places where Lutkins could be found. They visited Fritz’s shop, GustafFs shop, Gray’s stop, the pool room and Lutkins mother’s farmhouse. (ii) They could not find Lutkins because the Hack driver was Lutkins himself. Question 6.
The hack driver was Lutkins himself. He had driven the lawyer previous day. The narrator was really hurt when Lutkins and his mother were laughing at him as if he were a bright boy of seven. Question 13.
Answer: Appearances are not always true. At times a person on first meeting appears to be friendly, co-operative, understanding but as the time unfolds a different story is revealed. When the lawyer comes to the city for first time he is very happy to meet the hack driver.