Judge Rules That Asking For A 'Lawyer Dog' Is Too Confusing
During a police interview, a man told investigators, "just give me a lawyer, dog" (the comma preceding "dog" was not in the original transcript, but I added it in because, duh). Once a suspect invokes the right to counsel, police must terminate the interview until an attorney is present. However, Louisiana Supreme Court Justice Scott Crichton said, "In my view, the defendant's ambiguous and equivocal reference to a 'lawyer dog' does not constitute an invocation of counsel that warrants termination of the interview."
Alright. I'm pretty sure "dog," as in "man" or "dude," has been widely known parlance since about 1980. So these police were so confused they literally thought he was asking for a dog lawyer? A domesticated canine who passed the bar and is now able to legally represent the accused? And the judge agreed it was "ambiguous?"
I can't imagine how these officers and judges function in real life, with all the "ambiguous" slang out there. You could ask them, "Do you want a hotdog for lunch?" only to be met with disgusted outrage. "What?? You want me to eat a dog whose temperature exceeds the normal range? You monster!" And you don't want to know what would happen if you asked to ride shotgun.
These cops/judges sound like a real bummer to hang out with, like a bunch of Datas from Star Trek, except instead of treating you with childlike wonderment they throw you in prison and when you ask for a lawyer they go "Err-ror! Does not compute! Initiating taser sequence!"
Subscribe to our YouTube channel and check out Perhaps President Donald Trump Is Actually A Dumb Liar With A Terrible Memory - Some News, and watch other videos you won't see on the site!
Also follow our Pictofacts Facebook page. Why don't ya?