Buy the books on Amazon ___ ___

18 thoughts on “It Was You! pg 82

  1. Ann Onymous said:

    Yay!! A new page!!

    (Not a very profound comic, I know, but this is the first panel I’ve seen go up since I started reading this webcomic, and as the other panels don’t say what day they were put up, I didn’t know how long it would be until the next panel was up. I still don’t know how long it is between panels, though; I need to wait for the next panel to know that. So, for the record, today is February 9th, 2016, and since this is the first comment, this panel must have been put up pretty recently. And actually, now that I think about it, I probably checked this site just yesterday, so yeah, this panel probably went up today.)

    • He is a working attorney, so you have to give him some slack. Sometimes he’ll post 4 — 5 pages in a week and then it might be 4 — 5 weeks before he posts another. It is worth the wait, though.

      • Ann Onymous said:

        Yeah, I got the impression it might be a month or so between panels… I guess we’ll just have to wait and see when the next one goes up

        • Yeah, there’s no rhyme or reason to it. I love doing it, but it has to get in line behind work, kids, all their increasingly time-consuming school projects and afterschool activities, the wife, and the dog. It does take precedence over TV, Netflix, and video games, however!

          The last 8 pages went up on 12/2, 12/2, 12/4, 12/11, 12/27, 1/20, 2/1, and 2/9, and if there’s a discernible pattern there I don’t see it.

          • NN1 said:

            You mean being a lawyer with a family makes one busy? I am shocked.

            Note to defendant: Your lawyer probably knows more about law and procedure than the “really smart” guys you meet in jail.

          • UsaSatsui said:

            “You’re my lawyer, so that deal the DA is offering, should I take it? I mean, it’s…are you even listening? What’s that you’re drawing?”
            “Shhh! I’m busy! I’m trying to get the prosecutor’s shoes just right.”

          • Ann Onymous said:

            I just realized that I wrote “not a very profound comic” when I MEANT to write “not a very profound comment” (referring to me being excited about the new panel)… *facepalm*

            Sorry about that.

            Note to self: Always proofread comments.

            • Well, it’s not as if it was a terribly profound comic, either.

              • I think of it as when your professor is talking about, say, fluid dynamics and says, “Now remember that energy has to be conserved here and therefore…” Good to spend a couple minutes reminding us.

  2. SeanR said:

    I’ve been logging when I find them since late April of 2014. This helps me select out the ones that do have a consistent pattern and only check them on the days they normally update.
    My list is,… larger, and there’ll be some mistakes due to occasionally being away from my computer for long weekends, but here it is.

    F5/2/2014, M5/5, Tu5/6, W5/7, F5/9 (late), F5/16, Su5/18, F5/23, W5/28, F6/6, Su6/8, Sa6/14, M6/16, Tu6/17, F6/20, S6/21(2 comics), F6/27, M6/30, W7/2, Th7/3 (2 comics), Tu7/15, M7/21, Tu7/22, Th7/24(3 comics), F7/25, M7/28, W7/30, Th7/31, F8/1, M8/4, W8/6, Tu8/12, Su8/17, Su8/24, Th8/28, F8/29, M9/1, Tu9/9, M10/13, Tu10/14, W10/15, M10/20, W10/22, Th10/23, F10/24, M10/27, Tu10/28, Su11/2, Th11/6, F11/7, Tu11/11, M11/17, Th11/20, F11/21, Tu11/25, W12/3, M12/8, F12/12, Su1/4/2015, W1/14, W1/28, Th2/12, W3/4, Tu3/17, W3/26, F4/3, Su4/12, Th4/23(2), Sa4/25, M5/4(3), Th5/14, Tu6/2, (long court case here), W7/8, Sa7/11, W7/15, F7/17, W7/22, W7/29, F7/31, Tu8/4, W8/5, Th8/6, W8/19, F8/28, F9/25 (2), Su10/4, W10/14, M10/26 (3), W10/28
    (2, 2nd one late), M11/2 (late enough to be Tu), Tu11/3 ( found late enough to be W), Th11/5, Sa11/7 (2), W11/11(3), Sa11/14, Fr11/20(2), Sa11/21(2), Su11/22(3), W12/2(2), Su12/27-M12/28, W1/20, M2/1, Tu2/9(late),

    P.S. How’d the court case back in June go?

    • SeanR said:

      I keep forgetting to unblock the scripts before I post. Sorry. This post, that I’m replying to, was supposed to be in reply to our gracious host.

  3. SeanR said:

    It helps me select out the WEBCOMICS that DO update on a perceptible pattern, so I can separate them out for checking only on the days of the week I can expect them to have updated.

  4. Gregory T. Bogosian said:

    I am curious about where the distinction between testimonial and non-testimonial evidence and the differing bodies of constitutional law and criminal procedure came from. Did the distinction just become part of the law because it seems self-evident or does the distinction serve some public policy purpose?

    • I can think of a practical reason: You can reliably produce physical evidence, but you can’t always produce truthful testimony. If you have a face, you can take a mugshot. If you have blood, it can be sampled. Doesn’t matter who the suspect is or whether they’re innocent or guilty, the physical facts are there.

      But if a cop demands to know “Where are the bodies buried?” and I’m not the murderer, I can’t answer no matter how much I want to. Why jail me for failing to answer an impossible question?

      • SeanR said:

        Please visit the link Anon726 dropped and read through. The answer, or at least the answer as told by Mr. Burney, was posted some time back in the comic itself as part of the differences between our Adversarial system, and much of Europe’s Inquisitorial system.

        You’ll even find those same images again.

  5. Bruce Coulson said:

    If they’re ‘really smart guys’, why are they in jail? And why don’t people think to ask those kind of questions?

Class Participation

___