These are from a book called Disorder in the Courts and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and published by court reporters that had the torment of staying calm while the exchanges were taking place.
ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning? WITNESS: He said, ‘Where am I, Cathy?’ ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you? WITNESS: My name is Susan! _______________________________ ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact? WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks. ____________________________________________ ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active? WITNESS: No, I just lie there. ____________________________________________ ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth? WITNESS: July 18th. ATTORNEY: What year? WITNESS: Every year. _____________________________________ ATTORNEY: How old is your son, the one living with you? WITNESS: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can’t remember which. ATTORNEY: How long has he lived with you? WITNESS: Forty-five years. _________________________________ ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all? WITNESS: Yes. ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory? WITNESS: I forget.. ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot? ___________________________________________ ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn’t it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn’t know about it until the next morning? WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam? ____________________________________
ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the 20-year-old, how old is he? WITNESS: He’s 20, much like your IQ. ___________________________________________ ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken? WITNESS: Are you shitting me? _________________________________________ ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th? WITNESS: Yes. ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time? WITNESS: Getting laid ____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: She had three children , right? WITNESS: Yes. ATTORNEY: How many were boys? WITNESS: None. ATTORNEY: Were there any girls? WITNESS: Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney? ____________________________________________ ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated? WITNESS: By death.. ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated? WITNESS: Take a guess. ___________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual? WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female? WITNESS: Unless the Circus was in town I’m going with male. _____________________________________ ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney? WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work. ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: Doctor , how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people? WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much of a fight. _________________________________________ ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to? WITNESS: Oral… _________________________________________ ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body? WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 PM ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time? WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I finished. ____________________________________________ ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample? WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question?
______________________________________ And last:
ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing? WITNESS: No.. ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor? WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar. ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless? WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.
i was rewatching the rite of spring segment from fantasia and i've got to wonder. Why Did We Draw Archaeopteryx Like That. i remember toys having that same, boomerang arm shaped pose too. it's like a monkey lizard more than a bird.
Ooh okay this is a fun one cause while it technically is an Archaeopteryx and is listed as such in the production draft, I don’t think the design is based on Archaeopteryx at all!
ALT
To me, this “Archaeopteryx” almost exactly resembles something else, the fascinating historical phenomenon called Proavis.
ALT
Proavis, or Tetrapteryx as some four-winged interpretations were called, was a hypothetical prehistoric creature that was proposed in the early 20th century as a best guess at what the unknown ancestor of birds could have looked like. The illustration above was drawn in 1926 by Gerhard Heilmann, a Danish artist and amateur scientist who argued that birds evolved from non-dinosaurian archosaurs like Euparkeria. In his 1916 book Vor Nuvaerende Viden om Fuglenes Afstamning and the 1926 English translation The Origin of Birds, he presented Proavis as the imagined midpoint between a scaly ground-running archosaur and Archaeopteryx, which at the time held the title of The First Bird.
ALT
Other versions of the same hypothesis, like William Beebe’s Tetrapteryx above, were published and discussed around the same time, but it was Heilmann’s Proavis that gained immense popularity to the point that bird evolution was considered essentially “solved” for decades. It was also painted by Zdeněk Burian, one of the Old Greats of palaeoart, which kept the concept alive in dinosaur books for decades as well.
ALT
Of course further study has shown this hypothesis to be incorrect and that birds are instead members of Dinosauria (and honestly Heilmann either missed or ignored a lot of evidence for a dinosaurian origin of birds even in the 1910s), but the Proavis to me remains a beautiful and fascinating concept that represents scientists and artists striving to understand the prehistoric world and the passage of evolution, much like we still do today!
And of course, its popularity in the early 20th century put it at the perfect time for Fantasia’s artists to take… let’s say heavy inspiration from Heilmann’s imaginary Proavis when depicting a creature that was intended to be Archaeopteryx the whole time! The pattern of feathers matches up almost exactly, although the larger leg wings might have been inspired by Beebe’s Tetrapteryx as well:
ALT
So to get back to your original question that led to this whole deep dive, artists didn’t actually Draw Archaeopteryx Like That except when they were mistakenly drawing something that wasn’t Archaeopteryx at all! If you want to read more about the Proavis and Tetrapteryx I recommend this Tetrapod Zoology blog post by Darren Naish, he does into more depth about the history of the concept and some of the unusual evolutionary ideas that Heilmann used to arrive at this weird and cool imaginary creature!
As @staff further refine the polls while they’re rolling them out (still haven’t gotten mine sadly), here’s a suggestion of mine: Polls with a ten year time limit.
As of right now, it’s impossible for polls to turn into long-running legendary posts. You can try, sure (see the bug race), but it’s a week and then it’s locked, fixed, done, and all that’s left is for people to reminisce about that time there was a poll.
On the other hand, if a ten year poll gets popular, it can become part of Tumblr lore while still being updated. People can write passionate appeals for their vote and fight in the notes. Others can make graphs to show how the poll’s majorities shift with each different US president or Taylor Swift album. People can make memes about “remember 2025, when option 3 was in the lead? That was a crazy time”.
Why ten years, though, instead of a hundred or just no time limit? Because that way, the end becomes an event. People who voted in the poll when it was just a few hours old can watch the final countdown together, and there’s a new point in Tumblr history: That day when we finally all agreed on the best option, and presumably also some important political stuff happened.
Now, granted, most ten year polls would never reach this level of notoriety. But it only takes a few polls like this to be worthwhile. Maybe this shouldn’t be an option for users to select, but something the Tumblr website grants/pushes on you at random?
So, yeah. Ten year polls. They should be a thing.
Can you imagine the chaos of a 10 year poll with the options
Super
Who
Lock
Can you imagine
the chaos of a 10 year
poll with the options
Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.
This flashback in ATLA, Azulon becoming enraged with Ozai for disrespecting Iroh and the recently deceased Lu Ten, is usually interpreted as Azulon then ordering Ozai to kill Zuko. I disagree with this for two reasons.
1: We don’t actually hear Azulon say that, it’s only referred to by Azula (who was around seven or eight at the time and might have misunderstood what she heard) and by Ozai, years later, when he is taunting Zuko on the Day of Black Sun. Neither Azula nor Ozai are reliable narrators.
2: Azulon is, at the time of this flashback, the ruler of the Fire Nation who has just lost one of his only two grandsons and heirs. What kind of monarch loses one heir and then turns around and demands the death of another, especially when losing Zuko would hardly bother Ozai?
My interpretation of this situation is Azulon ordered Ozai to give Zuko into Iroh’s care, replacing Lu Ten as Iroh’s heir, neatly removing any argument Ozai had about Iroh’s line having ended. Ozai of course would never accept this. He either lied to Ursa, claiming Azulon wished Zuko dead, or outright told his wife he’d kill Zuko before seeing him get ahead of him in the line of succession, thus manipulating Ursa to help him assassinate Azulon. I think this theory makes far more logical sense than ‘Azulon ordered the murder of his nine-year-old grandson’.
ALT
ALT
ALT
ALT
ALT
