Share This Article
I just wanted to start this blog with saying that the law, especially on the Internet, is a little different when you are trying to get a good idea from a law professor. Because the law is made up of common sense, the best way to follow it is to read the case law. This is a pretty good resource to have for your reference.
A very good resource to have is a case from the Supreme Court, the United States Supreme Court. Basically, it’s the case of res ipsa loquitur. Basically, the Supreme Court says that if you have a witness who gives an eyewitness account of an event and if you have no other evidence to support your witness’ testimony, then you can use that eyewitness testimony to prove that the event happened.
What a great resource. The above case is about a man who was hit by a car and died, but an eyewitness contradicted those witnesses and the driver was found not guilty.
The case of the man who died was brought to the Supreme Court on the grounds that he was killed while on drugs. However, since no drugs were ever found in his system, it was determined that his death was accidental and, thus, his death was not caused by drug use.
The case of the man who died in the car accident, was brought to the Supreme Court on the grounds that he was involved in a drug deal which resulted in a car accident. However, the witness who contradicted the witnesses and gave the most damning testimony was never charged.
The Supreme Court seems to have had a very strange interpretation of this case. They seem to have interpreted it as if the person was using drugs and being caught in the accident was just a coincidence. Not quite. This case was about whether an accident caused someone to be killed by an overdose. The fact that the accident, which was not caused by drugs, is the most striking piece of evidence in the case meant that there couldn’t have been any drug use in the accident.
This case was decided by the Supreme Court in 1982. The case was started by a car traveling at 70 mph in a 25 mph zone. It hit the curb just as it was about to make a curve and the car was parked. The car was parked in the ditch, and the driver was nowhere to be seen. The driver was later found to be alive, walking to his car and telling a policeman he had just been hit by a car.
Although there are many cases where the law states that there is no such thing as a case of “the truth”, there’s no question that the above case was a good one and a good example of the truth being in the eye of the beholder.
We at the site res ipsa loquitur have heard dozens of stories of car crashes that lead to people dying because the cops are unable to determine if the driver was in the car or not. There are some cars that just don’t work. You know the one where if the driver is driving but has a flat spot in the back seat, and you’re sitting in the front seat, the car won’t start.
That is a car that just doesnt work. Its a classic example of what happens when the cop is out of the loop. They start to look at it in a way that makes it look like its a case of “they just dont see a problem.” But the problem is, there is a problem. There is now evidence that proves the cop was driving and the car was a problem.