04 May 2011

Rebuttal: The Truth Exposed

This is Brent, and I am going to take advantage of this forum, that for one reason or another, has chosen to post scathing slander regarding my trustworthiness with electronic items.

The prosecution calls Katie Pickett to the stand.

Me (in a very official sounding, lawyer-like voice): Is it not true that it was in fact YOU that were in charge of the original Ipod in question when it was originally lost?

Katie: Why yes, I do believe that it was.

Me: Indeed it was. Is the person that found the originally lost Ipod here in the courtroom?

Katie: Yes, he is.

Me: Would you point him out for me, please?

Katie: Certainly. (she points to ME)

Me: Let the record show that the defendant pointed to the prosecuting attorney!

(general rustling from the peanuts gallery)

Judge: There will be order or I will have all of you thrown out and held in contempt of court!

Me: Ms. Pickett....

Katie: It's Mrs. Pickett.

Me: Mrs. Pickett? Oh, well... my (blushing) your husband must be a VERY lucky man.

Katie: He most certainly is.

Me: Yes I am. Mrs. Pickett, after the new Ipod Nano was found, who was it that located the item in question?

Katie: Why, it was the same dashing Zeus-like hunk of a man that found the first Ipod! This man has the sleuthing instincts of Sherlock Holmes himself!

Me: So it was your husband, or as you put it, this "dashing Zeus-like hunk of a man" that found BOTH lost Ipods in question.

Katie: Yes, I believe that it was. He did find BOTH Ipods and I did not find any lost Ipods. If there were a contest for finding lost Ipods, I would be down 2-0.

Me: Let the record show that the defendant is ogling the prosecuting attorney.

Judge: Noted. Can you blame her?
Me: Not at all. The defense rests.

Note: this actually DID happen and Katie DID actually admit this. Once again, the prosecution (or in this case, the defense) rests.

No comments:

Post a Comment