Strange question...

[deuce91]

Lately I just stand around and scratch my head. (Before the funnies start, no I don't have dandruff, lice or fleas.) I just don't comprehend why people do or say what they do. In the 3/1/2007 edition of the Globe, we find that county is suing two young men, err boys, for shooting someone's SUV down in south Dodge. In his attempt to establish his argument, our DA asked...

"Who, if anybody, did you give permission to shoot your car?" Sauer asked Herreda.

Herreda replied, "Nobody, sir."

Why would anybody give permission to shoot their car??!?? Why would anyone ask that question? Was Sauer trying to establish something? To me that is the most crazy thing! I guess I don't get it.

[Quietly]

I can't speak for Mr. Sauer, but I think the question was just a way of covering all the bases so a defense attorney couldn't exploit any loopholes later. I always think it sounds silly when an attorney asks a witness if a crime occurred in Dodge City, Ford County, Kansas, but the attorney has to lay the foundation for his line of questioning.

[deuce91]

Thanks! I guess that makes sense, to lay the foundation. I just think it's funny you could even give someone permission to shoot your car when you're in it. I wonder if that would be covered under your car's insurance. But stranger things can and do happen!

[wordsmythe]

Well if the asnwer was, "Yeah he told me I could do it." that amounts to a confession in open court and under oath.

In that case, permission doesn't negate the violation.

[K C Muffin]

Deuce - it CAN be covered under your car insurance, but only if you have the proper coverage. Guess in Dodge, you'd have to be real careful to make sure your agent adds it to your policy!

[WizardofOz]

Here is your answer for the line of questioning:
21-3720
Chapter 21.--CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
PART II.--PROHIBITED CONDUCT
Article 37.--CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
21-3720. Criminal damage to property. (a) Criminal damage to property is by means other than by fire or explosive:

(1) Intentionally injuring, damaging, mutilating, defacing, destroying, or substantially impairing the use of any property in which another has an interest without the consent of such other person; or

(2) injuring, damaging, mutilating, defacing, destroying, or substantially impairing the use of any property with intent to injure or defraud an insurer or lienholder.

(b) (1) Criminal damage to property is a severity level 7, nonperson felony if the property is damaged to the extent of $25,000 or more.

(2) Criminal damage to property is a severity level 9, nonperson felony if the property is damaged to the extent of at least $1,000 but less than $25,000.

(3) Criminal damage to property is a class B nonperson misdemeanor if the property damaged is of the value of less than $1,000 or is of the value of $1,000 or more and is damaged to the extent of less than $1,000.

[NoLongerInRadioGuy]

Yeah, as above states (but I was beaten to posting!) one of the elements of most crimes is not only willingly and intentionally doing the act, but also doing so without the victim's consent. All elements of the crime must be proven in order to get a conviction.

[deuce91]

Thanks! I guess maybe that's why I've never been called for jury duty. The lawyers would ask those questions and they would fly right over my head. Once again thanks!

[WizardofOz]

You're not the only one. I heard some strange questions in court and said to myself "no s@*t" but later found out they have to prove the elements of the crime to meet the statutes. All just formality and a big sleeping pill for everyone else.

[Gunsmoke]

The Dodge City, Ford County, Kansas questions establishes for the record the Court's jurisdiction (ie, authority) to hear the case. It may also be used to establish if the law enforcement agency involved had jurisdiction (again, authority, power) to act. The above citation to the statute, and the question, would apply, if they were charged with criminal damage. I thought this was an attempted 1st degree murder charge but they were "bound over" on shooting at an occupied vehicle and felony weapons violations. If those were the charges, I don't know why that question would be asked.