Kettle Logic

#1

Post by secondary » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 6:23 PM UTC

Kettle Logic
en.wikipedia.org

Re: Kettle Logic

#2

Post by prvc » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:02 PM UTC

Is such a battery of arguments permissible in legal contexts, e.g. in a criminal defense?

Re: Kettle Logic

#3

Post by brey » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:04 PM UTC

prvc wrote: post #2

Is such a battery of arguments permissible in legal contexts, e.g. in a criminal defense?

'permissible' isn't quite the point ... if it makes the jury think you're lying, maybe it isn't the best strategy.

Re: Kettle Logic

#4

Post by prvc » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:10 PM UTC

brey wrote: post #3

prvc wrote: post #2

Is such a battery of arguments permissible in legal contexts, e.g. in a criminal defense?

'permissible' isn't quite the point ... if it makes the jury think you're lying, maybe it isn't the best strategy.

Certainly, but is there some other penalty for what might be construed as contemptuous and disreputable behavior?

Re: Kettle Logic

#5

Post by ambrozk » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:11 PM UTC

There is a joke I love that illustrates the concept:

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my client was nowhere near the scene of the murder, he didn't mean to pull the trigger, and that son-of-a-bitch had it coming!"

Re: Kettle Logic

#6

Post by infini8 » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

So this is the strategy the UK government has been using for the last few years.

Re: Kettle Logic

#7

Post by thehappypm » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:19 PM UTC

prvc wrote: post #4

brey wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'permissible' isn't quite the point ... if it makes the jury think you're lying, maybe it isn't the best strategy.

Certainly, but is there some other penalty for what might be construed as contemptuous and disreputable behavior?

It might be perjury

Re: Kettle Logic

#8

Post by evilotto » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:19 PM UTC

prvc wrote: post #2

Is such a battery of arguments permissible in legal contexts, e.g. in a criminal defense?

It was literally Kim Potter's defense. Shooting was an accident and untentional, but she was within her rights to use deadly force.

Re: Kettle Logic

#9

Post by yellowstuff » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:22 PM UTC

prvc wrote: post #2

Is such a battery of arguments permissible in legal contexts, e.g. in a criminal defense?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_pleading

Using multiple logically inconsistent defenses is generally allowed in the US.

Re: Kettle Logic

#10

Post by Mordisquitos » Thu, Mar 10, 2022, 7:23 PM UTC

brey wrote: post #3

prvc wrote: post #2

Is such a battery of arguments permissible in legal contexts, e.g. in a criminal defense?

'permissible' isn't quite the point ... if it makes the jury think you're lying, maybe it isn't the best strategy.

1. The jury should not base their decision on their belief whether either side is lying.

2. The defence is expected to lie, and if the prosecution cannot prove that every single one of the defence's arguments are lies, then the jury cannot convict beyond reasonable doubt.

3. The jury should assume that the prosecution is lying by default, and acquit if the prosecution does not convince them otherwise.