Originally Posted by
elader
Can you imagine the same conversation about two cars? "So, what you are saying is that if Mrs. Jones had slammed on her brakes instantly when Dr. Bill had jammed on his, theoretically she had enough time to avoid hitting him and getting herself killed? So in effect, it was her repressed unconscious desire for death that did her in!" "Why Mrs Jones should be put on trial her and pay for damages to the car she hit."
Ya, I know. It's just disgusting, really. It doesn't look like the prosecution really even did much of a cross-examine. It seems like the more time you spend with a jack-ass like that 'expert' on the stand, the more credibility you give them. It's better to show in 1 or 2 sentences that they're idiots and then get them out of there.