I love how we all collectively rebel when the narrator gets changed.

This narator is the best, and that being said, he deserves breaks and sick time! So we shouldn't flip out if someone else covers for him for a bit. He has a life outside of us and this channel and nobody wants to work a job that gives no time off, y'know? The other narator did a good job, even if he isn't the og.

I remember a story where a guy got out of a ticket because, while the officer meant to write "driver wasn't wearing their seatbelt", he actually wrote "driver was wearing their seatbelt. When he went to court for it as you usually do, he told the judge that due to how the ticket was written he was being accused of wearing a seatbelt and would like to plead guilty, and since wearing a seatbelt both isn't a crime and is what you're supposed to be doing while driving the judge laughed but let him go without having to pay.

WE GOT THE OLD NARRATOR WHOOO 🎉

One of the many things I love about this channel is how they give us new content instead of the same years old stories we've already heard dozens of times.

my dad once got out of a parking ticket because the cop had a brainfart and wrote may instead of march, placing the infraction 2 months in the future

I suspect in the Mcdonald's big mac fumble the lawyers assumed the business they were suing would roll over and settle and when that did not happen they had no clue how to proceed as they likely never had to take that type of matter to court in the EU before and utterly blew it.

27:47 My brother spent a bit over a day in jail because of a clerical error. He was caught having a beer when he was 20 and was sentenced to 20 hours of community service for minor in possession. A few years later a bouncer tried to confiscate his ID because he didn't believe it was my brother so my brother contacted the non-emergency police line. The cop came out, asked my brother a few questions, then arrested him. It turns out the county where he did the community service recorded it as 2.5 days (8 hour work day) of community service and somewhere in the transfer of information to the county where he got in trouble it became 2.5 hours, so there was a warrant out for his arrest. He'd never received any notification that there was any issue or that there was a warrant so he didn't know to resolve it until it became an issue for him.

One really important point about the supermacs case was forgotten. Supermacs existst in Ireland since 1978. That means the case was frivolous from the get go. So the judges had really no incentive to be nice to Mc Donalds lawyers. Proving they had owned the Trademark would not have them won the case, but might have saved their Trademark.

Story 5 is so wholesome. That’s awesome the cop did that for OP

I have a story about my grandfather- it’s less of a legal loophole and more just being a little bit of a shit in court. He got a ticket for speeding- can’t remember the exact numbers- but decided he was going to contest it. He showed up in court, and found they were basically doing all the tickets for that one officer today. He got his place in line and was watching the other cases, and noticed that this officer had a line he liked to use- “I clocked them doing [x] in a [y] and could tell they were accelerating from the Doppler effect.” So when it’s my grandfathers turn, the cop gives the same line, and my grandfather goes up to the stand and says “well, sir, I’m a physics professor at [nearby university] (note: this was true, he was) and I was wondering if you could explain to me how you can measure acceleration using the Doppler effect.” The judge dismissed the ticket then and there. The best part is that you *can* measure acceleration from the Doppler effect, but he phrased it in a way that clearly implied that you couldn’t, and the judge decided that he had better things to do with his time than listen to this cop fumble a physics explanation. Possibly one of my favorite stories about that grandfather.

Am I the only person who liked the other narrator too ? I found his commentary hilarious. Don't get me wrong this guy is my favorite KZfaq narrator of all time and god bless his voice, but I can't believe you guys didn't like the other one to the point where they had to delete the video!!

H e h a s r e t u r n e d But seriously, we need to appreciate every narrator.

That first case, you just know that the creator of Big Apple maps got screwed over in one of these cases and is doing everything they can to keep other people from being screwed over like they did

As someone living in Ontario I can't believe I never heard about that law

When I started watching your channel the videos were around 15 minutes and you're already up to an HOUR while still going daily. That's crazy

As an Australian Robo debt no longer exists. It was a whole scandal

FYI a blanket ban on bail for murder would be unconstitutional, and would require an ammendment. The constitution guarantees you to right to bail which is not excessive. So the courts MUST look at the specifics of each case and decide whether bail is appropriate, and if so, for how much. Remember, you're innocent until proven guilty - so even for a crime like murder, if there's not a lot of evidence, no criminal record, low flight risk - denying bail would be constitutionally unreasonable.

Rule Against Perpetuties. This means that you can't restrict the use of a piece of a property forever. You can do it for a set period of time but not forever. Have used it in several land use cases.

35:55 the day JFK was assassinated my mom was in court (before i was born) because she had absentmindedly walked out of JC Penny with some dresses. The court filing had listed the name of the company as 'JC Penny'. The judge looked at the prosecution and said 'Do you not know whom you work for? The legal name os JC Penny INC.' and he dismissed the case.

I'm starting to become really fond of this channel. As I live in Norway, there's always a new video when I wake up early in the morning, and it's become my daily routine to start the day with some coffee/tea and your newest video. I have watched *all* of your videos, as I started binging them when I first found this channel, so I'm always looking forward to the new video while I'm chillin' on my sofa in the morning. It's the best start of the day! Keep it up! You're doing a great job, and I really appreciate the time it must take to record these 1 hour long videos. You're doing great! Much love from me :)

When i lived in hawaii it would common for us to put blow up swimming pools in the beds of trucks, gill them with water( sometimes ice if ut was hot out) and wed ride in the pool wherever we needed to go. Since its hawaii bathing suits are acceptable in all stores so being wet was no issue.

Story 49: The jury was told not to do a reenactment because that is not part of the evidence presented in court. It doesn't matter if it is a good idea. It isn't evidence. If the defense wanted the reenactment to be part of the evidence, they would have had to do that in court.

The stuff about not giving the prosecutor a chance to prove simple things like where a prison is located or what the weight of a vehicle is are obnoxious and examples of ways our justice system is broken.

That poor guy's cat. I hope things improve and he gets his cat back.

Story 10 is crazy, like that drunk guy knew of that obscure law and it was malicious compliance 😂

YAY HES BACK

Glad to see (hear?) you're back. Not quite on topic as I haven't won anything yet, but one of the things I've learned about the law is that order is *everything* . Do something out of order and your case might as well be that titanic sub because it will implode on you. Even if it should be airtight and open and shut. It can get so tedious, but when the other option is getting a tongue lashing from the judge and a bunch of wasted money, you do things in the correct way. That's why these drunk driving type cases get thrown out because if they were to be prosecuted, it would open the cops up to being able to do basically anything they wanted *so long as a criminal was apprehended* and THAT is a terrible thing to give to a cop. We already have so many issues with police acting out of line, giving them another legal avenue for that is way too dangerous. Like, we already have stories of cops planting evidence after having probable cause, we don't need them to be able to do that without probable cause, too.

I want to sue an American government organization because I'm a Martian in Canada! WHAT.

I got caught shoplifting the day after, tried to pay for it which they refused, they pressed charges for theft. The free lawyer got it reduced to attempted theft since I tried to pay.

I worked with a guy who got a speeding ticket for fifteen miles an hour over the limit. He went to court and asked for a continuance. It was granted new date set. Went back, did it again. The judge told him that the next time he had to be prepared for trial or take care of the case before. He came in the third time and asked to speak to the judge. The judge tells him to come forward and say his piece. He steps up and says “I want to plead guilty your honor.” The judge says since it’s trial time he can’t do that unless it’s ok with the officer who issued the ticket. They go to ask him about it and it turns out that the officer isn’t there. The judge says that the state isn’t prepared for court and dismissed the case. Before the he left the judge asked him if he was going to plead guilty why get the three delays to which he replied “Because I could.”

The Colt 1911 case made me realize just how old some popular firearms are. In my mind, a 100 y/o gun is something like a Winchester Lever Action or one of those very old revolvers.

51:17 I remember that! By far my favourite case lolol. I seem to remember, though, that Super Mac was awarded the trademark. McDonald’s also could appeal all they liked but would never win as the only evidence they were allowed to submit on appeal was the inadmissible stuff. McDonald’s fired that counsel.

God, the DUI one annoys me because the breathalyser measures alcohol in the lungs, that's why you have to keep breathing for so long. A big gulp of wiskey could increase the reading, but not enough to go from under to "way over" As for "he was sober until he took the swig", no sorry, it takes at least a couple of minutes for alcohol to be metabolised into the blood stream after being consumed. He was driving impaired before he was pulled over. Shaking my head that a prosecutor should know this.

"Can ÿou imagine getting calls for a debt over a decade old?" Millenials with student loan debt: *laughs in broken promises and crushed dreams*

I had to run a red light once. Was sitting at the red for just over 3 full songs, somewhere around 7-10 minutes. Ran the red since it was about 1 am, no other cars on the road anywhere in sight. Ran the red, drove by the cop in a nearby parking lot watching the whole time to give him a wave and head home.

The reason you can't re enact the gun situation is that all evidence should have been presented in court, not secretly in the jury chamber. Not saying i disagree, but that's the reasoning.

i love how you can tell the people who didn’t technically break the law but disobeyed the spirit of the law doing something actually dangerous got off scot-free but with the intent to do better because of their brushes with law enforcement. sometimes people just need to be “scared straight,” not penalized.

Yeah, reenacting an event gives the jurors a better idea of what happened. They have all or close to all the information for them to use to find out who's guilty. So the prosecution was deliberately trying a tactic to prevent them from not able to find out. Kinda scummy in my opinion, good to see that the corporals didn't listen and did it anyway.

I was given a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt. I had been wearing it all day long and for just a brief moment had it off when I got pulled over. I gather all my evidence: how seatbelts were designed to only protect 200 lb men (of which I am not), how car companies have zero regulation over belt length/placement/etc, how public transit do not require seatbelt usage, and more. Basically how having the seatbelt law as written is sexist, not equal in its requirements, and unregulated in its safety standards, therefore unlawful. The week before I go to court, my area passes a law requiring seatbelt usage in taxis for all occupants. I show this to the cop pre-trial. He tells me he will agree to a lower fine. I debate in my head a moment, then hold up my pile of other evidence and say, no. I will not plead guilty to something unlawful that until last week wasn't even required by taxis the same size/shape/weight/safety of the vehicle I was driving. He grumbles but agrees. We go into court, and my ticket and fine were dropped. I almost wanted to fight it though, because that law is STILL unlawful, sexist, unregulated and un equal. One day I want to take it on, if only to make car manufacturers actually have to implement seatbelts that save lives of more than just 200lb men.

watching the car breaking every known traffic law in the background is oddly calming

the one about the guy fireing at the intersections while drunk on his horse made me laugh for 20 minutes.

Wait what, I just noticed the last 4 Vids were an hour long. I’m so happy

I got hauled into child support court. Using cancelled checks of money my parents paid, the judge ruled I overpaid by 150 months. Pissed my ex off, who had made a complaint. I never paid the clerk of the court. Paid my son's expensive school directly, which was way more than my support amount. A few years later I got notice of a court date for nonpayment. My ex called the clerk, on my behalf. But they refused to drop the case. At court, my lawyer tells the judge, I'm paying and never got credit for the prior over credits. He then drops the bomb. "Mr X also has a defense witness, the ex Mrs. X." Judge states, "Can't you get this s*** settled before court?" Lawyer has us go to the hallway. He then comes out and says my support has been totally paid through 18. My son was 14. I still kept paying anyway.

Not sure where story 12 happened, but all of those rules and definitions sound very much like the ones we have in Australia, and that truck sounds like it was a combination with two trailers, would automatically be considered a heavy vehicle, regardless of the weight. That's probably why the why the weight wasn't recorded; for that truck, it didn't need to be.

The seat belt story about Hawaii reminds me of when I was a kid. Summer baseball season, when we'd win the coach's would buy us ice cream. 90% of our games were played on one ball field and the ice cream place was maybe a little more than a 1\4 mile down the road. Dad would load team in the back of his truck and haul us to the shop. He got pulled over twice, first time warning, third time a small ticket, cop said 3rd time would be more serious. I forget if it was jail time, charges, towing the vehicle or what. *Shrugs* I was 9. So! My dad built a bench seat to fit around the 3 sides of the bed, anchored it to the truck's frame and installed seat belts enough for the team plus some. Next time he got pulled over(cop thinking it was going to be the same issue) no fines, no tickets. Nothing they could do.

_"Error Coram Noblis"_ is pronounced AIR-OR CORE-AM NO-BLISS, in short, you got the pronunciation exactly right!

HES BACK

2:20 Five whole minutes?! "Dead red laws" (if an automated light system does not detect a motorcycle or occasionally a bicycle, resulting in extended periods of the red light being shown, in some US states the motorist is allowed to proceed provided the intended path is clear of other turning vehicles and pedestrians) should be more common

It's so fun hearing so many words that I can't understand and yet understanding those stories

6:10 We have, or had, a similar law in Ontario that says that as long as all of the seat belts installed in a car are in use, you are OK. The reason for this is that prior to about the time the law was passed seat belts were an option. This meant that you weren't forcing most of the existing cars on the road to be retrofitted.

That is absolutely true. There are a lot of laws in a lot of places about firing a gun in the air at intersections to warn oncomers. Most were put in place in the late 1800 and early 1900 hundreds but the majority of them were never repealed.

Always keep your important receipts. It doesn't have to literally be the paper copy, just take a picture of it or scan it and let it live on the cloud somewhere for all eternity.

I love the new trend of long videos

Okay, that Air Force Basic Training story.... One of two things happened: Either he got absolutely BLASTED and made his punishment a million times worse... .... Or, more likely, his TI just fumed for a moment, got his ID out for entry and just told him: "Airman, do pushups."

that guy who wouldn't let the training instructor in should've gotten an accommodation

That determination you speak of after the 'forgot to validate at Tesco' is called Petty Spite.

That guy locking the TI out 😂

the city underestimated how stubborn people are

The first story is crazy but a brilliant hats off to the app that was so OCD in the best way❤️❤️❤️

The break in DESERVED a serving of lead.

8:50 Fun fact: Breaking out of prison is not illegal in Germany. It is seen as a fundamental human instinct to thrive for freedom and thus you are not punished for trying. BUT (!) you are still accountable for anything that actually is illegal while trying to do so, for example they still get you for destruction of property if you try to break a fence or dig a tunnel, you are in really big trouble if you take a guard hostage etc. but you are only tried on those things and "breaking out of prison" does not add to your sentence. If you manage to do it without breaking any other laws, you do not get additional time for it.

On the last story, the judge would not allow the reenactment because the condition of the gun would not be identical to the condition the gun was in during the incident (no bullets). So the reenactment might be deemed prejudicial.

The last one - tugging on the rifle teminds me if the lawyer trying to prive someting thought improbable could happen and unalived himself in court demonstrating.

I’ve driven in the bed of a truck in Glacier National park under the same laws as in Hawaii. Best experience ever. Just make sure you have an experienced, level-headed driver like my dad.

I love the one shoe runner story

Yayayayayay we got him back, welcome!

2:05 - This shouldn't be surprising; when a red light is obviously refusing to change, you're _supposed_ to treat it as a stop sign.

I guess martian Manhunter can’t get into trouble in Ontario .

Sovereign immunity is not as silly as qualified immunity. That shit is bananas.

Story 41 angers me immensely Court refused to prosecute, but the charges stay om the record for years!?!?!

Whoever wrote number 42, of Course you failed to get that changed, you wanted to change a certain class of crimes to guilty until proven innocent.

Big Apple Maps and other groups like them like Untergunther are extremely admirable.

Him and Mr. Kevin= best narrators on yt 💅✨

OP of Story 30 sounds like he's fun at parties.

The motor vehicle homicide case would get bail revoked. Danger to the community

These stories are why I will only refer to it as a legal system, not a justice system.

Man number 13 must have been a trip to try in court. Dude got so lucky he should have bought a lottery ticket the day after court.

Today I learned that my state isn't the only state that still protects that freedom to ride in the bed of a truck without any safety bullshit....apparently Hawaii does too, good for them

I love these legal stories 😂

If you think story 1's legal immunity is nuts, wait 'till you hear about Qualified Immunity...

YESSSSS OUR NARRATOR IS BAACK!!! WE'RE WINNING THESEEEEE

For the last story, wouldn't that actually invalidate the ruling? The fact that the members of the jury did re-enact the struggle over the rifle after having been explicitly ordered by the court not to, and having agreed to this?

Story 39. Literally the plot to Good Burger

McD bungle: I wish the company they went after had filed for the copyright in court when the judge ruled

CANADIAN NARRATOR MANNN ❤️

6:54 I have a suv with only the front two seats in. Large dogs, livestock, feed and hay being most of the reason. I hate helmet and seatbelt laws. I grew up and traveled cross country on vacations with my family in the carpeted back of a van and a station wagon.

He's baaaaaack!!!🎉🎉🎉

I love this guys voice

49:49 Mr.President, Theres been a second textbook.

Story 42: as Chromy as it is, this is exactly what we mean when we say someone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The term “murder” has very specific legal definitions. Murder is the intentional killing of another traffic accidents, which result in loss of life rarely fall under this definition. For OP to be claiming the defendant murdered another person is actually libelous. The reason the person was allowed to stay out on bail is because if they don’t violate their bail mandates, they are presumed not to be a long-term risk or a general risk in most scenarios. If we’re going to say that driving made this person a risk, you have to prove that by proving he consistently drove in a reckless manner. Given the fact he was out on bail for 14 months and only had one issue, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say he’s not a general risk as a driver. The reason OP attempt to change the bail requirements failed The presumed innocence until someone is proven guilty. Unless you can meet the requirement to show that this person is a clear and present danger, multiple people witnessed it happen, and the person is a flight risk, bail should almost never be revoked.

34:33 this is why I am glad my dad has over 1000 DUI arrests. He has had people he pulled over thank him because it convinced them to turn their life around

WOOO WE GOT HIM BACK GUYS👏👏

The Georgia one sounds about right. "oh, oops, workers might actually have some rights, cant have that!" *Repealed*

4:05 I see your a good neighbor lawyer

In NJ you can ride a horse, legally, while intoxicated. My home town established this law.

My mom and her boyfriend at the time had to pay the same fine four times in the same year time frame. They paid a fine (I think it was a fix it ticket). Then a few months later they got a notice of revoking of license for the fine being unpaid so they contested it was told they had no record of them paying it so they would have to pay it or have his license revoked. So they paid it a second time and a few months later they got another notice and had the same thing happen again so they paid the ticket a third time then a few months later it happened all over again.

I had a friend who got a ticket while wearing heavy makeup to go clubbing. She showed up to court barefaced and the officer didn't recognize her, so the case was dismissed lmfao.

NEW NARRATOR BAAACK!!

Where did you go narrator ? I'm glad you're back. ( If you were sick, i hope you're feeling better.)