Well, Superman does a good job of using his first few witnesses to establish motive, means and opportunity:
But the rest of the cross-examinations?
Batman is the worst goddamned defense attorney ever. Seriously, Lois would have been better off with a Gotham public defender.
Obviously, not only does Batman not shake anyone's story, or damage their credibility, he ends up getting them to actually strengthen their testimony!! The "never ask a question you don't already know the answer to" thing is kind of a cliche, but man, Bats really shows why it's true.
Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, why is he trying to shake these witnesses at all? Lois already admitted that she was there. She doesn't need an alibi, or reasonable doubt that she was in a crash. Her defense is that it was an accident, not premeditated murder!
And even if he gets one of the witnesses to demure to, "Oh, I'm only 80% sure it was Lois," how does that help when Lois takes the stand herself. Is she going to suddenly deny being there? Is she going to perjure herself?!?!
Yeah, yeah, I know, I'm applying actual legal thinking to a 1970 DC comic book. But this isn't the last example where we see that Batman is the worst defense attorney ever.
From Lois Lane #100 (1970)
No comments:
Post a Comment