Judge Lynch opened the afternoon session promising the jury more frequent breaks as he believed lunch tended to allow sleep to surround the jury box.  He also cautioned the attorneys that he would not tolerate jury sequestering due to unnecessary squabbling.  Truth took a seat in the jury box.

“You are still under oath and are required to tell the truth,” said Judge Lynch as if he had rehearsed that line.  His broad grin and glance over the gallery suggested this might be a Kodak moment.

Mr. Finch approached Truth while sporting dark sunglasses.”Mr. Truth, you testified under cross examination that you could only tell the truth.  The adept opposing counsel suggested through his questions.”

“Objection, Leading,” said Howe.

“Mr. Finch appears to be rephrasing your question, albeit it in a round about manner.  But I will allow it so long as it ends in a question that ,Howe’s cross examination brought to bear,” said Judge Lynch with a smiling glare aimed at Finch.

“The question that Mr. Howe brought up about men and concept suggested that men lie and therefore truth lies.  Does truth lie?”

“Truth does not lie.  However since more than one truth can exist, the ultimate truth must come from the facts.”

“Are you suggesting that by not telling the truth one could be lying?”

“The absence of truth is not a lie by itself.  People do not say anything in order to prevent the truth from being revealed,” said Truth.

“You mean like pleading the Fifth?”

“Objection, leading,” said Howe rolling his eyes which seemed to reflect Judge Lynch’s  favorite behavior.

“Abstained.  Mr. Finch, you asked a question that called on witness to render an opinion,” said Judge Lynch.

“Your Honor, he is an expert in Truth and in clear response to Mr. Howe’s question he stated that the absence of truth is often a form of preventing the truth from being revealed, “argued Finch.

The judge paused and seemed to reconsider, “Ask your question in a different way,” said Lynch.

“Mr. Truth, as an example of hiding the truth could you see pleading the Fifth as such a demonstration of hiding information?”

“Yes, that does fit the criteria,” said Truth/

Howe realized that by objecting, he allowed Finch to repeat, clarify and deepen  the definition.  This meant that if his clients plead the Fifth they would be seen as hiding the truth.  He vowed to be more cautious in his objections and he also had to figure out a way to neutralize this ploy by Finch.

“I’m not clear on something you said in response to Mr. Howe’s question.  You said there could be more than one truth and you clarified that only Fact could clarify.  So why do we need Truth at all?”

Howe did not ask that question but when he heard the question by Finch tended to think this was another trick by the prosecutor and did not respond..  Besides he wanted to hear the response and knew that Lynch thought he was in a philosophy class and that Lynch also wanted the answer.

“There are big Truths with a capital T and small truths with a lower case t

.”Would you explain for the jury?”

“As an example. say someone physically injured another person with the intent to do harm.  It becomes the duty of the police, jury or authorities to decide that truth with a small truth.  The larger Truth is that injury to someone is viewed as an accepted Truth.  The Truth is that we do not physically injure another with that intent in mind.”

“Thank you,” said Finch as he sat down.

The goal of the prosecutor is to present incomplete truths that the defense attorney must negate.  Some attorneys can’t think under the gun and occasionally a half truth gets through.  Other counsel can’t see the kernel to be negated.  Some just fall asleep at the switch and are off their game.  Finch just needed to validate the level he suspected from Howe.

“Recross? Mr. Howe,” asked Lynch.

“Just one question.  In your example, if the physical harm was the result of  an intent by a person to defend himself from imminent harm or death, how does big Truth solve this situation?”

“At that juncture proving the truth of ‘who dunnit’ is not the issue.  Rather the Truth of Reason and Fact decide the capital T.”

“Thank you.”

The judge thanked and dismissed the witness and sent the jury for a break. “We have time to start another witness.  Who will that be Mr. Finch?”

“I will call Honesty to the stand.”

“I beg the court’s indulgence, but I would like to cross examine truth,” said Mr. Howe.

“Please forgive me, Mr. Howe but I did not see you dealing with truth, but please cross examine,” said Judge Lynch.

Mr. Howe stood up and asked permission to approach the witness.  Permission was granted.

“I notice that Mr. Finch refers to you in the masculine.  Are you a man?”

“Objection.  This question is highly inappropriate and against the propriety of decency,” said Finch.

The judge paused and said, “It seems you want it both ways Mr. Finch.  Overruled,, besides I want to hear the answer, You may answer the question.”

“I am both male and female,” said Truth.

“Does that mean you are like a hermaphrodite or forgive me, a Jenner type?” asked the defense attorney.

Finch bolted upright but looked at the frowning Judge and then Finch readjusted his suit jacket and reorganized his desk and seat to the smile of Judge Lynch.

“Oh my, nothing like either of those, I am a concept to whoever uses me,” said Truth.

“Well could my dog use Truth?”

“No, a dog is not a human animal,  Your dog can neither lie nor tell the truth.”

“So as we here in the courtroom look at you do we all see you sort of the same way?

Finch got up and readjusted his chair again to the pleasure of Judge Lynch.  Finch also wanted to hear the response.

“No, some will see me as a bright light, a beacon if you will.  Others will not even look at me.  In fact they can’t see me.”

Finch grabbed the arm of his cousin and co-counsel, Amicus B. Finch and whispered in his ear.  Amicus looked confused but reached in his pocket and handed his cousin his sunglasses.  Finch put the glasses on, sat back and grinned at the snarling Lynch.

“So you are solely a human concept, correct?

“Yes”

“You cannot be here unless we, as humans, cannot conceive you?

“Yes.”

“Is it possible that some people here cannot see you.”

“Yes, that’s true.  Can’t hear me either,” said Truth.

“Would it be accurate to say that all men lie?”

“By the simplest definition of truth, yes, all men lie.”

“Then how do I know you are telling the truth now?”

“I am truth.  I can only be true.”

“Yes, but if you only exist through man and all men lie then you could be untrue.

“Objection.  There is no question.”

“Mr. Howe, please ask a question,” said Lynch.

“How can you be truth if you are created only by man and all men lie?”

“I only am sensed when called upon,” said Truth.

“That makes no sense,  No more questions,” said Howe.

“Your Honor, I move that the last derogatory comment made by the defense be stricken from the record?” requested Finch.

“So noted.  The last two sentences spoken by Mr. Howe will be stricken from the record and the jury is hereby told not to make any reference to the comments that have been stricken.  Mr. Howe, if you repeat that snarky behavior again I will, and I mean it, I will hold you in contempt of court and give the reins of the remainder of this trial to your co-counsel, Mr. Louis Cannon,” scolded Judge Lynch.”

“I humbly beg the court’s pardon.  I fear that the bright light I perceived may have caused my seeming agitation,” said Howe..

The judge rolled his eyes and turned to Mr. Finch and said, “Redirect?”

“Yes your Honor I have a few more questions.”

“Let’s take a ten minute break before redirect,” as the Judge stood and left the bench.

The Bailiff said, “All rise”  but the Judge had disappeared behind the door.  Amicus said to his cousin, “I see the trap you set for Howe and it seems he fell for it.”

“We will see if we can spin the truth back to where it belongs,” said Finch.

“We have to use RICO laws your honor because there is a conspiracy with many arms.  We cannot get to the top but we can prosecute the henchmen,” said Hank Finch the prosecutor.

“Mr. Finch, I and I alone will be the judge if there is a conspiracy.  The jury that you so carefully chose will make the decision.  These are serious charges you have filed here in State court.  There was a time where only the Federal Government could ptosecute these cases.  Why did you request  this State?”

“Your honor, this State shows the backbone to stand up to the Federal Government.  As you can see by the filings that many federal appointees are so named in the complaint,    The Government is the RICO target.” said Finch.

“I see that you intend to call Decency, Truth, Integrity, Honor, the Scales of Justice, Fact, Logic, the Republican Elephant, the Democrat Donkey, Religion, the Constitution, a group of school kids and Statistics.  I see you crossed off Jay Carney due to illness,” said Judge Lynch.

“We may ask the court’s indulgence on Jay Carney.  He is being treated for PTLD, Post Traumatic Lying Disorder.  His doctor said he was required to tell so many lies that he no longer believes that his spoon is an eating utensil.  He has lost much weight.  The truly sad part is that since his insurance plan was transferred to the VA he has not been able to receive any treatment.  The conspirators leave few clues, Your Honor,”  said prosecutor Finch.

“Very well.  Call your first witness,” said Judge Lynch.

“The State calls Truth to the stand,” bellowed the Bailiff.

“You have been sworn in.  You are required to be yourself.  Can you handle this obligation?” asked Finch.

“It is refreshing to be able to tell the truth,” said Truth.

“Objection.  Witness should answer with only Yes or No responses,”  said the defense attorney Dewey C. M. Howe.

“Your Honor, the witness is an expert in truth, in fact he is Truth,” retorted Finch.

“I must agree with Mr Finch.  The witness can give detailed answers within limits,” said Lynch.

Finch asked the question to be reread and Truth continued, “I have found it refreshing to not be twisted or spun.”

“Could you tell us what truth is?”

“Truth is what a person sees and believes.” said Truth.

“How are you different from Fact?”

“A person can see a robbery and there can be facts that substantiate the robbery, like cameras, fingerprints and more.  But each person could have seen a different robber, one with red hair another with dark hair and they both could be telling the truth.”

“How is that possible?  To have two opposite views be true.”

“Each person sees what he or she sees, possibly based on different angles to different lighting as an example. Each would pass a polygraph and each would be telling the truth.”

“Can someone tell only a partial truth?”

“Objection. Leading.”

“Overruled.  You may answer the question.’

“Yes, happens all the time.”

“Can that person pass a polygraph test?”

“Objection.  Witness is not a polygraph expert.”

“Your honor I propose that he and he alone knows whether the truth is being told and whether the polygrapher is any good or not,” said Finch.

“I tend to agree with Mr. Finch that Truth has a special purpose in these proceedings and his opinion is valuable in making a decision.  Proceed,” said Lynch.

“If you do not ask the right questions a partial truth can beat the polygraph,” said Truth.

“Thank you, I will heed your words of wisdom,” said Finch.

“Objection Your Honor.  The prosecutor is giving the impression that the words of Truth are wise,” said Howe.

“They are and I suggest you start making the correct objections,” said the Judge. “Call your next witness.”

It took over 5,000 years before Mel Brooks, while playing Moses, made a joke and dropped five of the original fifteen commandments. What I am trying to say is that there is no, none, nada, zip, zed humor in the Bible.
I thrive on humor, clever changes in wording and people making comments that have several meanings. To me, humor represents understanding; the “I get it” moment. Like a heartbeat, the more “I get its” you have the healthier your life is.
I would truly have stuck with the Bible if Jesus had turned to Judas and said before going into the Garden of Gethsemane, “Hey Jude, I need one piece of silver to get in the garden, got anything on you?”
His response could go all sorts of directions with, “I’ll go see if I can get some.”
“Come on you owe me fifteen from the donkey you rode in on.”
“Maybe your favorite James has some.”
“I doubt if Tom has any but maybe Paul has some stolen tax money.”
Besides really bad writing (maybe Aramaic doesn’t translate well) there is no humor anywhere. Jesus and all the Old Testament characters were very serious. I would love to rewrite the Bible to have people read it and fall out of the chair laughing screaming, “Matthew is hysterical. Can you believe how he torments Jesus?”
A fellow writer and friend heard one of my many politically incorrect jokes. He said he thought I should run with the idea that since Washington is such a joke, that having Trump as president might bring back American humor.
I used to believe that one of the things that is great about Americans is that we laugh at ourselves. I have to watch BBC in order to laugh today. The Brits are truly hysterical.
Being a Pole from Chicago, everyone sought me out with the latest Polish joke. Not because they believed it but because they knew I would laugh. I went to really good schools and we laughed at racial, ethnic, religious jokes with the same mind set as watching wrestling reading comic books or watching cartoons.
The Polish jokes came after the elephant jokes but before the Newfie jokes. When they started aiming their humor at the NewFoundlanders this signaled a change. The difference in time from a tragedy to a joke used to be measured in days. Now you can’t even make a pun.
If you think that Obama has done America well then I think that is humorous. And if you believe that your vote matters, I can still laugh at your delusion.
There is something very strange about this election. We will soon see.
One thing about humor is it contrasts deeply with horror. I was watching the movie that Hillary Clinton had banned from release in the U.S. I have to admit. I watched in horror and had a look on my face like I was watching a holocaust film.
So I am hoping to have a candidate elected that will bring back ‘political incorrectness’ and then I can laugh with friends in the open. Since we seem to have made a commitment to not address the real issues, let’s elect somebody who can at least allow us to die laughing.

A portion of my goal is to understand how people think.  Maybe another way of saying this is how do we look at the same thing and come to divergent interpretations.  On one hand life would be mundane and possibly boring, on the other hand it would prove challenging.

I have noticed a significant change in my friends who voted for Obama.  I believe they still hold onto the delusion that their vote actually had something to do with his election.  This much I understand.  They seem to understand that after nearly seven years things have gone from bad to worse.  A few still ride the pale horse but they are looking behind them.

This week President Obama put into action a law that will change the name Mt. McKinley to Denali.  That is a good thing.  Come to think of it it is the only good thing he has done.

I look at the division between not only blacks and whites but between Dems and Reps and homosexuals and heterosexuals let alone males and females.  If only this were growing pains.  But after a growing pain there exists something that grew — usually a mature entity.

I hear and read of government statistics that show the improvement in our once great country.  But simple, and I mean simple, perusal reveals the statistics as not misleading but downright lies.  I will not even attempt to convince you of the TRANSPARENCY of these lies because it will not change the damage done, although it might make you a better person.

I just read and will continue to reread a passage that fills a blank in my understanding of people’s reasoning.  David Moser at Indiana University invented this counterfactual.  “If all circles were large, and this small triangle D were a circle, would it be large?”  The responses to this question answered so much about how we are tricked into believing something and I can now understand how people come to certain conclusions.

Up until now I used logic as my point of reference but this counterfactual gives me a new tool of understanding.  Sorry, I can’t change your thinking but I can now understand it.  Does this sound arrogant?  Adjust.

Since all politicians are liars and crooks, I’ll choose one from a crime family I think is better.  I get it.  After all they all sit in the same Congress AND we elected them AND they swore to uphold the law of the land.

The truly sad part in this equation is the news media.  We receive more honest, if not accurate news, from independent sources than from the money driven news companies.  Election coverage and controversy is an economic boost to their bottom line.

No, I take that last paragraph back.  The truly sad part of this equation is ME. I was there.  I let this happen.  I didn’t stand up and say the truth.

I was on an exercise wheel.  I went around and around because I had to pay for my familie’s cell phones, their cars, their insurances and their credit cards.  I couldn’t afford to be sick because we’d lose everything.

Well, I got sick, we lost everything.  But I got off the wheel and I recovered.  I know what to tell my kids so they can get off the wheel.  Two things prevent this.  One they wouldn’t listen because they believe they have their own answers.Two, my generation still doesn’t get it and they have the same answers for their kids that got them in trouble.

Usually the happy ending is that the family reunited and stuck together.  But the process included destroying the family and family values while get this this — claiming to fight for family values.

I am going to make this change starting today and build on the understanding of that counterfactual.  I go back to the question I wanted an answer to –“Do you believe in abortion?”  The most frequent answer I got back was “It’s a woman’s choice.”  That has haunted me until I saw the counterfactual.  I get it.

For example, I heard a fellow say we have a right to education and health care.  I turned to my Bible expert and he says there is no mention of either as a God given right.  But I compared the military budget to the health and education budget and found that the Bible does tacitly accept war, (that is a counterfactual).

I also got an email that used a counterfactual to point out problems with vaccinations.  I almost fell for it until I reread it.  The answer to that issue is relatively simple but made impossible by our culture’s thought process.