You have read and understood these terms: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:


:''Sir Jerrold Baxter-Morley, Q.C''.: M’lud, we have conclusive evidence that the defendant knew of this disclaimer, rendered I might add in [[CAPS LOCK|FULL CAPITALS]] on page 346 of the presentation.
:''Sir Jerrold Baxter-Morley, Q.C''.: M’lud, we have conclusive evidence that the defendant knew of this disclaimer, rendered I might add in [[CAPS LOCK|FULL CAPITALS]] on page 346 of the presentation.
:''Defendant'': No I didn't.
:''Defendant'': Oh, no I didn't.
:''Lord Justice Cockle-Carrot M.R.'': Didn't you?
:''Lord Justice Cockle-Carrot M.R.'': Didn’t you?  
:''Defendant''. No, sir. I didn't read it!
:''Defendant''. No, sir. I didn't read it!
:''Sir Jerrold'': BUT IT SAYS HERE “I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD THESE TERMS”!
:''Cockle-Carrott MR'': I say! Really, Sir Jerr —
:''Defendant'': Yes, but I didn't read that either.
:''Sir Jerrold'': BUT, MRS. PINTERMAN, IT SAYS HERE “[[You have read and understood these terms|YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD THESE TERMS]]”!
:''Defendant'': Well it might do, but how should I know? I didn't read that either.

Revision as of 18:19, 15 October 2019

Towards more picturesque speech


Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

It’s great isn’t it? Can you just imagine the turtle you’d be looking under to prove this one?

Sir Jerrold Baxter-Morley, Q.C.: M’lud, we have conclusive evidence that the defendant knew of this disclaimer, rendered I might add in FULL CAPITALS on page 346 of the presentation.
Defendant: Oh, no I didn't.
Lord Justice Cockle-Carrot M.R.: Didn’t you?
Defendant. No, sir. I didn't read it!
Cockle-Carrott MR: I say! Really, Sir Jerr —
Sir Jerrold: BUT, MRS. PINTERMAN, IT SAYS HERE “YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD THESE TERMS”!
Defendant: Well it might do, but how should I know? I didn't read that either.