From what bakkagirl wrote:
"That said, I cannot think of one deposition that began with, "I cannot believe you said THAT [did THAT]!!!" "
I have also been approached that way, and they were typically way off base. These were some of my thoughts about this:
1. That phrasing, right off the top, is bewildering and puts me out-of-balance. I had no idea of what they were talking about. I suspected that that was the whole point. The accusations were wild and based on nothing, or on faulty interpretations of very little. You have to consider that these people want to be in control of EVERY conversation. This probably does that for them, a good deal of the time.
2. Once they had done that, they DID start asking rapid-fire questions. They really never believed their initial accusation, but thought that they could extract an explanation that i did NOT owe them. They hoped to get me on the defensive, and covering my @ss because my explanation would not be as bad as whatever i was just accused of. I have no legal education, but I was wondering if that was a common tactic.
Remember corboy's original post here. They try to get you to divulge information that you normally wouldn't. I think this is just one of their tactics. I have learned to take a minute to decide if I am going to answer their question AT ALL. I have to ask myself, "Do I really owe this person this information?"
"That said, I cannot think of one deposition that began with, "I cannot believe you said THAT [did THAT]!!!" "
I have also been approached that way, and they were typically way off base. These were some of my thoughts about this:
1. That phrasing, right off the top, is bewildering and puts me out-of-balance. I had no idea of what they were talking about. I suspected that that was the whole point. The accusations were wild and based on nothing, or on faulty interpretations of very little. You have to consider that these people want to be in control of EVERY conversation. This probably does that for them, a good deal of the time.
2. Once they had done that, they DID start asking rapid-fire questions. They really never believed their initial accusation, but thought that they could extract an explanation that i did NOT owe them. They hoped to get me on the defensive, and covering my @ss because my explanation would not be as bad as whatever i was just accused of. I have no legal education, but I was wondering if that was a common tactic.
Remember corboy's original post here. They try to get you to divulge information that you normally wouldn't. I think this is just one of their tactics. I have learned to take a minute to decide if I am going to answer their question AT ALL. I have to ask myself, "Do I really owe this person this information?"