Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
12verdictVolume32013ReptileTeorycontinuedfrompage11theplaintiKeenanandBallbelievethedeensebarhasutilizedtortdeormtomanipulatetheReptileoritsownuse.ByleadingthepublictobelievetortsunderminethequalityandavailabilityohealthcarethreatenthelocaleconomybyendangeringjobsmakeproductsmoreexpensiveandweakenresearchanddevelopmentexpenditurestheReptilehaslongviewedtheplaintiscaseratherthanthedeenseasathreattoitssurvival.WiththeirbookKeenanandBallattempttoturntheReptileontothedeensewhereourpurportedmantraisalwaysGivedangerapass.p.27TeReptilesMajorAxiomisWhenthereptileseesasurvivaldangersheprotectshergenesbyimpellingthejurortoprotecthimselandthecommunity.Id.KeenanandBallpositWhensomethingwedoordontdocanaectevenalittleoursaetyorthepropagationoourgenestheReptiletakesoverandTegreatertheperceiveddangertoyouoryourospringthemorermlytheReptilecontrolsyou.p.17TeReptilebelievescommunitysaetyispersonalsaetyscousinandasksthejurortoprojectthedeendantsactoromissionontoalargercommunitycanvas.InaperversionoTeGoldenRuleWherecounselasksthejurytoplaceitselinthevictimsshoesandawardsuchdamagesastheywouldchargetoundergoequivalentpainandsueringCollinsv.UnionPacifcRailroadCo.2012207Cal.App.4th867861theReptilewantstopunishtheDeendantsohecannotendangerthecommunitytheReptileisparto.WhythisReptileisDiferentromNativeSpeciesTeReptileisnotcontentusingonlytheevidenceavailableromhercase.Inordertoapplyheractstothecommunityssenseowellbeingtheplaintiawakensthereptileineachjurorbyaskingandansweringthreequestions.Notablythesequestionsallinvolvepresentinginormationtothejuryoutsidetheactsothecase.FirsttheReptileaskshowlikelywasitthattheactoromissionwouldhurtsomeoneormoreimportantlyanyone.AferaddressingtheinjuryinthepresentcasetheReptiledoesnotstop.Ratheritcontinuesontoaddresstherequencywithwhichtheactoromissionoccursandtheresultingharmonabroaderscale.KeenanandBalluseanautomobilenegligencecasetoillustratethispoint.RatherthantellingthejuryIyouollowavehicletoocloselyyoumayhitittheReptilestates4295injurywreckswerecausedlastyearbypeopleollowingtooclosely.p.32Secondtheplaintiwillaskthejurytoenvisionhowmuchharmtheactoromissioncouldhavecaused.AgaintheReptileisnotcontentwithstoppingwiththeplaintisactualinjury.InsteadtheReptiletellsthejuryTevalidmeasureisthemaximumharmtheactcouldhavecausedemphasisinoriginal.p.33.Soianautoaccidentinvolvingspeedsinexcesso100mphonlyresultedinasplitliptheReptilewillnotaskthejurytoaddresstheplaintisacialinjury.RathertheReptilewillaskwhethertheaccidentcouldhavecausedbraindamageoraatality.TirdandlasttheReptilewillaskthejuryhowmuchharmtheactoromissioncouldhavecausedinothersituations.p.34Usingtheautoaccidentexampleromaboveassumetheaccidentoccurredonahighway.TeReptiletakesthecarthatcausedtheaccidenthasthedrivertakeanorampintothejurorscommunityandonlystopthecaraferithasthreatenedaewlocalschoolsandthecommunitysretirementhome.ByaskingandansweringthesethreequestionstheplaintiwantstheReptiletoplantthreeseedsinthejurorsmindsthedeendantsconductthreatenseveryonessaetyaproperverdictwillreducethedangerandiaproperverdictortheplaintiisnotgiventhedangerinthecommunitywillbeincreased.p.39IdentiyingtheReptileintheWildandRulesorIdenticationTeReptileattemptstocircumventtheapplicablelegalstandardbypresentinganalternativeruletothejury.Ithedeendantviolatedthisruletheimplicationcontinuedonpage13