IDIOT
The supreme court comes to the rescue of people like me.
It has come out with a legal definition of an idiot-
"An idiot is one who is of non-sane memory from his birth, by a perpetual infirmity, without lucid intervals:and those are said to be idiots who cannot count 20, or tell the days of the week or who do not know their fathers or mothers or the like"
Atleast now I can prove legally to all those girls who think I am an idiot, that I am not. See this
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12............mmmmm 17 15 20. Leave this , how's this
Sunday Monday Tuesday Friday Saturday Thursday.......... Which is the seventh one??? Or are there eight?
No probs. Anyways all these definitions are too subjective.. They dont prove anything....
Till next time
Sarath
It has come out with a legal definition of an idiot-
"An idiot is one who is of non-sane memory from his birth, by a perpetual infirmity, without lucid intervals:and those are said to be idiots who cannot count 20, or tell the days of the week or who do not know their fathers or mothers or the like"
Atleast now I can prove legally to all those girls who think I am an idiot, that I am not. See this
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12............mmmmm 17 15 20. Leave this , how's this
Sunday Monday Tuesday Friday Saturday Thursday.......... Which is the seventh one??? Or are there eight?
No probs. Anyways all these definitions are too subjective.. They dont prove anything....
Till next time
Sarath
posted by Sarath | Sunday, August 31, 2008
10 Comments:
Does anyone listens to Supreme Court.. Do courts really matter?
Do you know how to eat with chopsticks? Have you seen Phoonk.
Does that prove me as an Idiot?
@ abhinav
as i concluded at the end of my post, all these definitions are too subjective. Why can't the number limit be 10.
Chopsticks and Phoonk??? New additions to the idiot definition?
U seen Phoonk or what?
If I do not understand that definition, am I an idiot?
Lets wait till they come out with the definition of the tv, the idiot box..
an idiot wud always want to prove hez not one :P
Hmm, normally I trust the supreme court's judgement but this one is way beyond me..
@ solitaire
trust me. Law definitions cannot be understood by 83% of the public. thanks for visiting my blog
@urv
Interesting point. Does it mean that the TV is only for legally proved idiots?
@gunj
r u indirectly suggesting that I am an idiot..
Do you trust these supreme court judgements so much???
@trooper
Seems the supreme court needs a break too. thanks for visiting my blog
hey bhagwann..those ppl r idiots themselves..!!
:-( im a law student.
i have been mugging up this definition for last 2 semesters (in family law, criminal law etc.)
*sobs*
don't call us idiots :-(
anyway. yeah. definitions are too subjective. courts in India are like that. kya karen...
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home