Shepard shows sense of humor in video

May 11, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Who knew the former chief justice of Indiana could play dumb so well?

At the dinner last night in Randall T. Shepard’s honor, during remarks from Indiana Court of Appeals Chief Judge Margret Robb, a video was shown to reflect how technology has changed since Shepard became chief justice. One thought it would focus on computers and the Internet, as the intro explained “Uncovered from the state archive, this footage depicts the first help desk professional seen at work.” But instead, it featured Shepard and State Court Administration Chief Deputy Executive Director Dave Remondini in monk robes, with Remondini trying to explain to Shepard how books work by candlelight.

Shepard, playing “dumb” quite well, just couldn’t figure out how to continuing reading once the text ended on a page. He was used to scrolls and having to turn pages was new to him. But Remondini, always patient, explained to the former chief justice several times how the text would be there, even after he turned the page and closed the book.

The video was a hit. The audience laughed often at the site of the longest-serving state chief justice not understanding how books work.

The video may have been familiar to some people; it’s been on YouTube since September 2008 and has more than 15,000 hits. It’s a remake of a Norwegian video and was created for a judicial conference to use during a discussion of new court technologies.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT