VH> That would probably work -- at least to the point of opening people's
 VH> eyes as to how what they SAY and how it could be interpreted to a jury
 VH> are two entirely different things.
True.  Painfully true.
 JT> VH> You might simply have someone simply burst into the room, fire a 
blank
 JT> VH> or two, run out
Oddly enough, when I was in law school, we had that very thing happen.  The 
object was to impress upon the students that "eye-witness" testimony was not 
always reliable.  It worked.  Out of 30 students, I believe we got 29 
different statements as to what the "shooter" was wearing, his physical 
appearance, etc.
 VH> It would be interesting -- I've developed a lot of training on strange
 VH> subjects and skills in my time.
Uhh, I'd kinda noticed that, Vern.
 VH> I'd find developing a course like that interesting.
Interesting is an understatement.  I think it would be fascinating.
Regards.  Cloyce.
--- EZPoint V2.2
---------------