Today’s Oregonian reported that Elisabeth Solomon, known to her friends as Libby, died this week at the age of 95. Mrs. Solomon was the widow of longtime federal judge Gus Solomon, after whom the old federal courthouse in Portland is named, and was a formidable character in her own right, possibly the only person who could single-handedly overrule Gus. Her obituary brought back memories of Judge Solomon.
One of his law clerks from the 1950s told me that Judge Solomon was presiding over the trial of a businessman for fraud. The defendant’s secretary, asked about a number of events, testified very politely that she didn’t remember any of them.
Then a juror wrote and passed a note to the bailiff, who handed it to the judge. (It is always a matter of interest when a juror writes a note to the judge during the middle of the trial.) Judge Solomon opened the note and read it. The juror had asked, “Just because the witness is under oath, do we have to believe her?”
Solomon thundered at the jury: “I am the judge in this case. I have authority over all matters of law. I will instruct you on the law which you are to apply to the facts. You are the jury. You will decide the matters of fact. It is up to you to decide the facts, based on your evaluation of the evidence, including your evaluation of the credibility of each witness, including this witness.” He paused, then continued: “However — I don’t believe a word she’s saying, either!”
One of his clerks from the 1960s, hearing this story, told me that in another case Judge Solomon simply told the jury, “I instruct you that Witness X is lying.”
And when in another case the plaintiff’s and defendant’s lawyers told him that the trial would take two weeks, he is supposed to have replied, “All exhibits are admitted. All objections to evidence are overruled. Plaintiff has this morning, defendant has this afternoon, and I will rule this evening. Counsel, call your first witness.” And he ruled that evening.

Comments
3 responses
WWP has heard this story too. You tell it better.
Ever wonder wherein the truth lies?
Perhaps it doesn’t matter. The point is told, and understood.
I’m sure the original transcript isn’t as concise!
Our memories improve and embellish events with the passage of time. Winston Churchill tells the compelling story of his conference with Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax, at which the three agreed that Churchill should become prime minister. He describes what Chamberlain and Halifax said. He continues by saying that that evening the King sent for him and asked him to form a government. It’s a great story. (It appears at the end of The Gathering Storm, the first volume of his WW2 series.)
Churchill’s biographers, however, say that it didn’t happen like that. Churchill either polished the story or simply didn’t remember it right when he wrote it down six years later. In his book on Churchill, Roy Jenkins describes Churchill’s account of those events as follows: “[Churchill’s] account is not without a certain central truth, but is wholly inaccurate as to times and participants.”
“Central truth.”
How, well … true.