𝑫𝒓𝒂𝒎𝒂 𝑻𝒆𝒌𝒔 𝑨𝒏𝒆𝒌𝒅𝒐𝒕 "𝑯𝒖𝒌𝒖𝒎 𝑷𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒅𝒊𝒍𝒂𝒏" ||𝑻𝒖𝒈𝒂𝒔 𝑩𝒂𝒉𝒂𝒔𝒂 𝑰𝒏𝒅𝒐𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒊𝒂 ||

Summary

In a bygone era, a diligent bridge maker's work led to a tragic accident when the bridge collapsed due to poor-quality wood. The victim, a hardworking merchant, suffered losses and sought justice. The judge held a trial involving the bridge maker, wood seller, and wood supplier, each blaming the other for the substandard materials. The judge's peculiar rulings, influenced by the wood seller's status and the supplier's wealth, led to an unjust outcome where an innocent, short and thin assistant was jailed and fined to compensate for the merchant's losses, highlighting the corruption and absurdity of the judicial system.

Takeaways

• 🛤️ A diligent and hardworking bridge maker was responsible for constructing a bridge, which tragically collapsed due to poor quality wood.
• 🐎 The bridge collapse led to a merchant falling into the river with his horse and losing his goods, causing significant financial loss.
• 📢 The merchant reported the incident to a noble judge, seeking justice for the damages incurred.
• ⚖️ The judge ordered the bridge maker to be brought to court to answer for his actions, highlighting the importance of accountability.
• 🏗️ The bridge maker defended himself by explaining that he used substandard wood provided by a wood merchant, shifting the blame.
• 🪵 The wood merchant was then summoned to court, where he was accused of supplying poor quality wood, affecting the structural integrity of the bridge.
• 🌳 The wood merchant argued that he provided various types of wood and it was the bridge maker's choice to use the inferior kind, further complicating the issue.
• 🔍 The judge then called for the wood seller's assistant, who was responsible for providing the specific wood used in the bridge's construction.
• 🚨 The assistant was found guilty and sentenced to prison and fined to compensate for the merchant's losses, demonstrating the court's attempt to assign responsibility.
• 🏢 The assistant's physical attributes and financial status played a role in the judgment, as he was deemed suitable for imprisonment and financial penalty.
• 🏛️ The court's decision concluded with the assistant being imprisoned and fined, while the public was left to contemplate the fairness of the judgment.

Q & A

What was the main occupation of the protagonist in the story?

The protagonist was a diligent and hardworking bridge maker.

What incident occurred on the newly built bridge?

The bridge collapsed due to the poor quality of the wood used, causing the bridge maker to fall into the river along with his horse and goods.

How did the bridge maker's family react to the incident?

The bridge maker's family did not accept the loss and reported the incident to the noble judge.

What was the judge's initial decision regarding the bridge maker?

The judge decided to summon the bridge maker and hold him accountable for his actions.

What was the bridge maker's defense when brought before the judge?

The bridge maker claimed that he used poor quality wood from a wood seller because it was the only wood available and he had no choice due to the seller's influence.

Who was ultimately held responsible for the poor quality of the wood?

The wood seller was held responsible for providing substandard wood.

What was the judge's ruling on the wood seller?

The judge ordered the wood seller to compensate for all the losses incurred by the bridge maker and to replace the faulty wood.

Why was it difficult to imprison the assistant mentioned in the story?

It was difficult to imprison the assistant because he was too tall and fat for the small and narrow jail, and he also did not have any money to be confiscated.

What was the final outcome of the trial according to the judge?

The judge closed the trial, and the thin and short assistant with money was imprisoned and fined to compensate for the bridge maker's losses and to pay the judge's fee.

How did the public perceive the fairness of the trial?

The public's perception of the trial's fairness is not explicitly stated in the script, but it implies that the judge's decision was questionable and perhaps not entirely just.

What was the judge's final action after the trial?

The judge asked the thin and short assistant with money to be brought before him, presumably for sentencing or further judgment.