This is the sort of thing that will interest those who are interested in this sort of thing, regarding the had-for-did phenomenon.
David Ellis writes, in Breach of Trust, c.2011,
(Scene: courtroom where defense attorney is describing his own cross-examination of witness Espinoza.)
"Given that Espinoza probably hadn't shared (had-for-did, should read, 'didn't share') this information with the prosecutors, they hadn't had (had-for-did, should read 'didn't have') the chance to prepare him for this line of inquiry."
Once you get on the 'had' highway, it's
hard to find the exit ramp.
.brad.27june11.