It is looking as though the extreme cases are moving a bit faster now.
Only Monday, the Prince George's County officers pulled over a suspect who had allegedly been crashing his car into parked vehicles. One of the earlier reports suggested the officers "smelled PCP," but this account simply says they thought he was "under the influence of a substance" and so, called for a "drug recognition expert."
Somehow, after the suspect was cuffed and restrained by seat belts in the front passenger seat of the squad car, he still managed to put up such a fight that one of the officers had to shoot him seven times, killing him. Unfortunately, there was no video footage to sustain the officer's use of force, because he wasn't equipped with a body camera. So, officials shortly lept to adverse conclusions, and the officer is charged with murder, and also reportedly manslaughter (presumably as a lesser-included or alternative count) and "assorted weapons charges."
Huh. I'm sure there will be a good story about why and how this happened. Perhaps the suspect was all like the Monte Python Black Knight, and was lunging at the officer with his teeth. We will have to wait for the explanation to be revealed, in the fullness of time.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-maryland-cop-was-charged-with-murder-after-a-man-was-shot-7-times-inside-his-police-cruiser/ar-BBZqnwh
January 29, 2020
Vox, on the Tranny/TERF Wars
This isn't cutting edge news, but for some reason was pulled to the forefront on the Interwebs today.
The upshot is that there is more trouble in the intersectional Big Tent, because a group of the radical feminists are fighting with the trannies. In a way, it is completely understandable. After demeaning themselves by marching around in stupid-looking, "pink pussy hats" to secure the special rights they are due, why should feminists have to share their status with a bunch of shitlord men who want to "identify" as women?
Just as Nkechi Amare Diallo raises the spectre of "cultural appropriation," the "transwomen" are objectionable to real, physiological women (at least some of the radical feminist ones) as gender-appropriators. How dare they?? IT'S A GENDER, NOT A COSTUME, AND IT ISN'T OK!
I know you are probably wondering, "what about the 'transmen,' then?" Well, it turns out, they are subject to contempt and derision from the feminists as "victims of the Patriarchy," so they don't get any kind of a break either. The radical feminists charging behind the TERF banner disagree with the basic concept that "gender" is a subjective construct, and instead hew to the millennia-old, general view that a person's "gender" is the physiological gender the person was born with. So, in tranny terms, the feminist TERFers are "denying the existence" of the trannies.
It will be interesting to see how this gets sorted out, or whether it even will. Maybe it will be like the rabid antisemitism that has come to be accepted inside the Big Tent simply because some Farrakhan-fan-feminists refuse to give that up. I think the bottom line with the Big Tent is, whether they ever get rid of Trump or not, there will never be any slackening of the discord, because they hate each other just as much as they hate him. Should they ever manage to accomplish the declared, collective goal, it is reasonably clear they will simply turn to shanking each other at the earliest possible opportunity.
https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/9/5/20840101/terfs-radical-feminists-gender-critical
The upshot is that there is more trouble in the intersectional Big Tent, because a group of the radical feminists are fighting with the trannies. In a way, it is completely understandable. After demeaning themselves by marching around in stupid-looking, "pink pussy hats" to secure the special rights they are due, why should feminists have to share their status with a bunch of shitlord men who want to "identify" as women?
Just as Nkechi Amare Diallo raises the spectre of "cultural appropriation," the "transwomen" are objectionable to real, physiological women (at least some of the radical feminist ones) as gender-appropriators. How dare they?? IT'S A GENDER, NOT A COSTUME, AND IT ISN'T OK!
I know you are probably wondering, "what about the 'transmen,' then?" Well, it turns out, they are subject to contempt and derision from the feminists as "victims of the Patriarchy," so they don't get any kind of a break either. The radical feminists charging behind the TERF banner disagree with the basic concept that "gender" is a subjective construct, and instead hew to the millennia-old, general view that a person's "gender" is the physiological gender the person was born with. So, in tranny terms, the feminist TERFers are "denying the existence" of the trannies.
It will be interesting to see how this gets sorted out, or whether it even will. Maybe it will be like the rabid antisemitism that has come to be accepted inside the Big Tent simply because some Farrakhan-fan-feminists refuse to give that up. I think the bottom line with the Big Tent is, whether they ever get rid of Trump or not, there will never be any slackening of the discord, because they hate each other just as much as they hate him. Should they ever manage to accomplish the declared, collective goal, it is reasonably clear they will simply turn to shanking each other at the earliest possible opportunity.
https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/9/5/20840101/terfs-radical-feminists-gender-critical
January 26, 2020
Hercules and the Resignation; Judge Kopf Leaves the ABA
Many readers may be familiar with the right Hon. Judge Kopf from the days of his own blog, "Hercules and the Umpire." After its demise, he has remained as a fairly regular commenter (and sometimes guest author) at Admiral Greenfield's "Simple Justice" blog.
Oft times, when commenting on ABA-related posts at Simple Justice, I have encouraged fellow readers to follow my 2016 example of dumping further association with, and any dues payment to, the ABA. Judge Kopf, a happy, 48-year member, would often note his intention to continue to support the ABA, for whatever good it might still do. I couldn't be too critical of that, as I was there once, and made excuses for ABA over far more decades than I should have.
Today, venturing into the Internet a bit late, I was surprised (but not displeased) to see that the draft judicial ethics opinion relating to membership by judges in political advocacy organizations had finally made the difference to Judge Kopf.
Reading the analysis in the committee draft, Judge Kopf could not escape the inexorable conclusion that the proposed exception for ABA could not be rationally supported, given what the organization has become. Hence, he resigned. From ABA, that is, and fortunately, not the federal bench.
Despite his considerable standing with the Nebraska Home Fleet (and Admiral Greenfield), His Honor has always been a modest chap, and does not see his resignation as having significance. In fact, it does. As I once did, Judge Kopf has done his very best to look the other way and to make excuses for the ABA, for nearly half a century. That he looks, and reasons and now cannot continue, is momentous. Maybe other judges will follow. Maybe none will. Yet, ABA has lost a true Defender of the Faith in this great, but humble, man. ABA is well past the end of its beginning, and now, it is also truly and well past the beginning of its end.
https://blog.simplejustice.us/2020/01/26/kopf-a-bomb-is-dropped-hitting-2-deserving-targets-but-missing-a-third/#more-42744
Oft times, when commenting on ABA-related posts at Simple Justice, I have encouraged fellow readers to follow my 2016 example of dumping further association with, and any dues payment to, the ABA. Judge Kopf, a happy, 48-year member, would often note his intention to continue to support the ABA, for whatever good it might still do. I couldn't be too critical of that, as I was there once, and made excuses for ABA over far more decades than I should have.
Today, venturing into the Internet a bit late, I was surprised (but not displeased) to see that the draft judicial ethics opinion relating to membership by judges in political advocacy organizations had finally made the difference to Judge Kopf.
Reading the analysis in the committee draft, Judge Kopf could not escape the inexorable conclusion that the proposed exception for ABA could not be rationally supported, given what the organization has become. Hence, he resigned. From ABA, that is, and fortunately, not the federal bench.
Despite his considerable standing with the Nebraska Home Fleet (and Admiral Greenfield), His Honor has always been a modest chap, and does not see his resignation as having significance. In fact, it does. As I once did, Judge Kopf has done his very best to look the other way and to make excuses for the ABA, for nearly half a century. That he looks, and reasons and now cannot continue, is momentous. Maybe other judges will follow. Maybe none will. Yet, ABA has lost a true Defender of the Faith in this great, but humble, man. ABA is well past the end of its beginning, and now, it is also truly and well past the beginning of its end.
https://blog.simplejustice.us/2020/01/26/kopf-a-bomb-is-dropped-hitting-2-deserving-targets-but-missing-a-third/#more-42744
January 24, 2020
Chance, DNA & the Pillowcase Rapist
This case, on the Interwebs today, highlights a continuing trend in the use and usefulness of DNA evidence and DNA-matching databases. On the facts, a man was arrested for a domestic violence offense, in a jurisdiction whose existing booking procedures for such an offense entail taking DNA samples and running them in a database to determine if the samples will match the arrestee to other, prior crimes.
The search query led to hits somewhat matching anonymous forensic DNA samples from Miami area rapes in the 1980s. These were sufficient to alert the police they should be looking at close relatives of the arrestee, and sure enough, surveillance leading to samples of his father's DNA ended up connecting the arrestee's father to a string of old rapes attributed to "the Pillowcase Rapist."
As DNA matching develops, criminals simply can't be careful enough to be certain of avoiding detection. If any family member misbehaves and is sampled, or if any family member innocently contributes DNA to a genealogical site, the police may be put on the trail of criminals who are not themselves in any DNA database.
As DNA databases are extended by voluntary and involuntary sampling, criminals who have left any trace DNA at prior crime scenes will be increasingly at risk of detection. Perhaps state and local governmrnts will even find ways to accelerate this outcome, as, for example, by requiring preservation of DNA samples as a part of all official birth and death records. Eventually, our society could reach a point where escaping detection for a considerable range of crimes could become virtually impossible.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/pillowcase-rapist-officials-believe-theyve-found-man-who-terrorized-south-florida-in-the-1980s/ar-BBZgTUy
The search query led to hits somewhat matching anonymous forensic DNA samples from Miami area rapes in the 1980s. These were sufficient to alert the police they should be looking at close relatives of the arrestee, and sure enough, surveillance leading to samples of his father's DNA ended up connecting the arrestee's father to a string of old rapes attributed to "the Pillowcase Rapist."
As DNA matching develops, criminals simply can't be careful enough to be certain of avoiding detection. If any family member misbehaves and is sampled, or if any family member innocently contributes DNA to a genealogical site, the police may be put on the trail of criminals who are not themselves in any DNA database.
As DNA databases are extended by voluntary and involuntary sampling, criminals who have left any trace DNA at prior crime scenes will be increasingly at risk of detection. Perhaps state and local governmrnts will even find ways to accelerate this outcome, as, for example, by requiring preservation of DNA samples as a part of all official birth and death records. Eventually, our society could reach a point where escaping detection for a considerable range of crimes could become virtually impossible.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/pillowcase-rapist-officials-believe-theyve-found-man-who-terrorized-south-florida-in-the-1980s/ar-BBZgTUy
Love Didn't Win: Transgender "Activist" Bludgeoned & Knifed by Husband
Boston. The guilty plea was reported today in the 2018 slaying that dispatched Christa Leigh Steele-Knudslien, said to be a well-known transgender "activist." Evidently, the decedent had some history of belittling and emotionally abusing the husband, who is said to have snapped at the time of the murder, beating the decedent extensively with a hammer, to the point of unconsciousness. The coup de grace was then delivered by running a large knife through the decedent's back, slicing through the right, upper lobe of the decedent's lung and puncturing the decedent's heart.
The defendant was allowed to plead down to murder 2, and so will be eligible for parole in 25 years, despite the ostensible, overarching "life" sentence.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/husband-pleads-guilty-to-killing-transgender-activist-spouse-in-the-berkshires/ar-BBZidQw
This murder occurred on January 5 of 2018, and is the first "transgender murder" recorded by Human Rights Campaign for its 2018 statistics. Notably, the crime cannot rationally be classified as "anti-transgender violence," given that it was essentially a crime of domestic violence by a defendant who had established a sexual relationship with, and married, the decedent, with full awareness of the decedent's status. This is not uncommon with killings recorded in the transgender murder statistics, although such domestic violence incidents with established couples have been only a small fraction of the reported deaths each year.
The defendant was allowed to plead down to murder 2, and so will be eligible for parole in 25 years, despite the ostensible, overarching "life" sentence.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/husband-pleads-guilty-to-killing-transgender-activist-spouse-in-the-berkshires/ar-BBZidQw
This murder occurred on January 5 of 2018, and is the first "transgender murder" recorded by Human Rights Campaign for its 2018 statistics. Notably, the crime cannot rationally be classified as "anti-transgender violence," given that it was essentially a crime of domestic violence by a defendant who had established a sexual relationship with, and married, the decedent, with full awareness of the decedent's status. This is not uncommon with killings recorded in the transgender murder statistics, although such domestic violence incidents with established couples have been only a small fraction of the reported deaths each year.
Coronavirus Strikes Chicago
The Internet was abuzz today as test results confirmed a case of Coronavirus in Chicago. Fortunately, the patient, reportedly age 60, is said not to have been in close contact with many people outside her home. Accordingly, we can be hopeful that bars and similar social settings may be spared, even if pie shops are not.
Of course, there is an excellent chance the ABA will bring the bane of epidemic to Chicago in any event, as the organization has for some years been trying to help the thousands-of-years-old culture of China come to grips with ABA notions of political correctness and "the rule of law." I suppose the Chinese will take some solace in the instant opportunity to return to the ABA a favor of equal thoughtfulness.
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2020/01/24/first-case-of-coronavirus-confirmed-in-chicago/
Of course, there is an excellent chance the ABA will bring the bane of epidemic to Chicago in any event, as the organization has for some years been trying to help the thousands-of-years-old culture of China come to grips with ABA notions of political correctness and "the rule of law." I suppose the Chinese will take some solace in the instant opportunity to return to the ABA a favor of equal thoughtfulness.
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2020/01/24/first-case-of-coronavirus-confirmed-in-chicago/
January 23, 2020
Tis the Season...for Desperate Job Searching
This time of year I always start getting emails from 3L law students in Texas who have started their last semester at law school and don't have a job lined up. Their preferred method of communication is an email or LinkedIn message saying that my firm and my practice have great reputations and that he (it's always men) would like to meet with me to discuss my practice and the possibility of working for me in the Fall. They've no doubt sent the same communication to 100,000 other lawyers in Texas and beyond. I never respond to these communications for several reasons.
First, I can't ever see myself hiring a lawyer right out of law school. First year lawyers (I include 1st year BillyBob in this generalization) are almost completely useless. I don't have the resources or time to train a baby lawyer. I'd rather let BigLaw firms do that and hire a trained lawyer who gets burned out on the lifestyle.
Second, there is probably a reason that the person who is emailing me doesn't have a job lined up. Back in 2010-14, even somewhat qualified law students had trouble finding work. The market is much better now, so anyone reaching out to me at this stage is automatically suspect.
For example, the person that reached out to me today has a pretty impressive technical background, which is a big plus for someone who wants to do patent law. According to his LinkedIn profile, he's had three different summer clerkships at boutique IP firms in Houston. Apparently none of these clerkships have resulted in a job offer. Although there could be many reasons why he wasn't offered employment by any of these firms, the three most likely reasons are:
1. His work product sucks;
2. He's an asshole; or
3. His grades are so bad that smaller firms feel like they can employ him for the summer for $15/hour without intending to offer him a job in the end.
None of these are good, but I'm inclined to think that it's probably No. 1. His email to me was replete with typos. I'm willing to let a lot of typos go, but he misspelled "Houston" for fuck's sake! The city where he has resided for the past 6 years.
Does anyone else have to deal with this shit?
First, I can't ever see myself hiring a lawyer right out of law school. First year lawyers (I include 1st year BillyBob in this generalization) are almost completely useless. I don't have the resources or time to train a baby lawyer. I'd rather let BigLaw firms do that and hire a trained lawyer who gets burned out on the lifestyle.
Second, there is probably a reason that the person who is emailing me doesn't have a job lined up. Back in 2010-14, even somewhat qualified law students had trouble finding work. The market is much better now, so anyone reaching out to me at this stage is automatically suspect.
For example, the person that reached out to me today has a pretty impressive technical background, which is a big plus for someone who wants to do patent law. According to his LinkedIn profile, he's had three different summer clerkships at boutique IP firms in Houston. Apparently none of these clerkships have resulted in a job offer. Although there could be many reasons why he wasn't offered employment by any of these firms, the three most likely reasons are:
1. His work product sucks;
2. He's an asshole; or
3. His grades are so bad that smaller firms feel like they can employ him for the summer for $15/hour without intending to offer him a job in the end.
None of these are good, but I'm inclined to think that it's probably No. 1. His email to me was replete with typos. I'm willing to let a lot of typos go, but he misspelled "Houston" for fuck's sake! The city where he has resided for the past 6 years.
Does anyone else have to deal with this shit?
January 22, 2020
Porn Hub Sued for Failure to Accommodate
How is a deaf patron to properly enjoy pornographic videos that offer no accommodation for the hearing impaired? Obviously, it isn't just a matter of the dialogue, as the various, wet, slupping, licking, sucking and smacking sounds, as well as the various technically vocal, but concurrently non-verbal, bedroom expressions are not really linguistic in character and do not lend themselves to formal "signing."
Hence, if the hearing impaired are to be favored, as nearly as possible, with the benefit of these un-signable, non-linguistic components, it can only be through the engagement of skilled, "close-captionists," who set forth descriptive text to identify the audible sound track that would be perceived by a hearing audience.
I have to say that, as our laws on these subjects are constructed, I think this may well be a "hit," and I look forward to the follow-up suits by the visually impaired, who will need to be able to sense the on-screen action via tactile accommodations.
For the nonce, I can only hope this particular plaintiff will be afforded an appropriate hearing (and God bless him for going after this, to defend liberty and pursue justice).
https://kdvr.com/2020/01/20/deaf-man-sues-pornhub-because-he-cannot-enjoy-video-content-without-captions-tmw/
Hence, if the hearing impaired are to be favored, as nearly as possible, with the benefit of these un-signable, non-linguistic components, it can only be through the engagement of skilled, "close-captionists," who set forth descriptive text to identify the audible sound track that would be perceived by a hearing audience.
I have to say that, as our laws on these subjects are constructed, I think this may well be a "hit," and I look forward to the follow-up suits by the visually impaired, who will need to be able to sense the on-screen action via tactile accommodations.
For the nonce, I can only hope this particular plaintiff will be afforded an appropriate hearing (and God bless him for going after this, to defend liberty and pursue justice).
https://kdvr.com/2020/01/20/deaf-man-sues-pornhub-because-he-cannot-enjoy-video-content-without-captions-tmw/
Astoundingly Biased Draft Opinion Bows and Scrapes to ABA Poseurs
For judges worried about not seeming to be in the pocket of any particular political faction, what is the difference between the ABA, the ACS, or the Federalist Society?
According to these drafters (who apparently live in an alternate universe), it is that the ABA is less focused on political advocacy.
Of course, they are obviously and completely delusional out of touch with the real world, but beyond the basic incompetence of their draft is the other issue they completely miss, which is the ABA's blatant discrimination against older lawyers.
The ACS appears to operate on "donations" as opposed to formal membership dues, and the Federalist Society will admit any lawyer, new or old, for $50.
By contrast, we all know about the ABA dues structure, which affords BigLaw newbies with $190,000 starting salaries a virtual "pass" while jacking up senior lawyers with far lesser incomes for $450 in annual dues. In short, the ABA deliberately and flagrantly maintains a dues structure that is centered around an efficient proxy for age discrimination. By ABA's own proposed Rule 8.4(g), no ethical lawyer would maintain membership in such an ageist, discriminatory organization, and doing so should be subject to discipline.
For the same reason, neither should any federal or state judge be seen as supporting this discriminatory organization. Quite irrespective of ABA's constant, radical, leftist political advocacy, its blatant and unapologetic discrimination against senior lawyers should render judicial approval or endorsement of this organization unacceptable. Judges who would not join an organization that charges black people more, or charges Hispanics more, or charges women more should not join this organization that openly and notoriously charges older lawyers more.
Unfortunately, and law be damned, it appears that only judges are to be allowed to comment on this bullshit travesty of ABA-ass-kissing-infamy, notwithstanding its facial impropriety and absence of support in reason. The rest of us are evidently deemed too stupid, or more probably, too old and stupid, to be heard on such questions.
A Light on the Water, All Souls Pass, Into the West
We haven't had the musical features for awhile, but this one spoke to me. To apologize to your audience, because you realize you won't be able finish your last set. So much this. Go with God, David Olney.
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/jan/20/david-olney-acclaimed-us-songwriter-dies-on-stage-after-apologising-mid-song
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/jan/20/david-olney-acclaimed-us-songwriter-dies-on-stage-after-apologising-mid-song
January 15, 2020
"Trial by Combat" Proponent Shows Ignorance of Basic Customs
For several days, various national publications have carried the story of this Kansas litigant who asked an Iowa court to order resolution of a domestic case by a duel to the death with Japanese swords. Included in the request was a prayer for twelve weeks' lead time to line up suitable long and short swords.
Apparently Kansans follow some dime-novel concept of dueling. The first point to be made here is that under normal dueling protocols as recognized in most western nations, the challenged party (not the challenger) would be the party entitled to designate the time, place and choice of weapons for the engagement. So, it would only be swords if the wife wants swords, and he needs to ask her for the twelve weeks to prepare. Also, principles of the code duello do not permit the challenger to designate the challenged party's "champion." If the wife chooses to name a "champion" as an alternative to dueling in person, she has the right to make that selection in her own discretion.
Beyond his foundational faux pas, the hayseed's designation of both the katana and wakizashi as weapons for the proposed duel reflects his further ignorance of customary practices when dueling with Japanese swords. Although samurai typically carried both blades in battle, duels with live blades were normally conducted with only one sword per participant, usually the katana. (Dueling with both would have been a practice limited largely to adherents of a double-sword style promoted by Kensei Musashi Miyamoto, based on the French double-rapier system, and would not be an option suitable for novices).
Based on the most current reports, it appears the request and response are going nowhere at the moment, due to the Iowa court's perception that some applicable procedural requisites have not been properly followed. It is possible that the court is concerned a proper challenge and acceptance are at this point lacking, and is waiting to schedule an appearance by the parties' seconds to set any details until those formal defects have been remedied.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/15/kansas-man-wants-to-settle-ugly-custody-battle-with-trial-by-combat-with-japanese-swords/
Apparently Kansans follow some dime-novel concept of dueling. The first point to be made here is that under normal dueling protocols as recognized in most western nations, the challenged party (not the challenger) would be the party entitled to designate the time, place and choice of weapons for the engagement. So, it would only be swords if the wife wants swords, and he needs to ask her for the twelve weeks to prepare. Also, principles of the code duello do not permit the challenger to designate the challenged party's "champion." If the wife chooses to name a "champion" as an alternative to dueling in person, she has the right to make that selection in her own discretion.
Beyond his foundational faux pas, the hayseed's designation of both the katana and wakizashi as weapons for the proposed duel reflects his further ignorance of customary practices when dueling with Japanese swords. Although samurai typically carried both blades in battle, duels with live blades were normally conducted with only one sword per participant, usually the katana. (Dueling with both would have been a practice limited largely to adherents of a double-sword style promoted by Kensei Musashi Miyamoto, based on the French double-rapier system, and would not be an option suitable for novices).
Based on the most current reports, it appears the request and response are going nowhere at the moment, due to the Iowa court's perception that some applicable procedural requisites have not been properly followed. It is possible that the court is concerned a proper challenge and acceptance are at this point lacking, and is waiting to schedule an appearance by the parties' seconds to set any details until those formal defects have been remedied.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/15/kansas-man-wants-to-settle-ugly-custody-battle-with-trial-by-combat-with-japanese-swords/
The Bullshit of the AR-15's "Subtle Design Nuance"
This story has been circulating for awhile, and went out on the AP wire two days ago. It still isn't newsworthy at ABA Journal (even though I emailed them a link to it), but that has to do with the substance of what is really going on here.
As the media would have it, federal prosecutors are having trouble with charges based on possession of the lower receivers for AR-15s, because of what the press terms a "subtle design nuance." Stepping into the real world for a moment, that "subtle nuance" is simply that the lower receiver is in fact not a functional receiver, but only half of a functional assemblage that requires both upper and lower receiver. Neither part, in isolation, is a functional receiver, and neither part, in isolation, can discharge a round. The legal result of this (as now confirmed by several federal courts) is that the lower receiver, in isolation, does not meet the statutory description of a firearm and cannot be regulated as a firearm. Felons who have one cannot be convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm solely for possessing the lower receiver.
Contrary to the media suggestion that the AR-15 has somehow been redesigned to skirt the law, that is not the actual problem here at all. To revisit the basics of federal criminal law, there is no federal common law of crimes. In order to charge a crime within the federal jurisdiction, elements of statutes creating the crime must be met. The lower receiver of the AR-15 was never a functional receiver, never could discharge a round, and never met the federal definition of a firearm.
So, the problem here was always unethical prosecutors jacking defendants up for conduct that was never a chargeable crime to begin with, and this was coupled with courts turning a blind eye as defendants copped pleas to federal charges that were missing basic statutory elements. That was the problem, and now, the courts are fixing that problem by increasingly dismissing these baseless and overreaching charges when federal prosecutors file them.
Note that the DOJ and the media, for all their bitching and whining, do not rationally explain why following the letter of the law enacted by Congress will or could cause any real problem. The lower receiver can't discharge a round. Unless and until it is assembled into a completed receiver, it has no more functionality than a rock or a paperweight. You could throw it at someone, and maybe bruise them, but that would be about it for the alleged dangerousness of this component. By contrast, if the lower receivers are combined with upper receivers and assembled into functional receivers that can discharge a round, they will at that point meet the definition of firearms, and the feds can charge violations accordingly. So, there is nothing wrong with the law. Basically, the prosecutors weren't following the law, and now, they have been caught and will have to follow the law. The cat is out of the bag, as they say, and they will have to scrape up a dime to buy some ethics somewhere, and start evaluating these cases properly.
https://apnews.com/396bbedbf4963a28bda99e7793ee6366
As the media would have it, federal prosecutors are having trouble with charges based on possession of the lower receivers for AR-15s, because of what the press terms a "subtle design nuance." Stepping into the real world for a moment, that "subtle nuance" is simply that the lower receiver is in fact not a functional receiver, but only half of a functional assemblage that requires both upper and lower receiver. Neither part, in isolation, is a functional receiver, and neither part, in isolation, can discharge a round. The legal result of this (as now confirmed by several federal courts) is that the lower receiver, in isolation, does not meet the statutory description of a firearm and cannot be regulated as a firearm. Felons who have one cannot be convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm solely for possessing the lower receiver.
Contrary to the media suggestion that the AR-15 has somehow been redesigned to skirt the law, that is not the actual problem here at all. To revisit the basics of federal criminal law, there is no federal common law of crimes. In order to charge a crime within the federal jurisdiction, elements of statutes creating the crime must be met. The lower receiver of the AR-15 was never a functional receiver, never could discharge a round, and never met the federal definition of a firearm.
So, the problem here was always unethical prosecutors jacking defendants up for conduct that was never a chargeable crime to begin with, and this was coupled with courts turning a blind eye as defendants copped pleas to federal charges that were missing basic statutory elements. That was the problem, and now, the courts are fixing that problem by increasingly dismissing these baseless and overreaching charges when federal prosecutors file them.
Note that the DOJ and the media, for all their bitching and whining, do not rationally explain why following the letter of the law enacted by Congress will or could cause any real problem. The lower receiver can't discharge a round. Unless and until it is assembled into a completed receiver, it has no more functionality than a rock or a paperweight. You could throw it at someone, and maybe bruise them, but that would be about it for the alleged dangerousness of this component. By contrast, if the lower receivers are combined with upper receivers and assembled into functional receivers that can discharge a round, they will at that point meet the definition of firearms, and the feds can charge violations accordingly. So, there is nothing wrong with the law. Basically, the prosecutors weren't following the law, and now, they have been caught and will have to follow the law. The cat is out of the bag, as they say, and they will have to scrape up a dime to buy some ethics somewhere, and start evaluating these cases properly.
https://apnews.com/396bbedbf4963a28bda99e7793ee6366
Laundering money while under indictment for extortion apparently frowned upon
Local man learns while being arrested during his disbarment hearing. Will make for interesting sideshow during his separate trial on the east coast.
https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-avenatti-arrested-again-20200115-g462mmpnjjeubecgjrkp7gecmi-story.html?outputType=amp
https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-avenatti-arrested-again-20200115-g462mmpnjjeubecgjrkp7gecmi-story.html?outputType=amp
January 13, 2020
Law School...Was it worth it?
KKRR posted a horrible little blurb on GLAWKER regarding a 2018 Gallup poll where various professionals were asked whether their graduate degree was worth the investment. Not surprisingly, only 23% of lawyers said that their law school education was worth it. Despite KKRR's inept reporting, this is certainly an interesting area for discussion.
So to the Commentariat, I ask:
1. How much did you have to borrow to attend law school (and was that more than or less than 15 years ago)?
2. Given everything that has happened in your career so far, do you think it was worth it?
I borrowed roughly $60,000 for law school more than 15 years ago. I consolidated my loans back when they were still private loans that were Federally guaranteed, so I got a super low interest rate (these were virtually risk free for the private lenders, so they were willing to compete for my business). I'm paying my loans over 25 years at 1.875% interest. My payment is less than $300 per month. I attend a very good law school and I'm making several times what I think was my earning potential before I got my law degree. I definitely fall in the 23% of lawyers who think the investment was worth it.
On the other hand, I don't know that I'd be willing to borrow $200,000 in order to make what I'm making now.
How about the rest of you?
So to the Commentariat, I ask:
1. How much did you have to borrow to attend law school (and was that more than or less than 15 years ago)?
2. Given everything that has happened in your career so far, do you think it was worth it?
I borrowed roughly $60,000 for law school more than 15 years ago. I consolidated my loans back when they were still private loans that were Federally guaranteed, so I got a super low interest rate (these were virtually risk free for the private lenders, so they were willing to compete for my business). I'm paying my loans over 25 years at 1.875% interest. My payment is less than $300 per month. I attend a very good law school and I'm making several times what I think was my earning potential before I got my law degree. I definitely fall in the 23% of lawyers who think the investment was worth it.
On the other hand, I don't know that I'd be willing to borrow $200,000 in order to make what I'm making now.
How about the rest of you?
January 11, 2020
Iran Lied, Did Shoot Down Ukranian Passenger Plane
Not a big surprise here, and basically what many (if not most) observers thought all along. Claims by Iranian authorities that they had excluded a surface to air missile as a cause of the crash were lies. Claims by Iranian authorities that the likely cause was a mechanical failure of the crashed plane were lies. Denials by Iranian authorities that their military had in fact shot down the plane were lies.
Needless to say, the "unintentionally" in the current story is looking pretty dubious as well.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/iran-says-it-unintentionally-shot-down-ukrainian-airliner/ar-BBYQdgZ?li=BBnb7Kz
Needless to say, the "unintentionally" in the current story is looking pretty dubious as well.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/iran-says-it-unintentionally-shot-down-ukrainian-airliner/ar-BBYQdgZ?li=BBnb7Kz
January 10, 2020
Liability Found in GirlsDoPorn Case
This case reminds me of the old saw in which the lecherous character says, "Well, we've established what you are; now we're negotiating terms."
The plaintiffs were "tricked into" being filmed for this pornography distribution business. They were "cash-strapped" and so were virtually forced to sign film contracts and to be filmed performing the various sex acts in hotel rooms. But, they had been falsely told by the wicked and scheming producers that the films would only be distributed on a very limited basis, in far away places.
As it turned out instead, these foul GirlsDoPorn distributors put the films on their website and generally distributed them everywhere, taking no precautions to help shield the identities of their stars from public scrutiny. As many of the plaintiffs were still active students on various college campuses (or, in the case of "Jane Doe 1," a law school campus), the widespread publicity of their sexual performance films led to other personal difficulties.
Indeed, Jane Doe 1 has determined that after her doxing as a porn actress, she no longer wants to be a lawyer, even though she has passed the bar. It occurs to me that she may not understand the profession well, as yet, and perhaps she will rethink that decision in later years.
In any event, with this nearly $13 Million civil judgment, the plaintiffs are "vindicated." As their lawyer explains, it is this vindication, and not the money, that makes them happy. Now the whole world can see that a court has declared they were tricked into making these films! Yes, let it be known that they are women of character, although perhaps not the sharpest tools in the shed, and that they did not agree to the general distribution of their paid sexual performances on the terms implemented by the defendants.
Personally, I do not see why they beat themselves up so much about this. Social animus against sex workers has dissipated a great deal in recent decades, and I doubt that many people were judging their existence based on a single, paid sexual performance in a digitally distributed video. Of course, I have not seen any of the films in question, and I suppose it is possible that the plaintiffs (who generally lacked prior screen experience) may have felt they were unfairly depicted as having poorly developed sexual skills. Significantly, as part of the relief in the civil case, the defendants have been ordered to remove the videos of the plaintiffs from sites under their control (although, of course, the larger Internet is forever).
A criminal trial of the cagey pornography purveyors (at least those who were apprehended) is still ongoing, so there will be further developments in those proceedings as they move along. This could eventually lead to a follow-up documentary, perhaps ironically styled, "Girls Do GirlsDoPorn."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/01/03/judge-awards-million-women-who-say-they-were-tricked-into-pornography/
The plaintiffs were "tricked into" being filmed for this pornography distribution business. They were "cash-strapped" and so were virtually forced to sign film contracts and to be filmed performing the various sex acts in hotel rooms. But, they had been falsely told by the wicked and scheming producers that the films would only be distributed on a very limited basis, in far away places.
As it turned out instead, these foul GirlsDoPorn distributors put the films on their website and generally distributed them everywhere, taking no precautions to help shield the identities of their stars from public scrutiny. As many of the plaintiffs were still active students on various college campuses (or, in the case of "Jane Doe 1," a law school campus), the widespread publicity of their sexual performance films led to other personal difficulties.
Indeed, Jane Doe 1 has determined that after her doxing as a porn actress, she no longer wants to be a lawyer, even though she has passed the bar. It occurs to me that she may not understand the profession well, as yet, and perhaps she will rethink that decision in later years.
In any event, with this nearly $13 Million civil judgment, the plaintiffs are "vindicated." As their lawyer explains, it is this vindication, and not the money, that makes them happy. Now the whole world can see that a court has declared they were tricked into making these films! Yes, let it be known that they are women of character, although perhaps not the sharpest tools in the shed, and that they did not agree to the general distribution of their paid sexual performances on the terms implemented by the defendants.
Personally, I do not see why they beat themselves up so much about this. Social animus against sex workers has dissipated a great deal in recent decades, and I doubt that many people were judging their existence based on a single, paid sexual performance in a digitally distributed video. Of course, I have not seen any of the films in question, and I suppose it is possible that the plaintiffs (who generally lacked prior screen experience) may have felt they were unfairly depicted as having poorly developed sexual skills. Significantly, as part of the relief in the civil case, the defendants have been ordered to remove the videos of the plaintiffs from sites under their control (although, of course, the larger Internet is forever).
A criminal trial of the cagey pornography purveyors (at least those who were apprehended) is still ongoing, so there will be further developments in those proceedings as they move along. This could eventually lead to a follow-up documentary, perhaps ironically styled, "Girls Do GirlsDoPorn."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/01/03/judge-awards-million-women-who-say-they-were-tricked-into-pornography/
"Celebrating" Morbid Obesity in a Cocked-Up Age
This has been a thing on the political left sufficiently long now that the new kid destroying Playboy Magazine has begun putting in nude pictures of fat women. This week, however, it is at the forefront because of the hefty musical entertainer, "Lizzo." Evidently, the "progressive" media has determined that since Lizzo has some musical talent, she should be used to teach children that being morbidly obese is a thing to "celebrate."
Of course, there is absolutely no logic to that, and it is not that modern medicine has not established the harmfulness of morbid obesity and its sequelae. Enter celebrity trainer Jillian Michaels, who quite cogently observed that if one is going to praise Lizzo as a musician it should be for her musical ability, not for her morbid obesity. Ms. Michaels, of course, has a possible profit motive in the debate, as she does make her money as a consequence of people wanting to maintain some functional level of fitness.
Now Whoopi Goldberg jumps into the fray, defending the praise of Lizzo's overlarge physique. Goldberg obviously has her own, hugely overweight dog in the fight as well, but at least has never attempted to suggest that she should be praised for her own absence of conditioning. Obviously, Goldberg made her money as a comedian, because people laugh at her, and being laughed at is what she is good at.
For some reason, "progressives" cannot seem to distinguish between criticizing weight (which they term "fat shaming") and criticizing their ignorant and harmful postulate that morbid obesity is a thing to be praised. Ms. Michaels did not say that Lizzo was an objectionable person because of her out of control weight, but only that such morbid obesity is not a thing to celebrate or take joy in. Overweight celebrities from Fatty Arbuckle to Mama Cass have understood this. It is only in the present age that celebrities have become so arrogant that they insist their obesity and other dangerous behaviors should be publicly hailed as virtues.
Jillian Michaels is right. I have no particular fondness for Lizzo's songs, but neither do I take any joy in her over-indulgences and lack of personal discipline which dramatically increase the probability of a shortened lifespan. It is her right to do it, yes, but shame on her and on all the "progressive" pundits who insist on marketing morbid obesity as a condition to be emulated. If Lizzo had any regard for her fans, she would at least admit that her condition is nothing to be proud of, whether or not she is ever willing to personally back off the feed bag. Her personal gluttony and sloth are not excuses to sell a ration of snake oil to a generation of children.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/whoopi-goldberg-defends-lizzo-after-jillian-michaels-body-shaming-i-do-celebrate-her/ar-BBYLxlk
Of course, there is absolutely no logic to that, and it is not that modern medicine has not established the harmfulness of morbid obesity and its sequelae. Enter celebrity trainer Jillian Michaels, who quite cogently observed that if one is going to praise Lizzo as a musician it should be for her musical ability, not for her morbid obesity. Ms. Michaels, of course, has a possible profit motive in the debate, as she does make her money as a consequence of people wanting to maintain some functional level of fitness.
Now Whoopi Goldberg jumps into the fray, defending the praise of Lizzo's overlarge physique. Goldberg obviously has her own, hugely overweight dog in the fight as well, but at least has never attempted to suggest that she should be praised for her own absence of conditioning. Obviously, Goldberg made her money as a comedian, because people laugh at her, and being laughed at is what she is good at.
For some reason, "progressives" cannot seem to distinguish between criticizing weight (which they term "fat shaming") and criticizing their ignorant and harmful postulate that morbid obesity is a thing to be praised. Ms. Michaels did not say that Lizzo was an objectionable person because of her out of control weight, but only that such morbid obesity is not a thing to celebrate or take joy in. Overweight celebrities from Fatty Arbuckle to Mama Cass have understood this. It is only in the present age that celebrities have become so arrogant that they insist their obesity and other dangerous behaviors should be publicly hailed as virtues.
Jillian Michaels is right. I have no particular fondness for Lizzo's songs, but neither do I take any joy in her over-indulgences and lack of personal discipline which dramatically increase the probability of a shortened lifespan. It is her right to do it, yes, but shame on her and on all the "progressive" pundits who insist on marketing morbid obesity as a condition to be emulated. If Lizzo had any regard for her fans, she would at least admit that her condition is nothing to be proud of, whether or not she is ever willing to personally back off the feed bag. Her personal gluttony and sloth are not excuses to sell a ration of snake oil to a generation of children.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/whoopi-goldberg-defends-lizzo-after-jillian-michaels-body-shaming-i-do-celebrate-her/ar-BBYLxlk
January 9, 2020
Further proof that RBG cannot be killed by conventional weapons
After a series of health scares in the last few years, Justice Ginsburg says she's now "cancer-free."
As Ginsburg, 86, told CNN, the malignant tumor on her pancreas was no match for the tag team of radiation therapy and judicial moxie.
Ginsburg's announcement comes as a welcome development to fans of the Supreme Court and to cable-news watchers who are one Trump-related "BREAKING NEWS" chyron away from massive myocardial infarction.
As Ginsburg, 86, told CNN, the malignant tumor on her pancreas was no match for the tag team of radiation therapy and judicial moxie.
Ginsburg's announcement comes as a welcome development to fans of the Supreme Court and to cable-news watchers who are one Trump-related "BREAKING NEWS" chyron away from massive myocardial infarction.
January 8, 2020
And the Intern Abuse Award Goes to . . .
I assume this got covered in "The Pink, Slimy Ghetto" column over at Glawker, at some point.
We have all heard stories of law firms, large and small, and sometimes even counsel offices, where student interns are exploited or otherwise treated poorly. Usually, federal law enforcement agencies are not in the running for the top spot in intern abuse surveys.
In this tawdry tale from Boston, however, Special Agent James Clarke of the IRS Criminal Investigation Division (a law school graduate) seems to have given it the old college try. After inviting one of the agency's summer interns out for a night of hard drinking at the bar across from the office, agent Clarke reportedly insisted on driving her to South Station. However, once they reached his government car, which was parked in the Government Center garage, Clarke apparently fancied that a brief, romantic interlude might be nice. According to the article, this led to Clarke restraining the young lady with his government-issued handcuffs, after which he choked her, put his government-issued service weapon in her mouth, and sexually assaulted her. Probably not wanting to be taken for a total cad (perhaps even still hoping for a second date), Clarke did go on to drive her to South Station, where he reportedly sexually assaulted her again, before letting her out of the car to catch a bus home.
Evidently not the forgiving or forgetful type (despite the five hours of drinking), the summer intern called 911 and reported that she had been raped. Physical evidence in the case included injuries consistent with strangulation, and, when they got around to the forensics testing, there was also summer intern saliva on Clarke's pistol.
Oddly, Clarke seems to have been allowed to continue performing his regular job functions for a period of about four months, and was only suspended after he was indicted on criminal charges. Almost equally oddly, some of the press articles reflect that in her initial statement to police, the summer intern indicated she could understand how Clarke might have thought the sex was consensual.
The jury, however, does not appear to have reached that conclusion. According to the linked article, Clarke was convicted of aggravated rape, rape, indecent assault and battery, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, and strangulation. (Evidently he got a "pass" on driving his government-issued car after five hours of drinking).
Seven to eight years from now, Clarke should be able to begin his ten years of probation, but (absent a successful appeal) will also have to register as a sex offender. The article reflects that Clark admits placing his gun in the intern's mouth, but his version of events was that she was sexually playful and the whole thing was consensual. Maybe shades of gray got a little too gray for him to sort out.
Well, live and learn. If you are a badge-and-gun-toting criminal agent with a wife and kids at home, and you think a seductive summer intern wants you to get her plastered, chain her up in your government car, strangle her, put your gun in her mouth and rape her, just say "no." There is just too much risk of a misunderstanding, in which a jury is likely to end up participating. Trust me on this, and you'll feel better about yourself later. Especially the first seven or eight years.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2020/01/07/irs-agent-sentenced-years-for-raping-college-intern-with-service-weapon/gJYTEkyvrRjBsURIR31MKK/story.html
We have all heard stories of law firms, large and small, and sometimes even counsel offices, where student interns are exploited or otherwise treated poorly. Usually, federal law enforcement agencies are not in the running for the top spot in intern abuse surveys.
In this tawdry tale from Boston, however, Special Agent James Clarke of the IRS Criminal Investigation Division (a law school graduate) seems to have given it the old college try. After inviting one of the agency's summer interns out for a night of hard drinking at the bar across from the office, agent Clarke reportedly insisted on driving her to South Station. However, once they reached his government car, which was parked in the Government Center garage, Clarke apparently fancied that a brief, romantic interlude might be nice. According to the article, this led to Clarke restraining the young lady with his government-issued handcuffs, after which he choked her, put his government-issued service weapon in her mouth, and sexually assaulted her. Probably not wanting to be taken for a total cad (perhaps even still hoping for a second date), Clarke did go on to drive her to South Station, where he reportedly sexually assaulted her again, before letting her out of the car to catch a bus home.
Evidently not the forgiving or forgetful type (despite the five hours of drinking), the summer intern called 911 and reported that she had been raped. Physical evidence in the case included injuries consistent with strangulation, and, when they got around to the forensics testing, there was also summer intern saliva on Clarke's pistol.
Oddly, Clarke seems to have been allowed to continue performing his regular job functions for a period of about four months, and was only suspended after he was indicted on criminal charges. Almost equally oddly, some of the press articles reflect that in her initial statement to police, the summer intern indicated she could understand how Clarke might have thought the sex was consensual.
The jury, however, does not appear to have reached that conclusion. According to the linked article, Clarke was convicted of aggravated rape, rape, indecent assault and battery, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, and strangulation. (Evidently he got a "pass" on driving his government-issued car after five hours of drinking).
Seven to eight years from now, Clarke should be able to begin his ten years of probation, but (absent a successful appeal) will also have to register as a sex offender. The article reflects that Clark admits placing his gun in the intern's mouth, but his version of events was that she was sexually playful and the whole thing was consensual. Maybe shades of gray got a little too gray for him to sort out.
Well, live and learn. If you are a badge-and-gun-toting criminal agent with a wife and kids at home, and you think a seductive summer intern wants you to get her plastered, chain her up in your government car, strangle her, put your gun in her mouth and rape her, just say "no." There is just too much risk of a misunderstanding, in which a jury is likely to end up participating. Trust me on this, and you'll feel better about yourself later. Especially the first seven or eight years.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2020/01/07/irs-agent-sentenced-years-for-raping-college-intern-with-service-weapon/gJYTEkyvrRjBsURIR31MKK/story.html
Judges, They Are Just Like Us
At least the state court variety. From <s> Penthouse </s> the article:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kentucky-judge-accused-courthouse-threesome-suspended-n1112296
Gentry is accused of coercing court staff to work on her judicial election campaign, retaliating against employees who failed to support her campaign, and hiring a man she had a sexual relationship with, according to a conduct committee document outlining the charges. She denies all of the accusations.
The judge, who was elected in November 2018, allegedly hired her lover, a former pastor, and then allowed him to play guitar and sing in the office, “disrupting other court employees during the workday,” according to the court documents. A lawyer for Gentry said she didn’t realize his behavior was a distraction, the documents show.
Gentry, her male lover, and a third court employee, a woman, also allegedly engaged in sexual activity in the courthouse. Gentry denies this, court documents show.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kentucky-judge-accused-courthouse-threesome-suspended-n1112296
January 7, 2020
Will Trump's "Statement" be Verbal or Military?
Following Iran's admitted missile strikes of this evening, which they telecast on their state TV, President Trump indicated an intention to "make a statement" on Wednesday.
In other news earlier in the day, the 82nd Airborne was conspicuously deployed to the theatre of operations. The U.S. Airborne divisions are among the most expensive to deploy, and, while the current administration is not easy to predict, deployment of these divisions has typically foreshadowed major U.S. offensive operations.
It is thus unclear what to expect tomorrow, as between some sort of speechifying by Trump and initiation of actual, full-scale war with Iran. Hopefully, it will just be some sort of oratory, but we will likely find out before noon, and the young soldiers boarding their transports may well have known what they were talking about. I think I will stop to fill my gas tank on the way to work.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/were-going-to-war-bro-fort-braggs-82nd-airborne-deploys-to-the-middle-east/ar-BBYHjjo?li=BBnbcA1
In other news earlier in the day, the 82nd Airborne was conspicuously deployed to the theatre of operations. The U.S. Airborne divisions are among the most expensive to deploy, and, while the current administration is not easy to predict, deployment of these divisions has typically foreshadowed major U.S. offensive operations.
It is thus unclear what to expect tomorrow, as between some sort of speechifying by Trump and initiation of actual, full-scale war with Iran. Hopefully, it will just be some sort of oratory, but we will likely find out before noon, and the young soldiers boarding their transports may well have known what they were talking about. I think I will stop to fill my gas tank on the way to work.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/were-going-to-war-bro-fort-braggs-82nd-airborne-deploys-to-the-middle-east/ar-BBYHjjo?li=BBnbcA1
January 6, 2020
Iranians Fly Drone Strike Fatalities Home in "Coach"
Recognizing that our guys usually have to come home as "cargo," I thought this was a nice touch. Each of the fallen from the Baghdad Airport strike was effectively allocated four seats, probably without even having to pay for extra tickets, and, there was an in-flight movie. I am not sure if the NY Post is trying to imply some criticism based on the coffins not having been booked "first class," but I think it might have been harder to fit them in there. Plus, it isn't like these guys were going to be ordering drinks.
It seems to me the bookings were fine. Lord knows, the only way our airlines would fly a decedent home in "coach" would be if the person actually died in "coach" (or, very possibly, if the person died in "first class," as they would then be unable to contest the downgrade to "coach").
In another story today, the NY Post reports that jewelers in the Big Apple are bagging on the quality of Soleimani's ring. Is the Post being too nit-pickety here? I think perhaps so.
Disqus.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/06/qassem-soleimanis-dead-body-flies-coach-back-to-iran/
It seems to me the bookings were fine. Lord knows, the only way our airlines would fly a decedent home in "coach" would be if the person actually died in "coach" (or, very possibly, if the person died in "first class," as they would then be unable to contest the downgrade to "coach").
In another story today, the NY Post reports that jewelers in the Big Apple are bagging on the quality of Soleimani's ring. Is the Post being too nit-pickety here? I think perhaps so.
Disqus.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/06/qassem-soleimanis-dead-body-flies-coach-back-to-iran/
Rock, Poker, Scissors at Mount Holyoke College
Interesting faculty developments at Mount Holyoke College in southern Massachusetts over the weekend. Rie Hachiyanagi, a 48-year-old professor and art studio chair, reportedly appeared at the home of a 60-year old female colleague, declared her longstanding love, then attacked the older woman with a fireplace poker, a rock and garden shears. Fortunately, she was apparently unable to gain possession of a Hattori Hanzo blade.
The victim is expected to survive, but is reportedly hospitalized with severe injuries. Hachiyanagi, meanwhile, has been arrested and charged with armed assault to murder, armed assault in a dwelling, mayhem, and three counts of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.
Press reports indicate that Hachiyanagi is being held without bail, but just in case, the school has placed her on administrative leave and banned her from campus "pending a review." Her next court hearing is not set until February 4, so Hachiyanagi should have plenty of time to scrub the floor and paint the fence while she is away from her regular job.
So far, the only indication of a possible defense position is that Hachiyanagi claims no memory of the incident, and asserts that she is suffering from an unspecified medical condition involving "multiple concussions." She does indeed have the look of a person who has "suffered for her art."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/police-college-professor-tried-to-murder-coworker-with-fire-poker/ar-BBYDFqd
The victim is expected to survive, but is reportedly hospitalized with severe injuries. Hachiyanagi, meanwhile, has been arrested and charged with armed assault to murder, armed assault in a dwelling, mayhem, and three counts of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.
Press reports indicate that Hachiyanagi is being held without bail, but just in case, the school has placed her on administrative leave and banned her from campus "pending a review." Her next court hearing is not set until February 4, so Hachiyanagi should have plenty of time to scrub the floor and paint the fence while she is away from her regular job.
So far, the only indication of a possible defense position is that Hachiyanagi claims no memory of the incident, and asserts that she is suffering from an unspecified medical condition involving "multiple concussions." She does indeed have the look of a person who has "suffered for her art."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/police-college-professor-tried-to-murder-coworker-with-fire-poker/ar-BBYDFqd
January 4, 2020
SIU Law Taps Camille Davidson as Dean
Some may remember Ms. Davidson from her longest recent employment, which was at InfiLaw's infamous Charlotte School of Law ("CSL"). For several years immediately prior to CSL's death spiral and collapse, she served as associate dean for academic affairs and faculty development, prior to being asked by then-dean Jay Conison to resign in 2017. Conison and Chidi Ogene were generally portrayed as the chief rascals and InfiLaw bagmen presiding over CSL's decline and implosion, and both became the subjects of a general faculty vote of no confidence as Ms. Davidson was forced from her administrative position. During the time she had served, one of CSL's reported tactics for attempting to address its bar passage issue was providing incentives to problem students to forego or delay sitting for the bar exam.
One might, therefore, wonder what sorts of near-term issues are contemplated by the SIU Board of Trustees as they are called upon to approve this selection. SIU Law (ranking unpublished) has its own acknowledged issues with bar passage rates, and the attached announcement identifies this as one of the main issues Ms. Davidson is expected to address as dean. Is this a good pick, under the circumstances?
Time will tell.
https://news.siu.edu/2020/01/010220-davidson-chosen-law-school-dean.php
One might, therefore, wonder what sorts of near-term issues are contemplated by the SIU Board of Trustees as they are called upon to approve this selection. SIU Law (ranking unpublished) has its own acknowledged issues with bar passage rates, and the attached announcement identifies this as one of the main issues Ms. Davidson is expected to address as dean. Is this a good pick, under the circumstances?
Time will tell.
https://news.siu.edu/2020/01/010220-davidson-chosen-law-school-dean.php
January 2, 2020
FOP Can't Always Make the Save
It was with some degree of amazement that I read through this story. Mind you, I was not surprised that the New York Police Department had not yet fired this officer. There is, of course, a bargaining unit to be reckoned with, and applicable disciplinary protocols.
I was, however, surprised that this imbecile seems to have somehow thought his career could survive this particular bit of misconduct. Several states removed from his jurisdiction, while attending a bachelor party in Tennessee, he decided to force his way into the home of some local residents, and threaten them with bodily harm, while also peppering his threats of violence with racial slurs.
When Nashville police responded to the scene, they were not amused. Nor, it seems, was the judge, who passed sentence of fifteen days in the pokey, after Officer New-York's-Finest "copped" (in the literal sense) to assault and aggravated criminal trespass. Not shockingly, word of all this somehow made it back to New York, and after staving off the inevitable for approximately three months, the officer tendered his resignation in lieu of proceeding in the disciplinary process. Reading between the lines, one might conclude that his union rep likely had a few words to say as to what might just be best for everyone concerned.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nypd-cop-who-broke-into-a-nashville-home-and-terrorized-family-resigns-under-pressure/ar-BBYyvcq
I was, however, surprised that this imbecile seems to have somehow thought his career could survive this particular bit of misconduct. Several states removed from his jurisdiction, while attending a bachelor party in Tennessee, he decided to force his way into the home of some local residents, and threaten them with bodily harm, while also peppering his threats of violence with racial slurs.
When Nashville police responded to the scene, they were not amused. Nor, it seems, was the judge, who passed sentence of fifteen days in the pokey, after Officer New-York's-Finest "copped" (in the literal sense) to assault and aggravated criminal trespass. Not shockingly, word of all this somehow made it back to New York, and after staving off the inevitable for approximately three months, the officer tendered his resignation in lieu of proceeding in the disciplinary process. Reading between the lines, one might conclude that his union rep likely had a few words to say as to what might just be best for everyone concerned.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nypd-cop-who-broke-into-a-nashville-home-and-terrorized-family-resigns-under-pressure/ar-BBYyvcq
ELIE LEAVING GLAWKER--FEDERALIST SOCIETY TO BLAME!!!
Apologies for the link to Glawker, but I think this merits a few clicks.
https://abovethelaw.com/2020/01/departure-memo-elie-mystal/?rf=1
Apparently Elie is stepping back from his duties at Glawker. But don't worry, he'll still be doing his stupid podcast if you really miss him. He doesn't say what he'll be doing next, but I'm sure it will revolve around mooching off of his gainfully employed wife.
His reason for leaving is...Brett Kavanaugh. But, as he says, Kavanaugh is merely a symptom of a much darker and move evil disease. This evil power is none other than...the Federalist Society. Apparently they're ruining America because...conservative something.
I've shared my thoughts regarding Elie before. He used to be my favorite writer at Glawker (after Juggalo Law, natch). I very seldom agreed with him, but I thought that his posts were usually well written and helped me see things from a perspective that was completely foreign to me. Most importantly, I thought that he as (mostly) intellectually honest. All of that changed when Trump was elected. I really do think that Elie suffered some sort of mental break that led to him thinking that there was this massive conspiracy among the GOP elites to take away everyone's rights. His posts got more and more painful to read because they are so divorced from reality.
Aside from the sadness that I feel for the fact that he's really losing his grip on reality, there is also something scary in his writing. I noticed over the last year that his attitude toward people who disagree with him politically has gotten very hard line. He seems to be at a point where he doesn't view Trump supporters (the vast majority of whom do not conform to his racist caricatures) as being fully human. He doesn't believe that there is anything left to be gained from talking with the other side. Throughout history, dehumanizing the opposition has been a precursor to civil war, genocide and other terrible acts. We always need to take care to remember that the people who disagree with us politically are humans (and Americans) first and foremost.
So, two questions for the Commentariat.
1. What's Elie's beef with the Federalist Society? I vaguely remember them from college that their members were pretty conservative and seemed to be anti-social (even from the perspective of an IP lawyer).
2. What's your prediction for Elie's next move? My guess is that he'll join some sort of leftist militant group after his wife kicks him out. The militant group will eventually kick him out after he eats all their food.
https://abovethelaw.com/2020/01/departure-memo-elie-mystal/?rf=1
Apparently Elie is stepping back from his duties at Glawker. But don't worry, he'll still be doing his stupid podcast if you really miss him. He doesn't say what he'll be doing next, but I'm sure it will revolve around mooching off of his gainfully employed wife.
His reason for leaving is...Brett Kavanaugh. But, as he says, Kavanaugh is merely a symptom of a much darker and move evil disease. This evil power is none other than...the Federalist Society. Apparently they're ruining America because...conservative something.
I've shared my thoughts regarding Elie before. He used to be my favorite writer at Glawker (after Juggalo Law, natch). I very seldom agreed with him, but I thought that his posts were usually well written and helped me see things from a perspective that was completely foreign to me. Most importantly, I thought that he as (mostly) intellectually honest. All of that changed when Trump was elected. I really do think that Elie suffered some sort of mental break that led to him thinking that there was this massive conspiracy among the GOP elites to take away everyone's rights. His posts got more and more painful to read because they are so divorced from reality.
Aside from the sadness that I feel for the fact that he's really losing his grip on reality, there is also something scary in his writing. I noticed over the last year that his attitude toward people who disagree with him politically has gotten very hard line. He seems to be at a point where he doesn't view Trump supporters (the vast majority of whom do not conform to his racist caricatures) as being fully human. He doesn't believe that there is anything left to be gained from talking with the other side. Throughout history, dehumanizing the opposition has been a precursor to civil war, genocide and other terrible acts. We always need to take care to remember that the people who disagree with us politically are humans (and Americans) first and foremost.
So, two questions for the Commentariat.
1. What's Elie's beef with the Federalist Society? I vaguely remember them from college that their members were pretty conservative and seemed to be anti-social (even from the perspective of an IP lawyer).
2. What's your prediction for Elie's next move? My guess is that he'll join some sort of leftist militant group after his wife kicks him out. The militant group will eventually kick him out after he eats all their food.
Pointless Achievements/Milestones
Today I filled my stapler with the last set of staples from the box of 5000 staples that I was given in my office when I started at my current job. I've never come close before to using a whole box of staples, and always thought it was a waste when I would start at a new job and they would give me that box full of staples. But here I am, finishing up that not-so-unending box of staples. Hooray?
Share your pointless achievements/milestones so we can all feel better about ourselves. And Happy New Year!
Share your pointless achievements/milestones so we can all feel better about ourselves. And Happy New Year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)