TiffanyvTwitter: An Open Letter To Tiff

Okay, so back in February I wrote about Tiffany Dehen, a USD Law graduate who filed a rambling, incoherent, and largely incomprehensible complaint as a result of someone creating a fake Twitter profile of her that implied her conservative political views meant she was a Nazi. Since that time, I decided it was best to leave well-enough alone, as Tiffany had proven herself to be sort of the litigious type and I wasn’t exactly interested in being dragged into the undertow on the sea of crazy that appeared to be brewing, and the fact that talking about Tiffany seemed a little too much like kicking a handicapped puppy. She was clearly out of her depth in this matter, suing both Twitter and her law school for $100,000,000 for the ostensible damage to her reputation.

This was, in my opinion, exactly the sort of lawsuit that the courts sort out on their own, without any interference from me or any other the other internet lawyer blogs who wrote about it.

Continue reading “TiffanyvTwitter: An Open Letter To Tiff”

Pets and the Law, Part 2: “No Visitation for Furbabies”

So last week we talked about how pets aren’t fucking people, but rather that they’re property.  The gist of that is nobody can really claim that Fido is a living, breathing person with all of the legal rights inherent to it, even if his bark does sort of sound like he’s saying “Mama” and you’re just certain that he has the same intelligence as your Uncle Bob. Depending on your Uncle Bob you may be right, every family has that guy, but it doesn’t change the fact that Fido gets no special consideration under the law.

Last week, though, we focused on the question of treating a pet as property in the financial aspect of the law. What happens when you and your partner split up, and all you really have are “furbabies.” By the way, can I digress for a moment to discuss the term “furbabies?” I get it if you’re like 60, alone, and have four dozen cats and nothing else, but could motherfuckers in their twenties stop using the goddamn term? It makes you sound a little unstable.

Anyhow, back to the topic at hand: how do you handle the pets in a family law situation?

Continue reading “Pets and the Law, Part 2: “No Visitation for Furbabies””

Joe Pesci Having Sweaty Sex: A Review of Larry Kelter’s “Back to Brooklyn”

So, I love My Cousin Vinny. I don’t think there’s a lawyer in existence that doesn’t love it. Yeah, yeah, as we saw in the last Film Friday there are some errors in how shit goes down and the presentation of trying a case out of state, but still and all it’s a great fucking movie that captures the realistic and procedural absurdity of a real courtroom and trial perfectly. That’s why when Larry Kelter let me know that he had written a motherfucking sequel to the trial exploits of Vincent Gambini, the foul-mouthed attorney who set an Alabama murder trial on its heads and questioned the physics of a man’s stove on the record, I leaped at the chance to grab an advance copy and review it.

Then I promptly sat on my ass and repeated promised Larry the review would be “coming soon,” because I’m a piece of shit.

But I finally got through with Back to Brooklyn, which you can find through that link on Amazon, and let me say this:

Fuck you, Larry Kelter, for making me form the mental picture of Joe Pesci and Marisa Tomei going at it.

Continue reading “Joe Pesci Having Sweaty Sex: A Review of Larry Kelter’s “Back to Brooklyn””

No post today, Check back tomorrow

Hey…

 

So, No post today.

The post will be up tomorrow at 8:30 a.m.  I had something that came up overnight that prevented me from polishing and posting like I normally do. It’s finished, just…I want to make SURE it’s finished before I get it up tomorrow.

This is a temporary disruption, and dammit, I’m sorry for it.

 

Friday is Freaky Friday, where I’ll discuss the intersection of law…AND THE SUPERNATURAL! Or the just plain weird. Or strange shit. I’m not sure how much of a dive I can do on those sorts of issues, but we’ll see how it turns out.

Once again, sorry for the lack of post today. Personal shit came up. I’ll be back at it tomorrow and Friday.

Let’s Talk About Last Friday

Alright.

Let’s talk about last Friday.

I’m not slipping into character for this one. I’m not going to start cursing, I’m not going to emphasize a bunch of stuff. I’m not going to try to be funny, or abrasive, or anything like that. I’m just going to talk to you guys for a moment.

As you know, last Friday, for Furry Friday, I took some stories from furries and, with their permission, used them to illustrate some points. The points were basically intended to be broken down as follows:

  1. Furry can affect your court proceedings, so you need to be aware of that;
  2. Although you’re a welcoming fandom, Furries who are above the age of consent should avoid circumstances that lend the appearance of impropriety in dealing with minors;
  3. You shouldn’t be forming Twitter lynch mobs; and
  4. Rape should be reported to the police.

3 and 4 were touchy subjects. Very touchy subjects, and I got a lot of mixed responses to them. They ranged from “Thank you for this” to “How dare you tell us not to self-police” and all the way up to “The police won’t do anything.”

I’m not going to touch the rape topic today. I’m not touching it because I’m already working on something to help explain how the justice system deals with this stuff, and to hopefully help explain why it may seem like the justice system doesn’t care. I put out a call among lawyers, and am arranging some time to interview a sex crimes prosecutor in relation to the largest concerns I’m hearing and the biggest protests to the statement made. I’d prefer to let the person who actually handles rape cases speak on that, and accordingly I’m not going to talk about it until then.

The lynch mobs thing, though, I will touch on.

The largest protests and loudest dissents were regarding the perceived position against the Furry community policing itself and allowing “bad actors” to go free and unpunished. It’s likely a response to how I phrased things in the article. I can see how people may have taken that as “lay off rapists.” It wasn’t. It wasn’t even really about rape. It was about jumping to conclusions of judgment and acting on them publicly, and encouraging others to do so.

I don’t think that’s right, and the reason I don’t think that’s right is simple: innocent people will get tarred by that brush.

In law, we have something called “Blackstone’s Ratio.” It goes like this:

Better ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer.

Continue reading “Let’s Talk About Last Friday”