Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts

Friday, July 31, 2020

Ellen's Brand is Dead


Ellen DeGeneres is not going to get away with being mean to people anymore:
Actors Brad Garrett and Lea Thompson have joined the chorus of critics taking aim at Ellen DeGeneres and her show. Dozens of ex-staffers have come forward with allegations that the show was a hostile workplace—and now celebrities are chiming in. Garrett, best known for his role as brother Robert Barone on Everybody Loves Raymond, tweeted out a Variety story about the scandal with the comment: “Sorry but it comes from the top ⁦@TheEllenShow. Know more than one who were treated horribly by her.⁩ Common knowledge.” Then Thompson, of Back to the Future and Caroline in the City, replied to a People magazine tweet about Garrett’s jab. “True story. It is,” she wrote. DeGeneres has apologized for the atmosphere behind the scenes of her show.
What used to keep people in line was fear, and celebrities are now being released from the possibility of being blacklisted from Ellen's show. This is a huge development because maintaining the viability of promoting various projects is the lifeblood of being an actor in Hollywood. If you can't appear on the crap shows that publicize As that fear subsides, you'll see a rush of stories from people who saw, firsthand, the abject cruelty of the environment around Ellen's long running "feel good" talk show.

It sounds like it was a shitshow of epic proportions. If these stories are true, then the toxic environment that surrounded Ellen is going to be one for the ages. We're talking law suits, career-ending legal settlements, and a cancellation that will send shockwaves through the industry. If anyone else is running their show like this, then they're next. Once you take out someone as big as Ellen, everyone else can be taken down as well.

The idea that DeGeneres is going to "salvage" something here is laughable. She could make a comeback. That's hard to do when you're sued by dozens of people who were horribly mistreated.

Monday, July 27, 2020

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard


Hollywood is probably going to make three or four movies out of this debacle:
A lawyer for British tabloid The Sun said Monday that Johnny Depp abused Amber Heard during their relationship, committing acts of violence fueled by misogyny and unleashed by addiction to alcohol and drugs.
Attorney Sasha Wass was summing up at Depp’s libel case against the newspaper over an article alleging he physically abused ex-wife Heard — a high-stakes celebrity trial in which the reputations of both former spouses are at stake.
Depp is suing News Group Newspapers, publisher of The Sun, and the newspaper’s executive editor, Dan Wootton, at the High Court in London over an April 2018 article, which called him a “wife-beater.” He strongly denies being violent to Heard.
The case is due to end Tuesday, but judge Andrew Nicol is not expected to deliver his ruling for several weeks.
In closing arguments, Wass said the newspaper’s defense “is one of truth -- namely that Mr. Depp did indeed beat his wife.” Wass said there was “overwhelming evidence of domestic violence or wife-beating behavior, cataloged over a three-year period.”
This is one of those tragedies where you just don't want to spend any time dealing with any of the people involved. It's off putting, to say the least.

How does Depp still have a career after this? Well, he's been very successful in making Heard look bad. And how does she keep working? Well, she's managed to elevate her profile and has shared extensive evidence of abuse. Depending on who you're biased in favor of, she's either a demon or a saint.

I will I hadn't heard of either of them.

Wednesday, June 17, 2020

Danny Masterson



Daniel Masterson was charged on Wednesday by the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office with raping three women.

The alleged separate incidents occurred between 2001 and 2003, according to authorities.

The That '70s Show star was charged with three counts of rape by force or fear. The case was filed for warrant Tuesday, according to the district attorney's office. Masterson was arrested Wednesday at 11:30 a.m., according to jail records. His bond was set at $3.3 million. He bonded out at 2:44 p.m., according to jail records.

Masterson is accused of raping a 23-year-old woman between January and December 2001. The actor is alleged to have raped a 28-year-old woman in April 2003. And, sometime between October and December of 2003, according to authorities, the actor is accused of raping a 23-year-old woman who he had invited to his Hollywood Hills home.

The district attorney's office noted it declined to file sexual assault charges against Masterson in two other investigations, one due to insufficient evidence and the other based on the statute of limitations for the crime alleged.

In a statement to The Hollywood Reporter, Masterson's lawyer said his client was innocent.

“We’re confident that he will be exonerated when all the evidence finally comes to light and witnesses have the opportunity to testify," Tom Mesereau said. “Obviously, Mr. Masterson and his wife are in complete shock considering that these nearly 20-year old allegations are suddenly resulting in charges being filed, but they and their family are comforted knowing that ultimately the truth will come out. The people who know Mr. Masterson know his character and know the allegations to be false.”

Los Angeles police began investigating Masterson over sexual-assault claims in 2017.

There shouldn't even be a statute of limitations for rape, let alone a delay of this many years in getting to the truth. Masterson could have raped countless women in the time it took to get us from 2001 to today.

There was a lawsuit filed in 2019 and Masterson was accused of raping incapacitated or drugged women as well as repeatedly raping and abusing a former girlfriend. What stands out in this particular incident is that Masterson has been accused of being helped in his defense by the Church of Scientology.

Saturday, March 7, 2020

The Duke of York


There was a time when Prince Andrew might have been a decent human being but those days are long gone:
The Duke of York has hired Britain’s most respected extradition lawyer to fend off an FBI inquiry into his friendship with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, the Telegraph can reveal.
Prince Andrew is receiving legal advice from Clare Montgomery QC, the leading expert on extradition law, whose clients have included Augusto Pinochet, Chile’s former dictator and Nirav Modi, wanted for India’s biggest fraud. She has been described as “the most formidable member of the bar.”
Ms Montgomery is being briefed by Gary Bloxsome, a criminal defence solicitor who has defended British troops against war crime allegations and is understood to have been appointed directly by the Duke.
Of course, he could just admit what he did and receive his punishment but it would seem that's never going to happen. The public relations disaster that is Randy Andy's life right now couldn't come at a worse time for the Royal Family (except for all the other times). You have to wonder what is being done in order to firewall the Duke of York from his own relatives.

It's difficult to imagine how a person who defended Pinochet could still be practicing law, but there it is. This is an epic disaster.

Monday, February 24, 2020

The Horror of This Man's Actions


I hope Harvey Weinstein is held accountable for every single heinous thing he ever did.
Harvey Weinstein was found guilty of rape and a felony sex crime Monday, marking a climactic end to a high-profile case that in some ways serves as vindication of the #MeToo movement.
Those two counts were connected to individual allegations made by Mimi Haley, a former Weinstein Co. production assistant, and Jessica Mann, a once-aspiring actress. Weinstein was acquitted on the two most serious charges of predatory sexual assault, which each carried a potential life sentence.

Weinstein, 69, appeared to be staring ahead while a half-dozen court officers surrounded him just after the verdict was delivered. The movie producer struggled to get up from his seat as he was handcuffed and escorted out of the courtroom.

Judge James Burke ordered Weinstein to be held in custody until his sentencing March 11.
It is a good thing that he is not free to live at home and continue out and about in public. As recently as October he was heckled at a comedy club. Now that he has had his due process, he should not be allowed in polite society ever again.

Thursday, January 23, 2020

Annabella Sciorra Testifies


This is devastating testimony, no doubt it:
Actress Annabella Sciorra testified in court Thursday that Harvey Weinstein raped her more than 25 years ago during emotional, face-to-face testimony from one of the women who has accused the movie mogul of sexual assault. 
"The Sopranos" actress said Weinstein raped and sexually assaulted her at her Manhattan apartment in the winter of 1993-1994. She first publicly spoke about the attack in an October 2017 New Yorker story as part of a wave of accusations against him. 
During her testimony, she called Weinstein "the defendant," and rarely used his name. At one point, though, she was presented with a photo of herself that she said was taken for a play she was working on at the time of the rape. "Yes, (the photo) reminds me very much of being raped by Harvey Weinstein," she said. 
Sciorra's voice quivered at times during her testimony, and she became particularly emotional recounting the period after the alleged rape. Sciorra said she would cut her fingers and hands and smear the blood onto a wall she was painting "blood red." She said wherever she smeared the blood she would mark it with gold leaf. When the prosecution asked why, she let out a sob and said she didn't know. 
Her testimony came a day after prosecutors and defense attorneys gave their opening statements in Weinstein's trial. Prosecutors said the Hollywood movie tycoon raped and sexually assaulted young women and actresses, including Sciorra, over the course of decades.
Harvey Weinstein shouldn't even be free on bail, if the safety of the general public means anything anymore. It's difficult to overstate how abusive and violent he is alleged to have been with regards to these women. 

Monday, November 4, 2019

Harvey Weinstein is a Scumbag




I still don’t understand why Harvey Weinstein isn’t in jail right now. He is a clear and present threat to public safety. How can a man credibly accused of assaulting more than 80 women still be walking around like some pathetic loser, desperate for sympathy?

Since initial bombshell reports by The New York Times and The New Yorker in October 2017, more than 80 women have accused Weinstein of sexual abuse ranging from harassment to rape. He is charged with predatory sexual assault, a criminal sexual act, first-degree rape and third-degree rape. Weinstein's impending criminal trial, which is set to begin January 6, has depleted him, members of the former film executive's small inner circle told CNN. The 67-year-old is physically weaker from recent back surgeries, but they don't describe an otherwise changed man.

CNN has learned from those closest to Weinstein that he isn't sorry about his alleged misconduct. He's combative, maintains he is innocent of any crime and is planning for a career comeback post-trial. His attorneys have maintained that any sexual contact between Weinstein and his accusers was consensual.

Two of Weinstein's remaining friends spoke to CNN on the condition of anonymity in order to protect their privacy due to the high-profile nature of his case. Weinstein's criminal defense attorneys, Donna Rotunno and Damon Cheronis, also gave interviews.

"Anyone who looks at him or talks to him knows this has taken an emotional and physical toll. Is his health failing? Not in a life or death situation, but I think he's just breaking down," one of his friends told CNN.

Of course, the women who have suffered for years are easily forgotten. I think that the writer of this story should burn their sources. Who is running interference for Weinstein? Who is working the press in order to buy him some freedom? What a disgrace.

Fuck this guy.

Thursday, May 9, 2019

Lori Loughlin




America’s beloved TV sweetheart is not going to go down without a fight:

 Actress Lori Loughlin has lost acting gigs and been the subject of public wrath after being charged in the college admissions scandal.

But beyond the court of public opinion, how strong is the legal case against Loughlin and her fashion designer husband?

That is the question her legal team is now trying to answer.

Loughlin and her husband have refused to plead out to federal charges, and it appears they aren’t in any hurry to do so as their legal team hunts for errors in the prosecution’s case.

“Her attorneys have made it clear that they are not going to be rushing into any deal with the prosecution,” said Louis Shapiro, an experienced federal litigator. “They want to perform a thorough analysis of the evidence and then help their client make an informed decision about what is in her best interest to do.”

The couple feel they were genuinely duped by William “Rick” Singer, the admitted mastermind of the scheme, into paying $500,000 to help get their daughters into the University of Southern California, according to a source familiar with the negotiations.

Loughlin and her husband, Mossimo Giannulli, had no sense they were engaging in any kind of crime, hence their not guilty pleas and continued reluctance to plead out, said the source, who spoke to the Los Angeles Times on the condition of anonymity.

The real threat here is not to Loughlin’s acting career but the future of her daughters on social media. All of that has collapsed. What looked to be an extremely lucrative future as an influencer has ended up being a nightmare run through the back alleys of fraud and money laundering. The actions of the parents have tainted the future of their children. Instead of owning up to a mistake, they’re going to weasel their way out of this by exploiting technicalities.

I can guarantee you—the case against Loughlin probably has some holes in it. But what’s missing here is at least a tacit admission that rich kids get into colleges and college admissions officials don’t seem to dig very hard when it comes to figuring out who should or shouldn’t get it.

America is not a meritocracy. America is rapidly becoming a kleptocracy separated by the same kinds of class barriers found in old European nations. We have always known that there were universities like Yale and Harvard that would crank out mediocre human beings that would be gifted with outlandish expectations and achievement goals upon graduation. This has given us our current political situation—a stumbling, incompetent trio of generations that failed to stop Trumpism, fascism, and nationalism.

You can hardly fault a TV actress for trying to set her indifferent kids up for a lifetime of skating by on their rather thin accomplishments. Perhaps Americans would have seen some benefit from experiencing the leveling grace of the guillotine. Who knows?

Tuesday, September 25, 2018

No, No We Don't Answer That




There is no contrition on the part of Bill Cosby. He imagines himself Jesus, and he has a view of himself that believes he is being persecuted so he can maintain the air of superiority that a PhD used to provide:

Bill Cosby was sentenced to several years in prison on Tuesday for sexually assaulting a woman over a decade ago. 

Judge Steven O’Neill gave Cosby, 81, a sentence of between three and 10 years in prison for attacking Andrea Constand in 2004. Constand is one of more than 60 women who have accused the previously beloved comedian of preying on them over the past five decades.

The real tragedy is that this didn’t happen fifty years ago when it really would have taken a bite out of the quality of his life and prevented many more victims from having to experience what it was like to be drugged and raped.

It all started four years ago:






Camille Cosby smiles, uncomfortably shifting in her chair. Staring off camera, switching positions, silent. In the latest contribution to the Bill Cosby saga, we see husband and wife side by side as he addresses the very act of questioning about his numerous rape allegations in an AP interview (above). Mrs. Cosby continues to smile and looks away from the reporter several times, both she and her husband presuming that the cameras have stopped rolling. I will not read into her silence. I will not pull meaning about this woman and her thoughts and decisions other than to say that in the watching, the silence is palpable, wince-inducing and profoundly painful.

That exchange highlights the most meaningful currency in this 30+ year long drama that is just now seeing its climax unfold on the public stage: silence. At every turn, it is the silence that serves as a proxy for power in the story of Bill Cosby, his alleged sexual deviance and the current downward spiral of public opinion. Silence here, as in most cases, represents the power wielded and power taken by those who are seen as, well, powerful.

Everything went to hell after that interview. More women came forward. You could feel the momentum shift. Cosby and his legal team have done everything in their power to destroy every victim, delay the judgement of the courts, and keep him out of prison.

So long, motherfucker.


Monday, April 23, 2018

Sex Tape Lawyer




It is because I am a naive boy who was raised on the Minnesota prairie that I did not know that one could aspire to the job of "sex tape lawyer."

I knew there were lawyers, of course, and I knew that if you went to college and then law school, you could practice law anywhere in the country. Anywhere in the world, maybe, although being a lawyer amongst people who don't care about the law is a worthless endeavor.

Did you grow up wanting to be a sex tape lawyer? Was there a void in your life? A need for titillation? I don't want to judge, but becoming a lawyer who specializes in the litigation of who owns what when it comes to a sex tape is like throwing away good talent and hard work. What did you do to get to the top of that industry? Where did you advertise? Who did you have to con in order to make it big?

Come on, spill it.  You have to have people with specific legal needs, the money to transact between each other, and a surfeit of sex tapes that will allow you to be the litigator you always wanted to be, a lawyer who handles the legal ramifications of sex tapes.

Pretty good gig, I suppose. You could make millions. That's all that matters today.

Now, go away.

Who are these horrible shits? These terrible people with no morals and a mastery of the ins and outs of the laws surrounding people who film themselves having sex with others who don't necessarily know (wink, wink) they are being filmed for prurient reasons?

Who injected these foul, misbegotten garbage can people into our politics and our discourse? We are not supposed to have to explain to ourselves how this goes on. I'm not some moral prude. I don't care if Bill Clinton got a blowjob. I would expect that he would have been a bit more careful about it, but okay. 

But this? These people around Trump?

Why, they're the equivalent of a massive ball of fat, lard and shit coagulated in the pipes below London Town. They're holding back the flow of the rest of the sewage we don't want to live in, the flow that takes it to the treatment plant and cleans it up as it should be sanitized and handled. 

Your taxes pay for that service. But the people around Trump are wasting our time, frittering away our money, and letting their personal immorality get in the way of solving real problems. God, just fuck these people for being so unpalatable and rancid in the way that they do things. What a waste, seeing these sex tape lawyers go at it like starving hyenas.

Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Quietly Ending the Death Penalty in America




In case you weren't aware of it, the death penalty is going away. Well, a better way to say it might be fading away:

Arizona prison officials told a federal court Friday they could no longer perform executions due to problems obtaining lethal-injection drugs, effectively ending capital punishment in the state for the foreseeable future.

The Arizona Department of Corrections said it amended its execution protocols to omit midazolam and that the state lacked supplies of either sodium thiopental or pentobarbital, according to a filing in a federal district court in Phoenix, Arizona. All three drugs are sedatives used to render inmates unconscious during a lethal injection.

The department’s “lack of the drugs and its current inability to obtain these drugs means that the Department is presently incapable of carrying out an execution,” the filing said. The state’s current supply of midazolam is also scheduled to expire before a lawsuit by five death-row inmates challenging the state’s use of the drug will be completed. 

One of the things that has always brought international condemnation and shame to the United States has been the uneven and unfair application of the death penalty. Many countries do not even have a death penalty. America is really more into revenge and applying the Biblical punishment of "an eye for an eye." This has become impossible in a day and age when companies become aware of the fact that the drugs they are manufacturing are perfect for putting people to death. 

Anyway, it's long overdue for the United States to join the civilized world in 2016. There will always be some asshole who calls for hanging, the guillotine, or the firing squad. Ignore them.












Thursday, February 25, 2016

Firing Dr. Melissa Click




There's a joke in here about tenure, but I'm not gonna make it:

University of Missouri's Board of Curators voted Thursday to fire assistant professor Melissa Click, who drew controversy after a video circulated of her calling for "some muscle" during protests at the university. “The board respects Dr. Click’s right to express her views and does not base this decision on her support for students engaged in protest or their views,” Chairwoman Pam Henrickson said in a statement. “However, Dr. Click was not entitled to interfere with the rights of others, to confront members of law enforcement or to encourage potential physical intimidation against a student.”


Basically, they took a pass on trying to educate someone as to how to conduct themselves in the "safe zone" of teacher-student-media interaction. I'm thinking that this was more about legal liabilities and future lawsuits, but it could have been more about the school just not wanting to have this kind of a public face.



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

The Balls on These People




Dead men can vote, apparently:

Hans von Spakovsky, a Heritage Foundation fellow, last week argued that the Supreme Court should count the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's votes in cases in which the justices have already cast preliminary votes.


During an interview with American Family Radio’s Sandy Rios, von Spakovsky noted that after hearing oral arguments, the justices meet and cast votes in the case before writing the decision.


"So that’s the point at which they know how a case is going to be decided and the chief justice then makes assignments of who will write the majority opinion etc.," von Spakovsky said, according to audio posted by Right Wing Watch. "I think the chief justice has an absolute obligation to give credit to Scalia’s vote in those cases that have already been decided, even if he didn’t write his opinion yet, because they know how he would have voted."


I'm sorry, but that's not how this works. That's not how any of this works. And we now have a very interesting precedent--dead men can now vote. The established rules and precedents of the Supreme Court no longer apply. This is, indeed, a world turned upside down, but it does not have to be. If we would just follow the Constitution, the president could nominate a new justice and we'd be good to go.

Funny how the only people stretching reality and changing things and making shit up are the ones who are trying to replace the Constitutional originalist.

The one truth in all of this is the fact that, when a Supreme Court Justice dies, the party in power gets to name the replacement. That's why justices retire. That's why elections have consequences. And that's why, on President Obama's watch, the Republicans have lost again. They can't stand it. They're doing backflips and flipflops and engaging in flights of fancy in order to justify the fact that they just lost control of the Supreme Court.


Basically, though, a guy who made his living complaining about voter fraud wants the Supreme Court of the United States to let a dead man vote. You couldn't make this up if you tried.


(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

Erin Andrews Deserves Every Penny




I have to admit, I'm shocked that this wasn't settled out of court years ago in favor of Erin Andrews:

Erin Andrews' $75 million stalking lawsuit goes to court
Court proceedings are getting underway in a $75 million lawsuit filed by sports reporter Erin Andrews against a peeping Tom who recorded her naked, as well as the hotel she blames for allowing it to happen. NBC's Janet Shamlian reports from Nashville.

It was a Marriott Hotel, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why they didn't make this go away when they had the chance. What benefit is there for the Marriott chain to be dragged through the mud like this? Whoever was working at the front desk on the day in question opened up the entire company to a massive lawsuit that was going to be filed and pursued through the courts no matter what.

Here's the gist of what happened--Erin Andrews checks into the hotel. A man calls up and uses basic social engineering to get the front desk to assign him the room next to her without notifying Andrews or her employer at the time, ESPN. He checks in to the room next to her and uses that proximity to film her through the peep hole. This same asshole puts the video on the Internet, gets caught, and spends time in jail.

As in, he was criminally convicted of invading her privacy.

The company in question now faces this lawsuit. And they're fighting it? Really?

Give Andrews every penny. Every single penny. What a disgrace--to make the business decision to fight her in court and thereby hope to save some money by gaming the jury system. Their strategy has to be to get the award knocked down some how by trying to prove that this did not hurt her career. Well, to hell with the career--it violated her privacy and safety. Isn't that enough? Apparently not.


(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

Maryland Restores the Franchise to Felons




I wholeheartedly support this. Restoring voting rights to felons should be a national issue. Taking away the voting rights of convicted felons appears where in the Constitution? Hmm?


//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js



(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Wednesday, January 6, 2016

Sovereign Citizens




This is actually part of the strategy of the sovereign citizen movement--take everything that the Federal government has in terms of handouts and put nothing back into the "coffers" of the government.

The Bundy family represents the most successful sovereign citizen outfit in America. They should be prosecuted as a syndicate or a crime family because this is part of a systemic effort to avoid taxation and the paying of fees in order to profit from Federally owned resources. To the Bundy's the fact that the Federal government gave them a "loan" is just part of the scam. They spent that money and laughed about it. They will not pay it back, of course. That's for suckers.

You're the sucker because you weren't smart enough to get a loan that you won't pay back for your "kin" or family.

Hypocrites? No, they're not hypocrites. They hate the government and they're not shy about taking money from it in order to "cripple" it because they don't have any shame. They'll take every penny they can get and whatever else. They don't care about fraud and they don't recognize the courts or official looking papers in the mail. They thumb their nose at it because they've already abandoned any pretense of living like regular citizens.

The worst thing a local cop or deputy sheriff will ever run into is not necessarily an armed criminal. It is a sovereign citizen who is armed has no intention of complying with lawful orders. Yes, they're one and the same thing, but anyone who self-identifies themselves as "sovereign" triggers a lot more alarms than a common criminal.

Tuesday, August 11, 2015

Remember When it Was Tracy Morgan's Fault?




Yeah, it was totally Tracy Morgan's fault that the driver who plowed into his vehicle was awake for 28 hours because Wal-Mart demands absolute fealty to maximum profits over all other considerations. I'm surprised that their lawyers didn't wring a few million out of Morgan in the process of suing him for almost dying when their driver crashed into him.

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

Prurient Purposes Thwarted




How far does freedom really go?

The man with shoulder-length red hair stood by the sidewalk just north of Island Park Pool. In the muggy heat, he wore gray slacks and a silky, blue, long-sleeve shirt.

From his perch along First Avenue South, the man, who appeared to be in his 20s or 30s, could peer down on swimmers by the pool’s diving boards. He would look around, act like he was smoking and then snap a photo using a camera with a zoom lens.

Jed Felix said he witnessed all this on Monday afternoon. After watching the man surreptitiously take photos for a while, Felix confronted him and asked what he was doing. “He said he was just taking pictures and that he was an artist,” said Felix, 26, of Fargo. “He said it’s completely legal.”

Now, imagine the impending freakout--they're violating his rights.

Well, yes, but no. They've made this an issue of trespassing, which means he went somewhere that he wasn't welcome and he did something specific that violates the use of public property for personal or prurient reasons. This is not the sort of thing that would stand up in every court, but it does make sense when considering the safety of the public.

This is because the man in question, regardless of what he's wearing, is using technology (a camera) to violate the privacy of others. Should they get a search warrant and see what's on the camera? Would a judge sign off on that? Who knows? Your right to be a weirdo is guaranteed up and until the moment when you start taking telephoto lens photos of kids and women (which should be good enough to ban paparazzi, but oh well).

The  kicker in this whole article will appear briefly before your eyes:

One of the comments was from a woman who said she saw the same man taking photos of women in bikinis on Friday in Island Park.

“We watched as he set his camera on his lap and aim it at women in the park and then moments later look through the shots he just took,” she said in a post on her own Facebook site, which included a photo of the alleged photographer, a man with long red hair who looked like the man Felix encountered.

Felix said the man he approached would not tell him his name or show him the photos he’d taken.

“He was very calm during the entire thing like he knew that he was in the right,” Felix said. “He said that until it’s illegal, he’s going to keep doing it.”

Why didn't the man want to show a perfect stranger, a common citizen, what was on his camera? Because he doesn't have to. That's a matter for the courts. Short of that, using trespass laws to keep him out of public places is about the only recourse left to the community, which has rights as well. He's made up his mind to be an asshole. That's his right! Nobody else has to put up with that, though.

Don't be an asshole. You're ruining freedom for everyone else.

Wednesday, June 3, 2015

A Lesson in Ethics by Ruth Marcus




I'm not making any of this up--Ruth Marcus questions whether we should have gone after FIFA and Denny Hastert:

For different reasons, I find both indictments unsettling — not necessarily wrong, but worth thinking through whether they ought to have been brought.

Holy Mother of God:

Instead, Hastert was tripped up by bank reporting requirements intended to catch drug kingpins and organized crime bosses. His alleged crime is that he structured his hush money withdrawals to avoid triggering reporting rules and then — seemingly on a single occasion — lied to FBI agents about why he was making the withdrawals. Lying is bad. Lying to FBI agents is even worse.

But, really, wouldn’t that have been your first instinct, too? I’d feel differently if Hastert had stuck with the lie, in a second interview after he’d had time to think it over, or before a grand jury. (And, yes, I’m thinking about President Clinton’s impeachment here.)

Hastert did, it seems, a terrible thing. He is, or was, paying for it — literally. He shelled out $1.7 million “to compensate for and conceal his prior misconduct,” the indictment says. He is at once alleged perpetrator and victim of a shake-down scheme; his alleged victim is both prey and blackmailer.

Yes, the first place anyone reasonable or serious would go in trying to excuse Denny Hastert's hush money payout to a victim of underage sex abuse is to the Clinton impeachment because, hell, they're the same damned thing, aren't they?

Good God.

Just so we're clear--we shouldn't prosecute FIFA (hundreds and hundreds of men have died building stadiums for FIFA World Cup host countries, who used bribes to secure the games) or Denny Hastert (sexually abusing someone is far, far worse than paying to keep it quiet).

Speechless.

Thursday, April 2, 2015

Nice Try, Asshole


Note the title of Kevin Williamson's attempt to defend the bigotry laws of Indiana. And, also note that he gets everything wrong right away:

There are three problems with rewarding those who use accusations of bigotry as a political cudgel. First, those who seek to protect religious liberties are not bigots, and going along with false accusations that they are makes one a party to a lie. Second, it is an excellent way to lose political contests, since there is almost nothing — up to and including requiring algebra classes — that the Left will not denounce as bigotry. Third, and related, it encourages those who cynically deploy accusations of bigotry for their own political ends.

So, the left uses bigotry, correct? Well, why do Republicans use national security in exactly the same manner to bludgeon their opponents into submission?

No one declared war on the private mind or the private beliefs of the people of Indiana. War was declared on the very public and commercial use of denying basic services to people based on their sexual orientation. This became an issue because Indiana law attempted to deny basic services to people based on sexual orientation in exactly the same manner as was done to people of color forty years ago (which the National Review defended as a matter of course in the 1960s).

No one is telling people what to think. They are being politely reminded that discrimination is anti-American and against the American way of life.

Can someone tell me what the fuck is he on about with regards to algebra? I am afraid the poor man is shivering in his own cloak of ignorance, afraid of his own shadow, and desperately hoping old William F. Buckley will show up and denounce that queer Gore Vidal.

You see, it's against the law to discriminate against people. Case closed, motherfuckers. Case closed.