Ethics Quote Of The Week: Criminal Defense Attorney Scott Greenfield

“A perpetual concern, particularly in criminal defense, is that the next generation of lawyers will lack the skills needed to do their job, to zealously represent their clients. They struggle to tolerate the language we encounter in the ordinary course of our work. They are blinded by hatred of their prosecutorial adversaries, the law enforcement witnesses, the judge who denies their pleas for “justice.” Can they mount effective arguments against their clients if they can’t tolerate hearing arguments with which they disagree?”

—Criminal defense lawyer Scott Greenfield, on his blog “Simple Justice,” reacting to the law students at UC Hastings shouting down Georgetown Law professor Illya Shapiro, who was supposed to be engaging in a civil debate with a Hastings professor.

Ethics Alarms discussed the Hastings incident here [#4]; I should have probably made a solo post of it, because as Greenfield correctly points out, it has wider implications. Later he writes,

The reaction to these students was split, with many woke law students and baby lawyers applauding their action while more experienced lawyers were appalled at what they viewed as a failure of a law school, of law students, to demonstrate the minimal capacity to engage in the manner that will be expected of them as lawyers. If tactics like this are what law students deem acceptable, will they ever be capable of being lawyers?

Continue reading

Comment Of The Day: The Alamo, March 3, 1836

Michael West’s dedicated account of the last days of the Alamo in 1836 continues with Day 10 of the siege, March 3. Michael’s mention below of the Alamo couriers reminds me of what I found to be the most moving of the commemorative bronze plaques at Alamo National Monument in San Antonio. It lists the couriers, and reminds us that every one of them headed back to the make-shift fort, knowing what was probably in store for them.

As far as I can determine, two of Travis’s final couriers didn’t arrive in time to participate in the final battle, and thus lived to tell the tale. James L. Allen (1815-1901) was probably the last courier to be sent by Travis, as he carried a final appeal to Fannin at Goliad. He reached Goliad on March 8, and was preparing to return to the Alamo when he learned that it had fallen. John William Smith  (1792-1845), who had been sent out from the Alamo by Travis previously, was sent again on March 3 1836. Smith was returning with 25 volunteers from when the Alamo fell. In John Wayne’s movie, Smith is played by Frankie Avalon, and is a composite of Allen, who was young (21) like Frankie, and the real Smith, who actually made it back only to find that the battle was over. Frankie’s big scene occurs when, having delivered a message relaying the fort’s dire situation to Sam Houston (Richard Boone), Houston offers him food and rest. “No sir!” “Smitty” says, turning his horse. “I gotta get back to the Alamo!”

Here’s Michael’s Comment of the Day on Day 10 of the Alamo story...

Continue reading

The Supreme Court Reinstated The Death Sentence Of Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Good.

Good, and also legal, ethical, just, fair and necessary.

Justice Thomas wrote the majority opinion in United States v. Tsarnaev. It is, like most Thomas opinions, long, careful, thorough, and persuasive. The dissent by Justice Breyer, in contrast, is uncharacteristically weak, and the other two “liberal” justices did themselves no favors by joining it. Essentially, it is an example of exactly the judicial legislating that conservatives rightly complain about. Breyer grasps at a dubious legal straw to do indirectly what he cannot do directly: ban capital punishment, which is both legal and constitutional. His whole argument in his own nutshell:

During the sentencing phase of his murder trial, Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev argued that he should not receive the death penalty primarily on the ground that his older brother Tamerlan took the leading role and induced Dzhokhar’s participation in the bombings. Dzhokhar argued that Tamerlan was a highly violent man, that Tamerlan radicalized him, and that Dzhokhar participated in the bombings because of Tamerlan’s violent influ-ence and leadership. In support of this argument, Dzho-khar sought to introduce evidence that Tamerlan previously committed three brutal, ideologically inspired murders in Waltham, Massachusetts. The District Court prohibited Dzhokhar from introducing this evidence. The Court of Appeals held that the District Court abused its discretion by doing so….
This Court now reverses the Court of Appeals. In my view, the Court of Appeals acted lawfully in holding that the District Court should have allowed Dzhokhar to introduce this evidence.

Continue reading

Ethics Mega-Dunce: Fox News Host Tucker Carlson

What an obnoxious, irresponsible, idiot. Worst of all, he’s made me agree with the hacks at “Above the Law”…

Here’s what Carlson said in his “opening statement” (pompous enough for you?) on his popular Fox News show two nights ago:

So is Ketanji Brown Jackson, a name that even Joe Biden has trouble pronouncing, one of the top legal minds in the entire country? We certainly hope so, it’s Biden’s right, appointing her is his one of his gravest constitutional duties. So it might be time for Joe Biden to let us know what Ketanji Brown Jackson’s LSAT score was. Wonder how she did on the LSATs, why won’t he tell us that? It would seem like Americans in a democracy have a right to know that and much more before giving her a lifetime appointment, but we didn’t hear that.” 

Continue reading

Still More Ukraine Invasion Ethics Points…Now With “The Trump Connection”!

1. How many times do I have to say that Twitter makes you stupid? Here’s a U.S. Senator publicly calling for the assassination of a foreign leader:

It is fine to think this or even to say it in private, as long as you are not Donald Trump and you know whoever you talk to will immediately leak it to the media. However, Executive Order 11905signed on February 18, 1976, by President Gerald Ford, banned political assassination.This EO was reinforced by Jimmy Carter’s Executive Order 12036 in 1978. It is still the law in the United States. Graham is a lawyer, and he knows that as a lawyer, it is an ethics breach to cause a third party to do what the lawyer cannot do himself.

Moreover, if such an act were to take place, Graham’s tweet would be justification for Russia to suspect, or even conclude, that the U.S. government was responsible. A foreign power assassinating or even attempting to assassinate a nation’s leader is an act of war.

2. Where’s Bandy Lee when you need her? It is unethical for a psychiatrist to diagnose anyone with mental illness without examining the patient in person. This is why the American Psychiatric Association’s  Principles of Medical Ethics state that its members should not give a professional opinions about public figures whom they have not examined in person, and from whom they have not obtained consent to discuss their mental health in public statements. Never mind: Bandy Lee of Yale, a Professor of Psychiatry, made a brief career out of breaking the rule regarding President Trump, because hating Trump suspends all ethical obligations and values. MSNBC and CNN flocked to her; eventually, Yale fired her. Now, if it was unethical for a psychiatrist to be diagnosing a political figure as mentally ill from afar, and it is, what is it called when a non-psychiatrist goes on Fox News and claims to be convinces that something has snapped in Vladimir Putin’s head? That what Condoleeza Rice has done twice already. Her opinion on the topic of Putin’s sanity is no more authoritative than that of anyone else who hasn’t spoken to Putin face to face in years. Continue reading

Comment Of The Day: The Alamo, March 2, 1836

Michael West has been counting down the days of the Alamo Siege for us, which is generally regarded as beginning on February 3, 1836, and ending on March 6. That makes March 2, yesterday, the 9th day of the iconic historical event. (As Michael reminded us in an earlier post, 1836 was a Leap Year, so there’s an extra day in there.)

Reflecting on The Alamo is always appropriate, but perhaps more this year than usual. The siege of Ukraine has more than a little in common with the desperate stand of the Texans against another ruthless dictator, and the values at stake are the same. Travis, Bowie, Crockett, Dickinson, Bonham and the rest decided to stay and fight for what they believed in and also for those seeking to establish their independence, though they were outnumbered and surrounded. Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, resembles the Texas patriots in his determination to stay with his nation’s endangered citizens, because he knows his courage, sacrifice, and likely martyrdom, will be crucial in preserving his nation in the long run.

In many ways Zelenskyy resembles Davey Crockett, a celebrity known for his humor who found himself first thrust into politics and later in deadly fight that required him to rise to new heights of character.

My favorite Alamo history is “Three Roads to the Alamo” by William C. Davis, who makes the case that the mission’s story is a microcosm of the American saga. Each of the three major players in the drama, Travis, Jim Bowie and Crockett, embody an archetype of how the nation came to be. Crockett was the restless pioneer who ventured first into unsettled lands. Bowie, apart from being the bona fide frontier fighter that the public believed Crockett to be, was the land speculator, part of a group that brought business, finance, and corruption to the West. Finally, Travis was the law-maker and politician, who promised to build a civilized structure where families could thrive.

Indeed the Alamo and its participants would support a whole course that would teach young Americans about history, politics, war, human nature, ethics, economics, law and more. Teaching its many complexities and lessons would definitely be more enlightening and productive than focusing on slavery as the defining feature of U.S. culture.

Here’s Michael’s Comment of the Day on Day 9 of the Alamo story...

***

Continue reading

Wait, WHAT? Ethics Observations On The Story Beneath This Headline: “Lawsuit: Mayor Lightfoot Berated Ex-City Officials Over Dick Size”

The 21st Century is just not turning out the way I expected at all.

The details of the underlying controversy can be read here, if you dare. What interests me is this part:

The suit was filed by former Chicago Park District deputy general counsel George Smyrniotis against the city and Lightfoot….The lawsuit alleges that when Lightfoot heard of the plan, she said she would cancel the parade’s permit, and she ordered an immediate Zoom call.

On that call, Smyrniotis says that Lightfoot “proceeded to berate and defame” the lawyers and questioned their credentials.

Lightfoot told them “not to do a [fucking] thing with that statue without my approval.”

“Get that [fucking] statue back before noon tomorrow or I am going to have you fired,” Lightfoot also said, according to the suit.

She is also accused of making obscene comments to Smyrniotis and King.

“You make some kind of secret agreement with Italians. … You are out there stroking your dicks over the Columbus statue, I am trying to keep Chicago police officers from being shot and you are trying to get them shot,” Lightfoot allegedly said. “My dick is bigger than yours and the Italians, I have the biggest dick in Chicago.”

Smyrniotis says the comments defamed him by claiming he couldn’t do his job.

Well all righty then! Continue reading

Morning Ethics Warm-up, 3/3/2022: Wow…Bias Really Does Make You Stupid!

Bias makes you stupid, and lets everyone know you are biased and stupid, except those who are also biased and stupid. It also destroys your credibility, and signals that you are untrustworthy. That simple meme above was briefly tweeted out by The Daily Show, which appears on Comedy Central, once a cable option that was devoted to making people of all backgrounds and orientations laugh…you know, like comedians used to try to do. But eventually progressives took over the media and entertainment, and as with the once bi-partisan late night talk shows and Saturday Night Live, decided that the only people who deserved to be made fun of were conservatives, religious Americans, Republicans and, most of all, Donald Trump, and the only people they cared about making laugh were the hard-biased woke, like these shows’ hosts, performers and writers.

Thus when the meme of the dying battery was issued during “Sleepy Joe’s” wreck of a State of the Union speech, fans of the show erupted in anger. “… how very republican rhetoric from you,” protested one user. What the fuck?!?! Who hacked this account?!? This is bullshit!!! @Trevornoah did you approve this?!?” read another  tweet, which referred to the show’s reliably progressive messaging host. 

So the meme was taken down. Bias also makes you a weenie, apparently.

I read about this after being thoroughly disheartened reading an exchange a very, very intelligent and informed college friend had on Facebook about Biden’s SOTU. One development that has been fascinating to observe is that after four years inwhich insulting and complaining about President Trump were my Facebook Friends’ daily pastime (and in which Facts Didn’t Matter, just raw hate and virtue-signaling), since Biden’s election there have been virtually no political posts at all regarding this President, favorable or unfavorable. No jokes, no memes, no observations.Thus this exchange really stood out, as my old friend expressed admiration for the speech and snidely offered that it was a big upgrade from “Drumpf.”

The verdict essentially echoed the mainstream media reviews in places like MSNBC and CNN, but they are paid to issue Democratic propaganda. How can anyone with two brain cells to rub together call that speech anything but dishonest, frightening and infuriating?

What–the hell-–does “go get ‘im” mean? How can anyone believe that the state of the union is “strong”? How can a nation spend its way out of crazy inflation? What sense does it make to lob verbal insults at Putin when you are still funding his invasion by buying his oil and making it clear that no military force will be used to stop him? Who but an idiot would find any of that impressive or reassuring?

Yes, Biden promised that the next time, Putin will really be in trouble. The next time. Sure. “And as I’ve made crystal clear, the United States and our Allies will defend every inch of territory that is NATO territory with the full force of our collective power — every single inch,” the President said. Like Obama defended the “line” he drew in Syria. Like Joe stuck by our commitment in Afghanistan.

And, of course,we saw and heard the usual signs of Biden’s mental decline, like when he tried to ad-lib and said, “We’ve sent 475 Million vaccine doses to 112 countries, more than any other nation. And we won’t stop, because you can’t build a wall high enough to keep out… a vaccine…the vaccine can stop the spread of these diseases.” Joe also called the Ukrainians “Iranians.”

To be fair, he did this kind of thing even before his mind started turning to oatmeal. Still, how much biased-fueled denial does one have to embrace to watch that speech and think, “Wow, that was GREAT!!! I am so confident in the three years lying ahead!” ?

1. Yet another unethical and incompetent Republican House Member…Van Taylor, a Republican U.S. Congressman from Texas,  dropped out of his re-election race after it was revealed that he had been in an extra-marital relationship with a woman whose previous marriage was to an ISIS commander. Taylor has a wife and three daughters. He paid his paramour  $5,000 to keep quiet about the affair.

All you have to do, once you are elected to Congress, is resolve not to get involved in sex scandals, adultery, child porn or sexual harassment for two short years. How hard can that be? If a politician can’t control himself or herself to that minimal extent, then they should be in another line of work.

In his apology, Taylor admitted to a “mistake.” This means that at some point he must have thought having an adulterous affair with a women connected to a terrorist organization while he was serving in Congress was a good idea. He has dead ethics alarms. He shouldn’t be trusted to sell hot pretzels on the street.

2. Where are those Democratic District Attorneys when you need them? While DAs in various Democratic run cities are declining to prosecute shoplifting, drug possession and defecating in public, two Cape Coral, Florida children are facing battery charges because they shot two other kids….with Silly String.

Continue reading

Comment Of The Day: “Ethics Quiz: The All-Black Sports Platform”

This Comment of the Day by Here’s Johnny on “Ethics Quiz: The All-Black Sports Platform” needs no introduction.

Here it is:

***

In my early years (40s, 50s), there was racism aplenty. The small community I lived in, the schools I attended, the activities I was involved in, all were white and as WASPish as they come. My parents didn’t seem to be especially racist, but one comment I do remember was my mother saying that Negroes (the accepted term way back then, although ‘colored people’ was also used) were okay so long as they “stayed in their place.” Their place was the segregated part of the nearby rather large city.

Fortunately for me, my career path took me away from both that mentality and that kind of segregation, via a military that was integrated and a second career in education in a community even more thoroughly integrated. Times changed. I changed. And, now, I am supposed to accept segregation once again? Well, count me out. Continue reading