Professions

How Dangerous Lies Become Accepted Truth: D.C. Theater Embraces The False Emmett Till-Trayvon Martin Comparison

/ Jack Marshall / 91 Comments
If we want it to be true, then it will be true...

If we want it to be true, then it will be true…

I awoke to find this in my Washington Post Style Section this morning, in the column devoted to notable events in D.C. theater. My personal Facebook page is fairly well linked to the Washington , D.C. theater community, so I decided to register my disgust there. I’m continuing it here, and in the interest of economy, will simply repeat what I just posted on Facebook.

I will just add this: I foolishly assumed that the irresponsible, and either ignorant or malign attempts to equate the killings of Emmett Till and Trayvon Martin were isolated examples of race-baiting excesses, and would be widely rejected and debunked by more responsible figures and authorities. Not only did this not happen, but that indefensible comparison, and the damaging falsehoods it is intended to plant, like a deadly virus,  in our national fabric, is beginning to take hold as truth.

Anyone, regardless of race and political or ideological belief should be able see how intolerable this is. Everyone has an obligation to do what they can to stop it.

Here is my Facebook post. Continue reading →

Ethics Dunce: ARod-Plunking Red Sox Pitcher Ryan Dempster

/ Jack Marshall / 28 Comments

I’ll admit it: I came thiiiiis close to designating Red Sox pitcher Ryan Dempster an Ethics Hero. Right after he intentionally threw a fastball  into Alex Rodriguez’s ribs on what would have been ball four, I was ready to write the post. Good for Dempster, I thought, making a statement for all the players who deplore steroids and the cheats who use them and for all the fans who feel that sociopathic, lying, greedy players who have debased the greatest game on earth with their use of PEDs. I continued to think that even after the Red Sox lost last night’s game against the Yankees, in no small part because Dempster put the Yankee third baseman, who continues to play while he appeals Major League Baseball’s suspension of him for this season and next, on base.

I was not, however, thinking clearly or ethically at the time.

Now, I am. Continue reading →

Eliot Spitzer And The Pathology Of Leadership

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments
Some members of the Enormous Ego Club...

Some distinguished members of the Enormous Ego Club…

The New York Daily News today issued a scathing rejection of Eliot Spitzer’s candidacy for New York Controller, and endorsed his rival. This, from an ethical point of view, is a no-brainer, but it was the manner in which the rejection came about that was noteworthy, and the lessons we can glean from Spitzer’s character that are worth pondering.

The Daily News editors were obviously incensed that Spitzer obfuscated, spun and, in their view, lied when they quizzed him on the shady circumstances that caused him to resign in disgrace as Governor of New York.  Spitzer was alternately indignant—How dare you interview me about my criminal use use of a prostitution ring  when I was Governor, when that was long ago and I’m offering my services to the people of New York?—and evasive, as described in this passage of the endorsement piece: Continue reading →

Comment of the Day: Ethics Dunce: Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas)

/ Jack Marshall / 17 Comments

clownsReader Rip Claassen, a true Renaissance Man and good friend (Full Disclosure: Rip has costumed several of my shows, and is a director for The American Century Theater, where I serve as Artistic Director), also something of a historian on comedy and performance art, contributes this to the discussion of  what the media is now calling “Clowngate,” contributes this, the Clown Code of Ethics.

Here is his useful Comment of the Day for all you clowns, on the post, Ethics Dunce: Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas):

“As a clown and a Republican, I am offended. The art of clowning should make people laugh and think. To entertain is the object, but a clown must follow a strict code of ethics, and that this performer missed.

“This is one of several Clown Codes of Ethics, one that I particularly approve of… Continue reading →

Yes, The Best Criminal Defense Lawyers Represent The Worst People. Or You.

/ Jack Marshall / 20 Comments
When your life is at stake and you need help, don't screw around.

When your life is at stake and you need help, don’t screw around.

The degree to which the average American, even the average educated American, even the average educated and rational American, is ignorant about the ethical mandates and structure of the legal profession and the justice system is by turns shocking, depressing, and frightening. The consequences of this ignorance, for which the legal profession itself is largely to blame, bursts forth in all their ugly splendor after the acquittal of a Casey Anthony or, even more disturbingly, a George Zimmerman. Well meaning members of the public, who are nicely represented in this Ethics Alarms thread, think they are declaring their support for justice when they advocate cutting through all the troublesome bureaucracy and making sure what “everyone knows” is the correct result happens, and process be damned. Just do the right thing! How hard can that be?  This blogger, for example, has it all figured out. Leave it to him and people of a like mind, and we’ll have a police state in no time. Continue reading →

Exemplary Ethical Conduct I’m Embarrassed I Didn’t Know About Dept.: Jonas Salk and Albert Sabin

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments
Salk and Sabin

Salk and Sabin, true professionals. Did you know?

You learn the damnedest things in the damnedest places, which is a good reason to keep your ears open wherever you may be.

Last night I found myself listening to Michael Savage, easily the most offensive of all conservative talk show hosts, and he gives Rush and Mark Levine a run for their money in the ego category, too. I only listen to Savage by accident, and then only in bites of five minutes or less; it frightens me that millions of people might be influenced by such consistently hateful commentary.

But Savage (whose real name is Michael Alan Weiner) is no dummy, and not infrequently goes off on learned tangents about philosophy, history or religion in between declaring that the nation is under Nazi rule. Yesterday, just as I was reaching for the dial, he disclosed that one of his heroes growing up was Jonas Salk, not because he invented the first effective polio vaccine, but because he refused to patent it, and gave it to the world for the benefit of humanity. A bit later, Savage noted that Albert Sabin, Salk’s bitter rival who later invented the oral vaccine, also declined to profit from his invention.

Could all this be true, I wondered?  If it is true, why did I not know about it? Why doesn’t everybody know about it? Continue reading →

Now THAT’S An Untrustworthy Legal Secretary!

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

 

"Hey! That's Barbara! See you at wok, Monday, Barbara!"

“Hey! That’s Barbara! See you at work, Monday, Barbara!”

The Connecticut Law Tribune reports that Barbara Kalpin, a former legal secretary at the Waterbury law firm of Grady & Riley,  has been charged with stealing more than $1 million while forging dozens of checks and documents.

She was, the story says, “a longtime and trusted employee at the firm.” It seems the firm’s trust was misplaced.  Investigators have discovered that she spent about $500,000 over the last few years at an off-track betting venue in New Haven for horse and dog racing. According to police, she wrote 93 checks from a client fund that she managed, among other things using the money to pay credit card bills and to finance multiple mortgages on her home. Kalpin is facing two counts of first-degree larceny and 112 counts of second-degree forgery, and is awaiting arraignment next week.

Connecticut’s bar, like every that of every other state, imposes a strict obligation on attorneys to supervise non-lawyers who are placed in positions of assisting in legal work and the handling of client matters: Continue reading →

The Ethics of Cheering Alex Rodriguez

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments
Poor Alex Rodriguez and his wife...

Poor, downtrodden, Alex Rodriguez and his wife…

Baseball’s most embarrassing super-star, the steroid cheat Alex Rodriguez, in playing for the New York Yankees while appealing his long suspension by Major League baseball. As he is unquestionably a repeat liar and a serial violator of the game’s rules against PED’s (performance enhancing drugs), as he signed a contract, in part generated by the results of his cheating, that will both enrich him by millions and handicap his team competitively while conferring few, if any benefits, as he would qualify, by most objective standards, as the antithesis of a sports hero, the fact that Arod, as he is called, still was cheered by a vocal minority in Yankee Stadium when he made his season debut this week is intriguing. What does this mean? Can it be ethical to cheer Rodriquez now?

These are deceptively complex and difficult questions. The threshold  issue is whether cheering or jeering any sports figure, or any public figure at all, is an act with ethical content rather than just a communication of an opinion. Is it conduct, or just “words”? I think, in the context of the Rodriquez situation, a sound argument can be made that it is conduct. Registering group approval or disapproval of prominent conduct by someone of status and influence is a crucial societal function in setting standards, registering disapproval, and prompting shame, regret, apology and reform—none of which, so far at least, seem to register with Arod.

That is pretty clearly what the boos convey, but what about the cheers? If the boos are ethical—they are if the disapproval is proportionate, rational, fair, and just—then are the cheers automatically unethical? Not necessarily. Here are some of the things those cheers could be expressing: Continue reading →

Ethics Quote of the Week: Charles Geyh and Stephen Gillers

/ Jack Marshall / 3 Comments

“Codes of ethics for judges fortify the administration of justice. They tell judges their ethical responsibilities and articulate high standards of conduct to which they should aspire. They assure litigants that a judge before whom they appear is committed to fairness and impartiality. They require judges to conduct their personal and professional lives in a manner that fosters respect for the courts.”

—–Law professors  Charles Geyh and Stephen Gillers, arguing in Politico for the U.S. Supreme Court to adopt a Code of Ethics.

SCOTUS

“Codes of ethics? We don’ need no stinkin’ codes of ethics!”

The U.S. Supreme Court, it might surprise you to know, is the only court in the U.S. without a formal Code of Ethics that its judges are required to follow. The idea appears to be that if one has risen to the tippity-top of the judicial tree, one’s ethics must be impeccable as matter of course.

Right.

On Politico, Charles Geyh and Stephen Gillers make a convincing argument that SCOTUS should not only hold itself to high ethical standards, but also make it clear to all what those standards are.

You can read the entire post here.

________________________

Pointer: Legal Ethics Forum

 

Badonkadonkeys

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments
A face for radio, in D.C., anyway...

A face for radio, in D.C., anyway…

One would think—wouldn’t  one?— that I could listen to a baseball game on my car radio without being jolted intro an Ethics Alarms column, but nooooooo…

Here I am, sort-of listening to the Orioles game while running to the grocery store, and suddenly I hear two morning jocks have this exchange:

“So there, in line for the roller coaster, is this woman eating a funnel cake, and she has this comically huuuuge badonkadonk butt! It is the biggest butt I have ever seen! I couldn’t take my eyes off it!”

“How was she going to fit into the roller coaster seat with that badonkadonk?”

Well, I don’t think she could! And I came this close to saying, “Ma’am, would you please stand over here so I can take a photo of your comically gigantic badonkadonk butt as you eat your funnel cake?”

(hysterical laughter) Continue reading →