Fortuitously, this time the emergency room visit is occurring on a Friday, when an open forum would normally occur anyway! What luck! Calloo callay!

Go crazy with ethics analysis and provocation, please. I’ll see ya when I see ya…

Those who like to maintain that the Founders were infallible and the Constitution flawless would do well to remember this date, when the U.S. narrowly averted a disaster entirely made possible by bone-headed drafting of our road-map to a republic. On February 17, 1801, Thomas Jefferson was elected the third president of the United States, the first peaceful transfer of power from one political party in our history, as Jefferson’s fledgling Democratic-Republicans upset the Federalists of Washington, Adams and Hamilton. It was a close call, however, because Jefferson was nearly defeated by hos own Vice-President, the sinister Aaron Burr (That’s him on the left above.)Though Jefferson and Burr ran on the same ticket, the Constitution required state elector votes for both men to be counted separately. As a result, Jefferson and Burr emerged from the process tied at 73 electoral votes apiece, while the sitting President, John Adams, came in third at 65 votes. This sent the final vote to the House of Representatives. Of course, if Burr weren’t a sociopathic cur, he could have solved the botch by simply withdrawing from the Presidential race since nobody voted for him to be President. The Federalist-controlled House of Representatives, meanwhile, was happy to see Jefferson enmeshed in the controversy, and were delighted in the dealock  In the end it was Federalist Alexander Hamilton who saved the day and the nation, as he persuaded the House to vote against Burr, whom he called unfit. (This moment of high principle—Jefferson and Hamilton were far from pals–led to the duel with Burr in 1804 that resulted in Hamilton’s death.)  As for the ridiculously incompetent voting system, it was cleared up by the 12th Amendment, ratified in 1804. The fact that the first version didn’t inflict Aaron Burr on the still-vulnerable United States, however, was pure moral luck.

1. “Best Excuse for Unethical Conduct” of the Month: Bruce Lee, a Chicago ticket broker, was convicted of fraudulently selling tickets to White Sox games and  sentenced to prison this week. The  federal judge rejected his defense that he had actually helped the team, because it wasn’t going fill those seats anyway and the fans who bought his fake tickets spent money on food, drink, and souvenirs. The judge called the argument that nobody was harmed “delusional,” and saying that it was important to make the point to others who might try similar schemes that getting caught would have negative consequences.

The judge must be a Republican, since that line of reasoning appears to be taboo on the other side of the aisle regarding “minor” crimes. Continue reading →

1. There were three interesting developments on the legal front today with ethics implications:

• Royal slime-ball Prince Andrew, already shunned by the Royal Family, agreed today to pay an undisclosed sum to a victim of Jefferey Epstein’s sexcapades who accused the younger brother of Prince Charles of sexually abusing her when she was a minor. David Boies, showing his versatility after representing Harvey Weinstein, is the lawyer for  Prince Andrew’s accuser Virginia Giuffre. The amount of the out-of-court settlement will be not disclosed, Boies revealed.  Giuffre sued the Duke of York in August 2021, claiming that he abused her on multiple occasions in 2001 when she was a 17-year-old victim of the sex trafficking ring Epstein ran for decades. Of course, a settlement doesn’t mean that Andrew is guilty. Then again,

• The New York Times was found by a jury not to have defamed  Sarah Palin when it maliciously accused her of inciting murder with her campaign map. The jury didn’t know it, but the judge in the case, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff, had already announced that he would dismiss Palin’s complaint regardless of what they decided, as a matter of law. “We’ve reached the same bottom line … but it’s on different grounds,” the Judge said upon hearing their verdict. “You decided the facts; I decided the law. As it turns out, they’re both in agreement in this case.”

Too bad, but both the jury and the judge were right. The problem wasn’t malice despite the Times’ absurd claim that no malice was intended, a key element of the standard for finding defamation when the media attacks a public figure. The problem was that the editorial in question was still opinion, even though it stated Palin’s guilt as a fact. Had the same statement been in an alleged news story, it would have been a different matter.

• Insurers for the bankrupt Remington Arms Company and its subsidiaries agreed to pay the Sandy Hook Elementrary School families the maximum amount of damages available to them, $73 million. The settlement deal will also allow them to release thousands of documents that the plaintiffs obtained in discovery. A settlement isn’t precedent, and both sides had good reason to be wary of a trial. The victims in the Sandy Hook massacre raised the possibility of a jury persuaded more by emotion than law. Still, he unbroken record of attempts to find gun manufacturers liable for shootings made going to trial a risk for the anti-gun forces. As is typical, both sides claimed that they were pleased with the deal.

Continue reading →

I was going to make a mean comment about St. Valentine being beheaded on this date in 270, but thought better of it. I associate the holiday with nothing but stress and trauma personally, but my mother took it very seriously. Val was beheaded, the story goes, for secretly performing marriages in Rome after the Emperor Claudius II banned the ceremony to keep citizens from using marriage as an excuse no to serve in his army.

The real ethics event of note, which I meant to note yesterday, was the Allied fire-bombing of Dresden in 1945. The “Florence of the Elbe” was reduced to ash and rubble, while about 25,000 Germans died horribly. Yet the attack accomplished little strategically; the Germans were close to surrender, and Dresden contributed little to the war effort. It was the European theater equivalent of dropping the second atom bomb on Nagasaki. The Dresden fire-bombing has been described a war crime as well as an act of pure vengeance, pay-back for the German bombing of Coventry in England. In that 1940 raid, 568 people were killed and another 863 badly injured, but the city was considered a cultural jewel, like Dresden. I have not researched the decision to bomb Dresden in any detail, but it always seemed strange to me that Eisenhower went to such lengths not to destroy priceless artistic treasures toward the end of the war, yet approved this.

1. Self-promotion Dept. In case there are any New Jersey lawyers reading who would like three hours of ethics credits as painlessly as possible, I’m doing a Zoom legal ethics seminar for the New Jersey bar on the 25th of this month with long-time partner Mike Messer. I write the songs, and he performs them. This is the all-Beatles program I have long wanted to do; each song covers one or more tough legal ethics issues, and they are all among my favorites: “I Saw Her Standing There,” “A Day in the Life,” “Come Together,” “I’ve Just Seen a Face,” “Here, There, and Everywhere,” “Let It Be,” and “Maxwell’s Silver Hammer.”

Continue reading →