People, people.
Could we please restrain ourselves instead of aiding and abetting the attempts to get the thread locked?
23 Likes
That was a big Hardy har har har at the time. Imagine saying that with straight face.
2 Likes
Well, actually what Inigo says is true. Maybe the DH and son-in-law judge should also review this 80 page article in the Marquette Law Review (there are many articles on this subject but I picked this one). And Knights Mom, didnāt you state somewhere that your former job was a Filing Clerk for eviction court in Georgia? You stamp the forms in, maybe supply forms to people who want to file an eviction and show them how to fill in the blanks? Although an interesting job, youāre hardly going to experience a 3 month criminal trial or a 2 month civil trial and all the intricacies of 2, 3, 4 years of discovery and trial preparation, and some of the outrageous allegations that get thrown around.
Iāll just quote this small piece and anyone interested can go and read the 80 pages of the ethics of false defense and yes, lawyers lying in court. There are many cited references supporting the article and you could read further in those if interested.
Blockquote ā¦[i]t is only when the judge and jury know the truth that society
wins. Each time the lawyer uses talents and skills to pollute the
courtroom with a lie, either explicit or implicit, the lawyer has
intentionally diminished the chances that individual justice will
be done. Thus society loses.34
As detailed above, much of the discussion relating to the ethics of
arguing a false defense by discrediting the truthful witness does not
focus on the trial advocacy techniques used to accomplish this task but
instead addresses broader policy or philosophically oriented objectives.
Indeed, thousands of pages have been written with regard to these types
of arguments and the positions of Professors Subin and Mitchell have
been prominently featured in the leading legal ethics casebooks.35
However, despite the policy-oriented focus of these discussions, other
legal commenters have rightly noted that, in the context of discrediting
the truthful witness, criminal defense attorneys ādo routinely use an
arsenal of tricks to subvert the truthā36 and that, for this reason, a
significant problem in attorney ethics relates more directly to the
various techniques that defense lawyers consistently use to conceal and
distort the truth.37
When addressing the actual techniques of truth subversion, not only
have most scholars simply glossed over their application to existing
ethics rules38 but, to the extent they have addressed them at all, there
appears to be little consistency in their conclusions.39 Professor Subin is
of the view that ā[t]o the extent that these techniques of legal truthsubversion have been addressed at all, most authorities have approved
them.ā40 However, Professor Subinās conclusion is drawn in a cursory
manner, and he spends very little time engaged in any type of in-depth
analysis of actual trial techniques or ethics guidelines.41 Importantly, as
this Article thoroughly details below,42 Professor Subinās contention is
simply not accurate. Further, Professor Mitchell, in glossing over the
trial techniques used to argue a false defense, appears to acknowledge
the existence of some ethical limitations on how false defenses are
presented.43 In this sense, he suggests, without any discussion of existing
ethical rules, that it is permissible to argue a false defense so long as the
jury is not told a falsehood (āI will not assert that facts known by me to
be true are false or those known to be false are true.ā).44 Other
commenters have even less thoroughly addressed how current ethics
rules limit the means by which truthful witnesses may be discredited by
suggesting that, while it is ethically permissible to argue false inferences
from true facts to test the prosecutionās case, it is only āmore
controversialā to make an explicit representation to the jury that
defense counsel knows is false.45ā¦
Blockquote ā¦45. Myers & Ohlbaum, supra note 2, at 1059ā65. In addition to the above, it also worth noting that other scholars have addressed the issue of discrediting the truthful witness but in a manner that is less focused on the specific types of cross-examination and closing arguments that are used to argue a false defense. In exploring the ethical limitations of a false-defense theory from the perspective of current ethical guidelines, Professor Suni focuses on the ethics of blaming innocent third parties for the commission of a crime. Suni, supra note 9.
However, Professor Suniās analysis of the actual closing argument presented to the jury does
not indicate exactly how the false theory of defense was communicated. Id. Professor Steven
J. Johansen has explored the ethical limits of the false defense from the perspective of applied
legal storytelling in his essay Was Colonel Sanders a Terrorist?: An Essay on the Ethical
Limits of Applied Legal Storytelling, 7 J. ASSāN LEGAL WRITING DIRECTORS 63 (2010).
Professor Johansen argues that legal storytelling poses ethical challenges to lawyers in that
stories may be persuasive that are not always true. Id. at 64. However, Professor Johansen
does not explore the exact techniques that criminal defense attorneys use to advance false
defenses and notes that āstories lawyers tell must reveal their clientsā good faith beliefs.ā Id.
at 65. In this regard, this Article explores the ethical limits of how criminal defense attorneys
advance false defenses that are expressly premised on the absence of a good faith belief.
https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5276&context=mulr
3 Likes
Just a quick correction: No, that was not even close to KMās former position. Not even the correct state. As a lawyer, I assure that she saw it all, the whole process, all the intricacies, even more than most lawyers see. I happen to be familiar with the test for her position and it is widely considered equivalent in many ways to sitting the bar exam in the level of detail and knowledge required. In fact, itās more detailed as the bar has many sections, several of which wonāt apply to most practices. One must show a great breadth of knowledge as well as more or less depth, depending up the section, in the bar exam. The test for her position is insanely detailed about the law, procedures, etc. These folks can cite for you chapter and verse in the most extraordinary way. Thatās why, if youāre a decent lawyer, you befriend them and you respect them completely b/c they can and will save your butt if youāre a decent person!
This is why actual legal professionals would never belittle anyone in her position (not that you necessarily meant to here, but others certainly have). Itās bonkers what those folks have to to and keep track of and follow through with and generally keep the whole system afloat while we swan in with various filings. Thatās why when I see any mocking or belittling I have to chuckle because it is the strongest indication that the poster has very little actual knowledge or experience with the legal system and processes.
31 Likes
Gee thatās an awful lot of typing to still be so very, very wrong. Have I hit a nerve?
But hi ho daddy-o no, not even close. Thatās no where near what Iāve said.
At all.
BTW your link is just an opinion and does not substantiate what was posted by Inigo Montoya about attorneys being punished at all. It is not law.
Also, for the record, my over 30 + years experience is working in Family, Civil and Criminal Courts where Iāve issued warrants, worked court rooms, written orders and decisions, processed motions all where papers had to be evaluated for legal sufficiency and proper application of law. But thanks for playing.
30 Likes
I thought we are the fan club? 
5 Likes
Another indication is the posting of paper, which by the way is academic and not binding in law as it is. Google can be your friend in researching and finding papers of this kind.
My observation when people talk about law is there is a huge difference between those that cite the word of the law vs. the practice of law. Key indicator in telling the difference.
In my experience, armchair lawyers tend to cite what is in laws and acts, often verbatim and often without contextual languageā¦or out of context. Real lawyers interpret the meaning of what is in and not in the law, apply it procedurally and according to specific principles. In a nutshellā¦there are many other significant aspects to being a scholar of the law than just the ability to quote law or cases. Practicing law is an art that also combines the knowledge of the law with language, logic, creativity, oratory skills and extreme attention to detail.
Not a lawyer. Donāt play one on TVā¦but a professional in administrative law.
19 Likes
That is not my understanding of what happened although they certainly inquired as to whether LK might be interested in purchasing the property.
1 Like
All excellent points. All the good folks in positions like yours and KMās are literally what keep the legal system going. Lawyers and judges are super important, donāt get me wrong. But without the myriad non-lawyer legal professionals, the whole system collapses. There are many parts of the whole system that we lawyers only have a nodding acquaintance with. Thatās b/c professionals like KM and Dee-Vee have different, but equally important, expertise on which we rely wholly. Anyone who belittles or mocks non-lawyer/judge legal professionals just shows their ignorance. If you know, you know.
Thanks, KM and DV for keeping it all running and making us look good. Hats off!
20 Likes
Amen!
4 Likes
Yesterday several of us, me in particular, were accused of hating others. To be clear, I donāt hate anyone. I despise destructive, deliberately hateful behavior and will shine a light on that behavior every time I see it. If we, as a nation, have learned anything over the past 6 years itās we must stop ignoring bad behavior and call it out at every turn. Perhaps today will see more civil posts discussing a fairly inconsequential situation in the scheme of things. If not, so be it. I wonāt participate or respond to the baiting.
15 Likes
Do you even read the things
you post?
1 Like
I proof read, but frequently miss typing errors.
6 Likes
Nope. I just type random letters and hope it fits!!
Teehee!!
11 Likes
What a self serving post.
Iāve stated I like LK and I like MB. As you know Iāve only returned to the forum recently. and itās because of the outrageous lies you spread about LK that go outside your personal experience. Whatever you are doing it has nothing to do with shining a light on anyoneās deceptive, destructive behavior. You have strong personal feelings about LK and use the forum to advance your vendetta.
Iām sure you get information from the MB side. In my position I get information from both sides.
Therefore, it is I who will continue to shine a light on your destructive behavior.
All parties may have had reason to be upset about certain thingsā¦ā¦but only one party resorted to gun violence .
Your obvious mission here is to constantly excoriate LK in order to find some rationale for gun violence.
News flashā¦ā¦there is no excuse for gun violence.
2 Likes
I agree, there is no excuse for gun violence.
There is also no excuse for trying to ruin the lives of people who are not doing things your way.
28 Likes
QFP, because, well, because.
Just another bizarre twist!
8 Likes
Tky. I should also mention the art, craft and skill of ānuance.ā The gifted legal professionals genuinely possess it.
8 Likes
Self defense while under active attack qualifies. As for legal defense of such each jurisdiction is unique as to written law and applied law.
As for this particular case - may justice prevail.
15 Likes
Didnāt ask you. But cute.
1 Like
