|
Petey posted:- Julian Dibbell, YLS '13 Julian is responsible for me passing.
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 19:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 14:37 |
|
|
Thanks for all the replies. I knew that URM was a big factor, but I guess I didn't realize how big. Yay for being a beaner I guess!
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 19:57
|
|
|
newberstein posted:Thanks for all the replies. I knew that URM was a big factor, but I guess I didn't realize how big. Yay for being a beaner I guess! That's what I've always said. Esp. in AZ where you can get some of that sweet, sweet class action money that will come rolling in.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 20:01
|
|
|
Petey posted:- Julian Dibbell, YLS '13 From my first introduction to the internet---playing "gently caress You, rear end in a top hat" in Ahrnold's voice in Trekkie chatrooms on AOL---the web has been a place of ruthlessly loving with people and being full of poo poo. So when I had to read that dumbass thing in undergrad in some composition class, and the teacher was talking seriously about a girl crying because her wizard queen was cyberraped by a clown on a text-only game, you can imagine how seriously I took it.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 21:02
|
|
|
I argued that the Mr. Bungle rape as written could potentially give rise to an IIED claim.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 21:55
|
|
|
Bar Prep. Day Two Christ, Property still sucks. Though I was surprised by the pervasiveness of bad or inept professors who only teach *their* niche area of a discipline. Although my Contracts professor was apparently much more badass than I gave him credit for at the time. Bring a jacket into Bar Prep, hell just pack anything you think you might need from ear-plugs to caffeine pills to dirty looks to shoot at the assholes who talk or get up before you're finished on the practice MBE questions. Kumo fucked around with this message at 22:11 on May 19, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 22:08
|
|
|
Public Defender chat: Court furlough day, so I'm home and indulging in something horrible. COPS. This is like watching a horror film, yelling at the screen: "NO DON'T CONSENT TO THAT SEARCH!" Seriously, when the cop says "You are free to leave," why don't people leave?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 22:46
|
|
|
Ainsley, what law school did you go to? Did I miss this somewhere along the line, or is it a closely guarded secret?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 22:49
|
|
|
Caligula Caesar posted:Ainsley, what law school did you go to? Did I miss this somewhere along the line, or is it a closely guarded secret? Northeastern, I think. I could have told you that was a bad choice, my uncle almost got kicked out of northeastern years ago for taking pills. They were malaria pills because e'd just moved there from Pakistan. 
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 22:50
|
|
|
nm posted:Public Defender chat: Surprise. Fear. And knowledge disparity. And an unwitting trust of the police. And an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 23:02
|
|
|
nm posted:Northeastern, I think. Yup. I know a guy who got kicked out for bringing a gun to school. At least I think that was the story, I wasn't there but I heard about it from a guy who knows a guy
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 23:02
|
|
|
billion dollar bitch posted:And an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope. They show cavity searches on COPS?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 23:11
|
|
|
nm posted:Public Defender chat: Other points of similarity between criminal law and horror movies: The fate of the sassy black character.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 23:31
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:Other points of similarity between criminal law and horror movies: Seriously, you have cocaine sitting in a bag in the cupholder, the cop has told you you are free to go and then asks, "you don't mind if I search your vehicle do you?" What part of you makes you say, "no, I don't mind." Though if everyone refused the search, I might not have anything to do but 14601s (driving after suspension)
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2010 23:40
|
|
|
nm posted:The black guy has better odds in the horror movie. Unless you're completely trained about the applicable law or a complete sociopath, most people will default to their lifelong conditioning to obey authority. Cops can take a huge advantage of that. Especially if you're in an ethnic minority or if you're from a really downtrodden and marginalized area, you're taught early on that simple questions from cops are often not really simple questions. There's often a fear there that causes you to say "how high." Plus, like other people brought up, stress and nervousness often dulls a suspect's ability to think calmly and rationally.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 00:25
|
|
|
I had a guy for my clinic that was caught whacking off in a car, allowed the cop to search his car finding his crackpipe, and then as he was getting arrested the cop asked him if it was OK to search his house and the guy said "sure actually I've got some weed there."
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 00:27
|
|
|
TyChan posted:Unless you're completely trained about the applicable law or a complete sociopath, most people will default to their lifelong conditioning to obey authority. Cops can take a huge advantage of that. Especially if you're in an ethnic minority or if you're from a really downtrodden and marginalized area, you're taught early on that simple questions from cops are often not really simple questions. There's often a fear there that causes you to say "how high." Anything illegal in your car? No weapons? Then you don't mind if I search your car? But it still amazes me. Also maddening is when people confess. People think they're hosed and can't lose anything by confessing well before that point. I had a guy who was accused breaking into a common area shared by 4 tenants. The police only interviewed 1 tenant who said he didn't have their permission. We had reasonable doubt until the jackass confessed to sneaking in. Fun fact though: ICE does not Mirandize anyone. If you have a client who was questioned about a crime (besides simple immigration violations) while in ICE custody, statement is out. Got a false document charge tossed based on that. nm fucked around with this message at 00:35 on May 20, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 00:32
|
|
|
nm posted:Public Defender chat: dude cops is the best sitcom on TV, you're watching it all wrong
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 00:46
|
|
|
[GBS debate] If a cop asks to search my car, and I have nothing illegal inside, should I consent?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 00:48
|
|
|
also all of that poo poo about not talking, refusing consent etc. is good in theory, but say "officer I respectfully choose to exercise my rights, and I refuse to consent to a search" to a cop who wants to arrest you and you will be going to jail regardless. he'll call the K-9 unit. he'll trump up something to arrest you on and do an inventory search. don't matter one bit. say "go ahead," and maybe he won't find that joint wedged between the seat and the console.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 00:51
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:also all of that poo poo about not talking, refusing consent etc. is good in theory, but say "officer I respectfully choose to exercise my rights, and I refuse to consent to a search" to a cop who wants to arrest you and you will be going to jail regardless. he'll call the K-9 unit. he'll trump up something to arrest you on and do an inventory search. don't matter one bit. Not everyone lives in New Orleans.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 00:54
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:also all of that poo poo about not talking, refusing consent etc. is good in theory, but say "officer I respectfully choose to exercise my rights, and I refuse to consent to a search" to a cop who wants to arrest you and you will be going to jail regardless. he'll call the K-9 unit. he'll trump up something to arrest you on and do an inventory search. don't matter one bit. This has never come up for me but I always thought it sounded more believable if you were just all pissy about it and said something like "gently caress no you're not tearing up my car and getting my poo poo everywhere."
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 01:00
|
|
|
J Miracle posted:This has never come up for me but I always thought it sounded more believable if you were just all pissy about it and said something like "gently caress no you're not tearing up my car and getting my poo poo everywhere." Or just say you're in a rush to get somewhere, something like, "Sorry officer, but I really have to get to X. Unless there's something you're worried about, can I please go?" Though I don't think this works for minorities.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 01:05
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:also all of that poo poo about not talking, refusing consent etc. is good in theory, but say "officer I respectfully choose to exercise my rights, and I refuse to consent to a search" to a cop who wants to arrest you and you will be going to jail regardless. he'll call the K-9 unit. he'll trump up something to arrest you on and do an inventory search. don't matter one bit. So your advice to your clients is to consent to the search?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 01:07
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:dude cops is the best sitcom on TV, you're watching it all wrong
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 01:15
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:also all of that poo poo about not talking, refusing consent etc. is good in theory, but say "officer I respectfully choose to exercise my rights, and I refuse to consent to a search" to a cop who wants to arrest you and you will be going to jail regardless. he'll call the K-9 unit. he'll trump up something to arrest you on and do an inventory search. don't matter one bit. How much legal theory as opposed to factual discovery/argument do you do in criminal work? Criminal work is starting to look appealing because it turns out that in legal malpractice, no one knows what in the gently caress, mainly because there's three different kinds of causation that have to be accounted for G-Mawwwwwww fucked around with this message at 01:25 on May 20, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 01:19
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:So your advice to your clients is to consent to the search? my advice to clients is not to drive around with drugs in their car
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 01:21
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:my advice to clients is not to drive around with drugs in their car Move to strike, unresponsive.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 01:42
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:Move to strike, unresponsive. Sustained. Counsel?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 01:55
|
|
|
the question is argumentative and assumes facts not in evidence. however, in the interest of judicial economy and not waiving my objection, my answer is as follows: no.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 02:43
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:my advice to clients is not to drive around with drugs in their car Well how am I supposed to get them to the school so I can sell crack to 8 year olds?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 03:44
|
|
|
nm posted:Well how am I supposed to get them to the school so I can sell crack to 8 year olds? Juvenile couriers, of course.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 03:53
|
|
|
wrong thread, I suck! IGNORE ME
Murmur Twin fucked around with this message at 04:15 on May 20, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 04:13
|
|
|
How the gently caress is a K9 search not a search anyway? Which justice is the genius that thought up that rule? e: Not, "it's a reasonable search" but "it isn't a search to begin with." Really.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 04:21
|
|
|
It's not my fault the dog can smell you from here.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 04:49
|
|
|
Julian is actually a really nice guy and told me at a conference once that ARIC was unbelievably misinterpreted. He intended it to be a basic journalism / pop anthropology piece about the new and different things that were happening in cyberspace (mainly community spaces arising from what were dead DARPA data lines), but every journalist just saw RAPE RAPE RAPE INTERNET RAPE and focused on that, and the debate became whether or not internet rape was serious business, when in reality it was never about that in the first place. I sort of feel bad for him, because he (and his work) have been caricatured in this way somewhat baselessly. But only so bad, because he did make a career out of it. Phil Moscowitz posted:From my first introduction to the internet---playing "gently caress You, rear end in a top hat" in Ahrnold's voice in Trekkie chatrooms on AOL---the web has been a place of ruthlessly loving with people and being full of poo poo. My introduction to Julian and Second Life was an old prof at UMass talking really seriously and eloquently about both "A Rape in Cyberspace" and Second Life. I resolved then and there that I would destroy Second Life because it was something he loved. I went on to SA, found the SL people here, and that's how the Second Life Safari began. Of course, that prof ended up hating it himself, and becoming my thesis adviser, but that's just proof that even old profs can be made to understand that there is inherent value in loving with people on the Internet. SWATJester posted:I argued that the Mr. Bungle rape as written could potentially give rise to an IIED claim. Probably - although the same would go for 99% of stuff on the Internet, and if you explained to most goons that there was such a thing as IIED they would not understand. It's amazing what the Internet does to the sort of common decency that keeps you from loving with people in public.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 05:07
|
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:How the gently caress is a K9 search not a search anyway? Which justice is the genius that thought up that rule? Note that they cannot detain you only to wait for the dog to get there. Courts have even tossed cases where it has taken what was obviously way to long to write a ticket (1 hr for a minor traffic infraction)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 05:10
|
|
|
nm posted:Because they don't go in your car. So? It's like how Posner wrote in an Op/Ed that warrantless wiretapping / government coded worms / etc by definition cannot violate privacy because a computer / robot / script cannot violate privacy.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 05:14
|
|
|
Petey posted:Julian is actually a really nice guy and told me at a conference once that ARIC was unbelievably misinterpreted. He intended it to be a basic journalism / pop anthropology piece about the new and different things that were happening in cyberspace (mainly community spaces arising from what were dead DARPA data lines), but every journalist just saw RAPE RAPE RAPE INTERNET RAPE and focused on that, and the debate became whether or not internet rape was serious business, when in reality it was never about that in the first place. You'd appreciate the sheer level of crap in my paper. I cited HellMOO. My prof advisor asked me to run the Anshe Chung incident through an IIED analysis. It's awful, which is a shame because I feel like it could have come from a decent start.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 05:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 14:37 |
|
|
Petey posted:So? David Brin's theory is that privacy is obsolete; technology makes snooping so easy that we may as well give up, admit there's no privacy anymore as a concept, and put restraints on what people can do with the information instead. The man has a point. It's only a couple of more technological cycles until someone comes up with a surveillance cam that sees through walls, around corners and tags your Social Security number at the top of your face for 29.95 a month.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2010 05:51
|
|