July 15 roundup

by Walter Olson on July 15, 2008

  • New York attorney suspended from practice after attempting as guardian to extract $853,000 payday from estate of Alzheimer’s victim [ABA Journal, Emani Taylor]
  • Bought a BB gun to fend off squirrels, now his 20-year-old son faces three years for bare possession [MyCentralJersey.com via Zincavage]
  • U.K.: “Sports clubs face being put out of business following a landmark court ruling forcing them to be liable for deliberate injuries caused by their player to an opponent.” [Telegraph]
  • Prosecutors in Norwich, Ct. still haven’t dropped their case against teacher Julie Amero in malware-popup smut case. Why not? [TalkLeft, earlier]
  • Dealership protection laws, deplored earlier in this space, work to make a GM bankruptcy both likelier and messier [The Deal]
  • Strange new respect for talk show host Joe Scarborough in quarters where conservatives are ordinarily disliked? Some of us saw that coming [NYMag]
  • Following Rhode Island rout of lawsuit against lead-paint makers, Columbus, Ohio drops its similar case [PoL, Akron Beacon Journal editorial]
  • In latest furor over free speech and religious sensitivity in Europe, Dutch authorities have arrested cartoonist “suspected of sketching offensive drawings of Muslims and other minorities” [WSJ; "Gregorius Nekschot"]

{ 1 trackback }

Julie Amero case ends
11.22.08 at 2:54 pm

{ 2 comments }

1 Alan Kellogg 07.15.08 at 1:43 am

Norwich Ct. Case

The prosecutors are afraid of admitting error. They think that if they say they were wrong and correct their mistake, that they will lose any authority. What they’re really doing is eroding what authority they have by showing they cannot be relied on to handle any affair honestly. Reputation counts for a lot in the legal community, and once you’ve earned a reputation for dishonesty people will run riot over you.

2 Deoxy 07.15.08 at 11:10 am

Freedom of speech IS the freedom to offend. “freedom to speak anything which does not offend anyone” is exactly identical to “no freedom of speech at all”, as anyone (such as the government) can just proclaim whatever topic to be “offensive”, and then you can’t say it.

That’s the whole, complete, and entire point of freedom of speech. It has no other purpose.

Comments on this entry are closed.