So the boys went as a theme again. We’ll never beat the year they went as Thing 1 and Thing 2, but this year’s theme went over pretty well. Especially when I took ‘em to the courthouse.

More than one person asked how we decided which boy would be dressed in which outfit. They had about 6 or 7 different Halloween functions, between school and parties and such. We just switched them back and forth.

The second most commonly asked question was whether we were worried that one of the costumes would have any long lasting effect on them as people. Impressionable, malleable young minds, and all that. It may have been asked in jest, but I had already taken the issue seriously myself. 

After much research, both online and live consultations with child psychologists, I determined that dressing the children in these costumes would not alter their lives in a negative way, anymore than having them wear a pumpkin would turn them into a pie when they reached adulthood. What’s all this fuss about? Well, here they are…

 

So, to answer everyone’s question, no I’m not worried. I don’t think our choice of Halloween costumes will turn either one of them into a cop.

 

Hat Tip: Everyone who probably blogged about this a month ago when it was published, sorry I wasn’t paying attention at the time:

Incarceration reduces former inmates’ earnings by 40 percent when compared to demographically similar counterparts who have not been imprisoned, according to a new report from Pew’s Economic Policy Group and the Pew Center on the States.

The report estimates that after being released, former inmates typically work nine fewer weeks a year, and their annual earnings drop to $23,500 from $39,100. Not surprisingly, given the stigmatizing effect that a criminal record can have on a job applicant’s résumé, former inmates enjoy less income mobility than counterparts who did not serve time.

I’m going to go look up that report… more soon, unless, as always, I don’t bother to get around to it.

For those who would like further proof that I don’t always spend my time wisely: I am collecting (cutting and pasting?) email signatures of lawyers on various listservs that I frequent. Don’t ask. Maybe it’ll make a blog post some day.  Just today, this one popped out at me:

Attorney’s Name

Address/Contact Info/Blah Blah Blah

Concentrating in criminal defense, personal injury/police misconduct, divorce and grievance/disciplinary defense

I guess if I didn’t waste loads of my time on stupid projects (see first paragraph, e.g.) perhaps I could concentrate on five things at once too.

 

Bennett asked, in a comment to my puzzle post, whether I was just gonna leave folks hanging. That was probably the original plan. But he called me on it, so here goes.

Honestly – unlike most sentences that start with that word, this really is honest – I initially decided to write an impossible/unsolvable puzzle after Gamso and Bennett told me that the first one was too easy. That’ll teach ‘em! What can I say, it’s not a very mature reaction.

But as I started tapping out the Must Wash Hands Mystery post, it occurred to me that my fake riddle was more like a koan. Merely thinking about the problem was in and of itself the point of the exercise.

Continue Reading Solution?

I was set on a jury docket yesterday morning and the case was going to be reached. It was my day to go. Of course, as usual, there were probably 30-40 cases set, but mine was going to be the one. How did I know this?

  • I had taken the case over from another lawyer, about a year after the arrest, so it was old, old, old. And the previous lawyer had used several defense continuances. I burned a few myself after that.
  • After taking over the case, I asked permission to put it back on a contested pretrial docket, and had a pretrial hearing. Significance? If the prosecutors were likely to cut us a deal, it would have been before they had to “do all that work”.
  • I had been contacted by the prosecutors about the case last week, and they re- (or, re-re-re-) iterated their position that they would not offer anything close to what my client would accept – in this case, a reduced charge. The case was not going to settle.
  • Also, the fact that they bothered to contact me at all meant it was high enough up on their radar to be concerned that it was in the top few cases likely to go.

Continue Reading Rip Roaring Rarin’ And Ready For Trial

OK, OK, I have provided an update/answer to the riddle in the last post. Such an addendum is unnecessary for my first two commenters, who found the riddle beneath them. I hope they find this one slightly more challenging. At any rate, it’s more difficult than 2 + 0 = 2, which was the solution to the verdict riddle.

Let’s begin. It’s not uncommon when you excuse yourself to the bathroom in a restaurant to find a sign posted somewhere near the sink and soap dispenser that reads:

Employees Must Wash Hands Before Returning To Work

If I ever open a greasy spoon there’s no way that sign will be in the restroom. Why? Because that sign does two things, at least to me.

Continue Reading A More Sophisticated Jury Trial Puzzle: Employees Must Wash Hands

Lance Stott and Dax Garvin (disclosure: my professional roommates/suitemates, and personal friends) started two separate jury trials a few months ago on a Monday.

Let me digress a bit, and for the sake of clarity, define separate. Each individual lawyer represented one and only one client. They were not co-defendants. Their charges were not related in any way. They had never met each other.

Their cases were assigned to different courts, with separate prosecutors, judges, court reporters, etc., etc. The fact that both lawyer’s cases started the same day was a complete coincidence. There’s not some hidden secret there that will help explain the puzzle.

By Wednesday afternoon, both trials were finished. Now, to the riddle…

Defense lawyers talk of one-word verdicts (it’s a euphemism for a loss) and two-word verdicts (wooohooo!). AKA, “guilty” and “not guilty” if you want it literally spelled out.

In this instance, if you combined the number of words in all the verdicts in their cases, the total was two. Two words total, when added together. Seems like two bad results from the clients’ perspectives, eh?

Yet neither client was convicted. Solve away… (Answer now provided after the break)

Continue Reading Verdict Riddle

One of the big boys on the blawk sent me an email with a subject line the same as the title of this post. In its entirety, the email read “???”.*

OK, point well taken. I’ve been in a blogging slump, and to break out of it, I’m going to commit one of the greatest sins of the blogosphere. I’m going to write about why I haven’t posted anything recently.

Awww to hell with that, I’m gonna write up a list of reasons, and assign truth percentages to them.

Continue Reading Blog???

 From the internet guru girl blog:

Personal note from CEO of IGG:

While there are many ways to project your business on line, you have to make sure you feel comfortable with the company or person you are intrusting[sic] your site and online marketing to.

Make sure you understand what it does, what you expect from it, and know that IGG is telling you that the web works better than any other medium but you have to allow the features you’ve chose to work together.

 

Continue Reading Sparta Townson, CEO Of Internet Guru Girl