![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The Defense of Dim-wittedness
Oct. 18th, 2010 03:20 pmDefense Counsel: My client is way too stupid to have made any money at this, Your Honour.
Crown Attorney: He really is. Look at these pictures. This was a very amateurish undertaking.
Judge: Yeah, that looks pretty dumb. Wow. He never would've made a go of it, would he?
Defense Counsel: No, never. Considering how incompetent he was, I suggest a mild sentence.
Crown Attorney: Fine by me.
Judge: OK, then Mr. Defendant, I'm going to sentence you to X months only. Also, please don't try this again. You're really, really bad at it.
Defendant: ...thank you?
ETA: Realized yesterday that I should probably include a disclaimer with every post that has to do with defendant-client-court-related stuff:
Solicitor-client privilege is a serious thing, yo. If you see any quotes, paraphrases, or any other kind of work-related tidbit on this journal, you are not seeing anything confidential. Most of it is from the (very public) courthouse, from defendants who have nothing to do with me. Any names used are fake, and I would only post something from one of our clients if it was extremely general. Eg, everything from "I murdered my mom" to "I work at a Canadian Tire" is too specific to post, IMHO; "I like summer" is probably OK. "We got a first-time petty drug dealer thirty days suspended sentence today" is too specific; "we got a fair sentence last week" is probably OK.
Eg, the other day I posted about three co-accused in court named Mohammed Mahmoud, Mehmet Ahmed, and Ahmad Muhamed. They weren't my clients, and those weren't their actual first and last names; I have no memory of what their real names were, only that there were three guys, six names, and all were close variations on Mohammed.
Just wanted to make that clear :)
Crown Attorney: He really is. Look at these pictures. This was a very amateurish undertaking.
Judge: Yeah, that looks pretty dumb. Wow. He never would've made a go of it, would he?
Defense Counsel: No, never. Considering how incompetent he was, I suggest a mild sentence.
Crown Attorney: Fine by me.
Judge: OK, then Mr. Defendant, I'm going to sentence you to X months only. Also, please don't try this again. You're really, really bad at it.
Defendant: ...thank you?
ETA: Realized yesterday that I should probably include a disclaimer with every post that has to do with defendant-client-court-related stuff:
Solicitor-client privilege is a serious thing, yo. If you see any quotes, paraphrases, or any other kind of work-related tidbit on this journal, you are not seeing anything confidential. Most of it is from the (very public) courthouse, from defendants who have nothing to do with me. Any names used are fake, and I would only post something from one of our clients if it was extremely general. Eg, everything from "I murdered my mom" to "I work at a Canadian Tire" is too specific to post, IMHO; "I like summer" is probably OK. "We got a first-time petty drug dealer thirty days suspended sentence today" is too specific; "we got a fair sentence last week" is probably OK.
Eg, the other day I posted about three co-accused in court named Mohammed Mahmoud, Mehmet Ahmed, and Ahmad Muhamed. They weren't my clients, and those weren't their actual first and last names; I have no memory of what their real names were, only that there were three guys, six names, and all were close variations on Mohammed.
Just wanted to make that clear :)
