Unpublished Comments

 Posted on January 14, 2012 in Uncategorized

"Blake Jamerson" (IP 75.148.128.34) writes in response to Andy Nolen: Total Fraud?:

Mr. Nolen is a wonderful attorney. Not only does he know the law but lives by the law. He helped my family and I with some valuable insight on my brother's case. He returned all my calls and would call me if he was running late to court. I understand not every one person is alike but doesnt mean that one's negative opinion is everyone's opinion.

I would have published this one without a second thought, except that the events that prompted the post to which this person was responding included Andy Nolen posting false reviews (positive for himself, negative for other criminal-defense lawyers) on the internet. So to confirm its authenticity, I emailed the address that "Blake Jamerson" left, and got a "recipient not found" error from the server. I found no case in Harris County in which Nolen represented a person named Jamerson.

Is this another instance of Andy Nolen using sockpuppets to market himself?

I wrote a post about the suspect circumstances of the grand-jury investigation of the Lykos DA's Office. Someone responded:

This is disgusting. This case is nothing but a bunch of greedy power hungry lawyers all. From the Judges, to the Grand Jury, to the Prosecutors to the DA. Their isn't a descent human in this whole affair. Vindictive, self absorbed scum.I hope everyone involved in this mess rots in hell!

I wish that "Richard" (IP 70.140.39.198), with such unambiguous and colorful opinions of the events in Live by the Hatchet, Die by the Hatchet, could have followed the rules and used his real name.

Here's another one that I tried to confirm; it's a perspective that we don't get enough of in the American blawgosphere:

I dont know what you privileged Americans are complaining about. Your average lawyer starts practice at the age of 24, is it? Here in India I started work at Biglaw at 21 and was interning (summering) from 18. I would give anything for 3 extra years at law school. Work-life balance? Never heard of it, never seen it. Choice of practice area? Don't have one. At least in the US if a guy wants to litigate with a big firm or maybe go for a tax practice, he can go for it. Here, you arrive and are shown your desk and told that you are now a Banking and Finance lawyer, whether you like it or not, your preference be damned.I disagree with the assumption that everybody needs to sit at their desk for 15 hours everyday to become good at what they do. Everyone works in different ways. Some people can figure something out while taking time off or sleeping. Everyone has got their own work cycle. I do my best work in the morning. If my boss left me alone in the afternoon or if I could go back home for an hour and head bang, I would definitely perform better in the evening. The only people who are better off because of the 24 x 7, 365 days a year at your desk workstyle are the partners.And then there are the corporate clients. Assholes. It is ok for them to take time off and do whatever the heck that they do after setting some stupid artificial deadline.

"Rathore" (IP 203.115.120.186), in response to I Wouldn't Hire Your Kine. Rathore never responded to my email seeking confirmation.

On the Internet, everyone's an expert. Here's "Delta" (IP 24.199.117.105), in response to Schadenfreude, Irony, and The Defense Function:

"Normal people (like normal dogs) have an innate sense of fairness: people should get what they deserve, and no worse. But normal people also seem to have an innate sense of retribution: people who do harm should be punished, regardless of their culpability. Retribution is what makes a child angry at the sofa on which he stubs his toe..."I can't say as I have any sympathy for this alleged "sense of retribution". For example, I don't think that I've ever in my life been inclined to "punish" an inanimate object in this way. Sure, from a young age I would be bewildered and enraged at people who blithely and purposely harm others (as per anecdotes my dad tells), but I don't at all see this drive to hurt things for unforeseen consequences.I might propose that this asserted "sense of retribution" among people, prosecutors, and philosophers is culturally dependent, e.g., in Texas.

If Delta really didn't go through Piaget's preconceptual stage, in which a child attributes living characteristics to inanimate objects, she's got problems.

Delta's sense that retribution is not an innate human sense does not reflect human psychological reality. The sense of retribution exists, not just in Texans but in people across cultures and around the world. It makes good evolutionary sense (as does the capacity to murder, and the tendency to mistrust people different than us).

While it may be comforting to pretend that we contain no darkness, it's a dangerous lie. It's dangerous for us to lie to ourselves because if we pretend we don't have the darkness, the darkness will control us. And, for trial lawyers, if we pretend that our jurors don't have the darkness, the darkness will control them.

A supporter of letter lawyers, "Saleen Love" (IP 70.114.52.242), wrote in response to Texas Civil Liability for Barratry:

Ok, so according to the "new" civil law liability, attorneys can be sued for having their ads in the yellow pages then, right? A phone book is sent to potential client's homes so it would constitute barratry to have your ad in a phone book that is sent to a potential client. Good luck suing a lawyer that sent you an ad meant to help you....you will lose badly. Find better ways to sue losers.

Aside from the fact that yellow pages are public media, not subject to the same solicitation rules as letters, all I can say is: show me a better way to sue losers, and I'll sue them.

Finally, sometimes I get comment spam that, coincidentally, fits the post perfectly:

I think its definitely a step in the the right direction. Change is always welcomed!

That's "Marsha Braiyn" (IP 197.156.130.15), in response to NM: TSA to Oversee Prom Searches.