There was a time when human memory systems were treasured and cultivated. The technology of memorization was taught in the rhetoric classes and was deemed to be integral to public speech. Those days have long past and we trial lawyers are the poorer for it. The ancient art discovered by Simonides of Ceos is today an anachronism.
Concreteness
I am always on the lookout for a fresh and unique way of describing something, especially when it can take it from abstract to concrete. Here is one from today’s New York Times:
“The trigger of a semiautomatic pistol is pulled, and a firing pin in the back of the gun darts forward, slamming into the primer on the rear of the cartridge holding the bullet and causing a small explosion. This ignites the gunpowder in the cartridge, blasting the bullet out of the barrel with tens of thousands of pounds of pressure. That blast goes both ways, driving the left-behind shell casing backward hard enough to leave an impression from the inside of the gun on the shiny brass. The pistol ejects the casing, hot and spinning.”
The Goodman Opening
I haven’t blogged for at least three weeks because I have been fully engaged in John Goodman’s DUI manslaughter trial. But now it is time to begin anew.
Move Over Ted Stevens, Here Comes Dr. Jordan: DOJ’s Next Brady Scandal?
Arthur Jordan used a counterfeit badge and posed as an on-duty U.S. Marshal in order to carry firearms onto commercial airplanes while on personal travel. He did this nine times. According to the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, Jordan’s “criminal conduct” resulted in “multiple violations” of 18 U.S.C. Sections 912 and 1001 and 49 U.S.C. Section 46505, and “could have been charged as felonies.”
Sins of the Father…. Part 2
In my last post I criticized Justice Scalia for the last sentence of his dissent in the Maples case. “Because a faithful application of those precedents leads to the conclusion that Maples has not demonstrated cause to excuse his procedural default; and because the reasoning by which the Court justifies the opposite conclusion invites future evisceration of the principle that defendants are responsible for the mistakes of their attorneys; I respectfully dissent.”
The Sins of the Father . . . . .
My partner Howard came rushing into my office: “Did you read the Scalia dissent?” I confessed I had no earthly idea what he was referring to so he threw it down on my desk, finger jabbing at the last line, “Read this.”
Big Win in the 11th Circuit
Dr. Robert Ignasiak was charged in a 54-count indictment with health care fraud and illegally dispensing controlled substances. He was found guilty and sentenced to 292 months’ imprisonment. The opinion issued by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reverses Dr. Ignasiak’s conviction.
Coaching Part 2
Right after I wrote the first coaching piece I came across this cartoon by Hugh MacLeod at his wonderful website gapingvoid.com. “You can’t read the label of the jar you’re in” tells us you can’t see yourself from the inside. You need an independent opinion from someone looking at you to tell you how others [...]