Celeb/Public trials just feel like a version of Marc Andreesen's "Current Thing". When a new Current Thing drops, everyone has to have an opinion. Most NPC's just download what they need to know or say (Is there a team Depp emoji? Gotta get that Ukraine flag next to my raised fist/rose in my bio!) from whatever source they trust most.
You will probably hear from many current lawyers and some former lawyers (like myself) that will also tell you that trials are incredibly rare and that the ones we know about and are privy to are Unicorn outliers that aren't anything like normal trials. Trials and law are also fact-specific. The beauty of the common law system is that precedent rules, but what makes it infinitely malleable is that no two cases have the exact same facts. Lawyers can and do argue about why the facts in any particular case are similar/dissimilar to prior cases.
Thanks! I had no idea the term was only used by youngsters. I appreciate your gatekeeping. Keep up he good work and point out any other problematic terms.
I am truly puzzled by how people are not only getting swept up in this but also fervently defending either side. How are you coming to the conclusion that either of them is completely innocent? I'm tired of thinking about people thinking about this trial and while I know very little, I don't even want to know as much as I do. That is as far as my opinion goes on this case.
As with everything, tribalism and the coalition instinct. And I agree. It would be so nice not to know anything about this shitshow. Or is it a clusterfuck? 🤔
I agree - all I know is it’s some kind of defamation case which is giving them both a chance to hurl shit at each other. Second, people are taking sides, as Jeff says, based on who they think they are. And all of that, such as it is, is more than I ever wanted to know
Celebrity Trials have been a thing for almost as long this country has been around. In England in 1820 there was the trial of Queen Caroline whom the King was trying to divorce/strip of her titles that was more sensational than whatever the Depp/Heard trial is about. Heck, I imagine there were scalpers selling tickets to the Joan of Arc trial even though most people couldn't figure out what she was on trial for.
My local news recently featured a hard hitting piece on edible tape that holds burritos closed.
This is the brave new world we were promised.
Local News is the best thing on tv.
Johns Hopkins. Home of Yascha Mounk and burrito tape research. What more could one want out of an institution of higher learning?
Receipts: https://photos.app.goo.gl/u64KTNVxZY6b6GC5A
Celeb/Public trials just feel like a version of Marc Andreesen's "Current Thing". When a new Current Thing drops, everyone has to have an opinion. Most NPC's just download what they need to know or say (Is there a team Depp emoji? Gotta get that Ukraine flag next to my raised fist/rose in my bio!) from whatever source they trust most.
You will probably hear from many current lawyers and some former lawyers (like myself) that will also tell you that trials are incredibly rare and that the ones we know about and are privy to are Unicorn outliers that aren't anything like normal trials. Trials and law are also fact-specific. The beauty of the common law system is that precedent rules, but what makes it infinitely malleable is that no two cases have the exact same facts. Lawyers can and do argue about why the facts in any particular case are similar/dissimilar to prior cases.
You must pay extra close attention to all things deemed important to make sure you stay on the correct side of the mob...
As another recovering lawyer, I approve of this message.
Old.
Thanks! I had no idea the term was only used by youngsters. I appreciate your gatekeeping. Keep up he good work and point out any other problematic terms.
I'm 57 but played games on PCs for about 15 years and occasionally still do on my iPad. Can I get a dispensation?
"maybe you feel that it’s generally understood that we’re not all walking around with, say, a working knowledge of North Carolina maritime law"
Maybe *you're* not, but any true Arrested Development fan certainly should be: https://youtu.be/TdeSh3vLvYI
I am truly puzzled by how people are not only getting swept up in this but also fervently defending either side. How are you coming to the conclusion that either of them is completely innocent? I'm tired of thinking about people thinking about this trial and while I know very little, I don't even want to know as much as I do. That is as far as my opinion goes on this case.
As with everything, tribalism and the coalition instinct. And I agree. It would be so nice not to know anything about this shitshow. Or is it a clusterfuck? 🤔
I agree - all I know is it’s some kind of defamation case which is giving them both a chance to hurl shit at each other. Second, people are taking sides, as Jeff says, based on who they think they are. And all of that, such as it is, is more than I ever wanted to know
Celebrity Trials have been a thing for almost as long this country has been around. In England in 1820 there was the trial of Queen Caroline whom the King was trying to divorce/strip of her titles that was more sensational than whatever the Depp/Heard trial is about. Heck, I imagine there were scalpers selling tickets to the Joan of Arc trial even though most people couldn't figure out what she was on trial for.
Also the play/movie Chicago is about this, so, yeah, it's definitely not new.
Man-on-the-street Interviews are the best thing about local news though!
Good point. I’ll try to do better. Like using duct tape when a controversial topic comes up. On my mouth.
I dont think so because if we were we would have seen people like us on local news and that hasn’t happened yet…