Home / General / Lawyering out

Lawyering out

Comments
/
/
/
1111 Views

https://eppc.org/author/edward_whelan/Let’s say you’re an attorney, one who is deeply interested in ethics. And suppose you decide to claim that a random person committed a sexual assault that is currently being blamed on someone you wish to defend.

Later, when the thrill of playing Perry Matlock fades a bit, you realize that you may have made one or more mistakes. For example, you may start to suspect that in sharing a number of details about the random person, including first and last name, photos of him as a teen and an adult, and the address of his boyhood home, you may have committed one or more acts that could cause the person you accused to sue you.

Perhaps you even realize that by accusing this person of sexual assault — a crime for which there is no statute of limitations in the jurisdiction where it allegedly occurred — you’ve given them a really big stick with which to beat all of the money out of your sorry hide.

Here’s how you can try to get out of trouble:

Step 1: Deny you said what you said by using lots of words that make you sound lawyerly.
Step 2: Repeat your previous assertion by denying it.
Step 3: Lay on the passive voice to make it clear that it isn’t your fault you named the random person, it just happened. Possibly due to doppelgängers dragging them into the sorry mess that you did not create from a parallel universe.
Step 4: Blame a woman for the fact that you said what you appeared to be saying but you were not in fact saying, it wasn’t you it was a guy who looked just like you who hacked into your Twitter account for several hours.
Step 5: Once RealYou regains control of your Twitter account, nonapologize by calling the massive, carefully crafted shitstorm you unleashed on this person, a mistake in judgement.

https://twitter.com/EdWhelanEPPC/status/1042900266415267840
Exit, Stage Lib- Left!

As an aside, Whelan’s contribution to PROJECT PROTECT BRETT KAVANAUGH highlights the fact that safety from the baying hordes of wingnuttistan is a relative, rather than an absolute thing. While factors like race, gender and religion certainly increase the chances that a person will be savaged by these goons, Whelan demonstrates that anyone is a potential victim. The only difference — for now anyway — is the likelihood that the instigators will pretend to apologize.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
It is main inner container footer text