Best lawyer & judge biographies according to redditors
We found 63 Reddit comments discussing the best lawyer & judge biographies. We ranked the 34 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
We found 63 Reddit comments discussing the best lawyer & judge biographies. We ranked the 34 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
She is a total badass! If you need motivation, fitness or otherwise, check out Notorious RBG.
And then he almost immediately huddled with a small group to brag about his own book and disparage Jerry Buting's book (Illusion of Justice https://www.amazon.com/Illusion-Justice-Inside-Murderer-Americas/dp/0062569317/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1540113073&sr=8-1&keywords=jerry+buting&dpID=51I5kf-kR8L&preST=_SY344_BO1,204,203,200_QL70_&dpSrc=srch).
I actually think the person who brought up his book may have been a shill. It was a weird thing to bring it up so quickly and so cheerfully. Maybe the publisher was worried about taking a bath on it.
The kidnapping of Colleen Stanton. I cannot conceive of how awful her life must have been, and have continued to be after her release. This book Perfect Victim, is pretty detailed and horrific.
Highly recommend the book Indefensible by David Feige for those interested in these issues. Not a flawless book but brings up many important issues in a very accessible way. http://www.amazon.com/Indefensible-Lawyers-Journey-Inferno-American/dp/031615623X
The author is also chairman of a fund that helps poor defendants make bail. Which might not sound like a big deal, but it is something that allows poor defendants one of the main advantages of wealthier defendants in being able to fight their cases from a position of freedom rather than from a jail cell. The inability to make bail influences many, many people in the decision to take plea deals rather than fight charges.
http://davidfeige.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-bronx-freedom-fund-six-months-in.html
In case you want descriptions or reviews, I've added Amazon links.
> The Happy Cook: 125 Recipes for Eating Every Day Like It's the Weekend by Daphne Oz
>Before I Fall by Lauren Oliver
>Live by Night: A Novel by Dennis Lehane
>Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win -the Space Race by Margot Lee Shetterly
>Appetites: A Cookbook by Anthony Bourdain, Laurie Woolever
>War Hawk: A Tucker Wayne Novel by James Rollins, Grant Blackwood
>Notorious RBG: The Life and Times of Ruth Bader Ginsburg by Irin Carmon, Shana Knizhnik
>Downfall: A Brady Novel of Suspense by J. A. Jance
>Chaos: A Scarpetta Novel by Patricia Cornwell
>The Witch of Portobello: A Novel by Paulo Coelho
> I'd be very surprised to hear that a justice has his or her mind completely made up from the outset of every single case. Some or most cases, maybe, yes.
This is because the Justices are necessarily generalists. Orin Kerr has a really fascinating interview about how the idea that a Justice can just decide his or her ideology can get them from point A to point B is pretty much an illusion in a vast majority of cases.
> Perhaps I am an optimist, but I imagine most of the justices do order their clerks to conduct a metric fuckton of research on the merits of the arguments of both the appellant and appellee.
Speaking as a former, non-SCOTUS clerk, I can tell you that the briefing of the parties matters a ton more than independent research by clerks. You'd never have enough time. And from a judicial economy sense, it's clear why: the parties (especially at that level) have likely turned over 99% of the rocks to make the best case on the appellate issue before the Court. You're so unlikely to discover something new.
And, from reports of clerks (also this one) delays in getting opinions have less to do with research and writing and more about consensus building. You'll almost always find that the briefs share a great deal with the briefing of some party (or amicus). Deviations occur where there's a negotiated middle ground.
you should acquaint your self with the colleen stan case. forced to live in a box under a bed for years, towards the end of her imprisonment, she actually got a job at a hotel, and gave the paycheck to her captor.
edit: you can watch the documentary on the case here, featuring the girl.
there's also a book on it called the perfect victim, written by the lawyer who prosecuted the guy. the writing itself is pretty shitty, but the book is impossible to put down.
Over half of Rehnquist's clerks went to school outside of the T14. This was a rule of his and a deliberate effort to correct an imbalance he disliked.
http://www.amazon.com/In-Chambers-Justices-Constitutionalism-Democracy/dp/081393401X
Great book with plenty of wonderful stats for those curious about efforts to penetrate the illuminati status of the Supreme Court.
I didn't take BarBri before law school. I did fine. So I don't think it's necessary. (And I can't speak to whether it would be helpful.)
In the summer before I started law school, I met a law school professor. I asked him if he had any advice for law school.
He said to read 1L, by Scott Turow, which references another law school book: The Paper Chase, by John Osborne. Not because law school is really like that -- tension and pressure so thick it hangs in the air like a fog -- but because it will give you some idea -- albeit a dramatized one -- of how the Socratic method works in class.
His 2nd tip was: study more after class than before class. Most law school students are so freaked out about being called on in class that they spend way more time preparing for class, than they do studying the material you learned in class. He said to read all the cases and be prepared for class, but the point is to do well on the tests, so you need to learn the material. Spend more time preparing for the test than preparing for class.
His 3rd tip: Read what your professors have written. It will give you an idea of how your professor thinks, and what he thinks is important. And if you can somehow work it into class discussion -- or better yet, a test answer -- then the professor's ego probably can't help but be stroked a little bit.
If you haven't read Notorious RBG, I highly recommend it.
Scientists like Feynman and Oppenheimer ("father of the Atomic Bomb"), also native New Yorkers.
Also Alexander Hamilton (not native, but mostly associated with NYC). He's cool enough to have a hit Broadway show about his life. Although if we're getting political, what's better than FDR, the guy who bitch slapped the Nazis while fighting a whole other war across the world.
But, of people alive today, I'd say Ruth Bader Ginsberg -- by a wide margin the most badass member of the Supreme Court as evidenced by this book.
I just read Illusion of Justice by Jerome Buting (of Making a Murderer fame). I really liked it. He goes over his work on the Avery case, his battle with cancer, and a few other cases.
Ralph Armstrong is one he worked on that's really fascinating. I wrote this comment about the Armstrong case the other day. (caution, spoilers if you want to read the book)
https://www.amazon.com/Illusion-Justice-Inside-Murderer-Americas/dp/0062569317/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1495475193&sr=8-1&keywords=jerome+buting
How to Live: Or A Life of Montaigne in One Questions and Twenty Attempts at an Answer, by Sarah Bakewell.
The do it yourself colorful RBG.
Abstract:
Professor Rebecca Newberger Goldstein is one of the most influential thinkers in the world of public philosophy. Amongst many other philosophical texts, Goldstein is the author of The Mind-Body Problem, Betraying Spinoza: The Renegade Jew Who Gave Us Modernity, 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction and Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won’t Go Away. For many, Goldstein’s talent for bringing philosophy to life through her wit and beautiful storytelling is unapparelled. In the words of A. C. Grayling,
>“Like Plato… Goldstein has both literary and philosophical gifts of the highest order: the combination is superb.”
The list of Goldstein’s accomplishments is exhaustingly extensive; let us mention just five of many. Professor Goldstein was named a MacArthur Fellow (popularly known as the “genius award”) in 1996 and elected to The American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2005. In 2011, she was designated Free-thought Heroine by the Freedom from Religion Foundation and Humanist of the Year by The American Humanist Association, and in September of 2015, awarded the National Humanities Medal by President Obama in a ceremony at the White House. The reason cited?
>"For bringing philosophy into conversation with culture. In scholarship, Dr Goldstein has elucidated the ideas of Spinoza and Gödel, while in fiction, she deploys wit and drama to help us understand the great human conflict between thought and feeling."
_______
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/panpsycast-philosophy-podcast/id1141816572?mt=2&ign-mpt=uo%3D4
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1IUpXIJ1czUcbqKYjVsux5?si=dyHTigLVTVipZu6SNVtp-w
TuneIn: http://tunein.com/radio/The-Panpsycast-Philosophy-Podcast-p969318/
Google Play (US and Canada): https://play.google.com/music/listen?u=0#/ps/Isk2eawr7ew63mpskug5ruxd2iy
Pocket Casts: https://pca.st/cLun
Android: http://subscribeonandroid.com/thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast2?format=rss
RSS Feed: http://thepanpsycast.libsyn.com/rss
_______
Contact: www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast
Support and early-access: www.patreon.com/panpsycast
Check out this book if you're a reader. You might come out of it with a new appreciation for what they do.
https://www.amazon.com/Indefensible-Lawyers-Journey-Inferno-American/dp/031615623X
"Apology for Raymond Sebond" and "Of Experience" are his most well-known.
Think of Montaigne as a proto-blogger. There's no overarching theme, really, other than he's trying to understand the world and himself. He comes from an earlier Humanist tradition that is inductive and bottom-up as opposed to deductive and top-down. He's not there to present an argument as a lawyer would; he's there to explore an idea wherever it takes him. (For more on the difference between Montaigne's essays and modern essays, this post is essential: http://www.paulgraham.com/essay.html) I disagree with the other response here: there's no reason not to skip around and read whatever interests you.
If you still need some guidance, though, Sarah Bakewell's How To Live is helpful: http://www.amazon.com/How-Live-Montaigne-Question-Attempts/dp/1590514831
The chapters are organized thematically, so there's no need to read that one straight through either. I think she has a tendency to get bogged down into too many details, so feel free to skim.
https://www.amazon.com/How-Live-Montaigne-Question-Attempts/dp/1590514831
This is the book
>To be fair, my interest in being less "automated" in my Stoic thoughts was inspired only recently after a discussion on this subreddit. My dive into skepticism has been a means to assess and challenge my beliefs in a different way, as the surviving Skeptic works delve more into epistemology than surviving Stoic works..... ..... ....Epictetus, when talking about evaluating impressions, mentions that we need to examine it by the tools at our disposal and chiefly the dichotomy of control. Skeptic tools fall in the former for me.
This is something that's been bothering me also when put into practice. I've been considering applying the Socratic line of questioning - haven't developed a full-fledged approach yet apart from an acronym CARPIQ (clarify, ques. assumptions, reasons, perspectives, implications, and question). But it seems cumbersome at the outset itself - I mean it's not going to be like second nature nor is it going to be easy implementing on a machine-like organ that produces thousands of impressions. Being preoccupied with a lot of things, this might take me some time to figure out.
You've given me an additional direction to explore. I'm grateful for that. I'll definitely make time to explore this.
>When I get the chance, I'd like to pick up Outlines of Pyrrhonism from Sextius Empiricus.
Interesting. Adding this to my list. Thanks!
>Oh! What book about him did you pick up?
How to Live, or a life of Montaigne in one question and twenty attempts at an answer, by Sarah Bakewell
If you like that, you should buy the book
You can grab the audiobook in Frame translation, the narration is quite nice.
I've done some research into the best translation and the consensus seems to be that Screech is the most "accessible and modern" http://www.amazon.com/Michel-Montaigne-Complete-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140446044/
Although the best book on Montaigne is http://www.amazon.com/How-Live-Montaigne-Question-Attempts/dp/1590514831 which I found thanks to Farnam Street and I would recommend reading it alongside the original.
Lots of great recommendations in this thread; I've added a few to my reading list. Here are my suggestions (copied from a previous thread):
And, the following two are a look into the lives of two great men that lived in the 20th century; both offer many points worth emulating.
The philosophical school of existentialism deals with this—how do we continue to exist in the face of the absurdity of life? I highly recommend the book At the Existentialist Cafe for an engaging and assessable introduction to this area of thought. It’s a truly amazing book.
marching powder
The Pritzkers are a Mafia family gone "legit". Abe Pritzker got the grub stake for the family fortune working for Al Capone and Big Tuna Accardo and the Chicago "Outfit".
You want to read an eye opening book. Check out Super Mob by Gus Russo all about Mob fixer Sidney Korshak and how the Mob has inserted itself into all of America's important institutions from Politics to Hollywood. The Pritzkers figure prominently. They were big Obama backers as well.
https://www.amazon.com/Supermob-Korshak-Criminal-Associates-Americas/dp/B001FA23R2
They already stole that for her biography.
I'm feeling that SSG. Take heart. You're not the only one. Merely one of the vanishingly few (anymore) resolutely sticking to your own independently self-determining guns.
For reasons that are nobody else's but your own - ones you've chosen that nobody has taken away from you; maybe can't.
Because having whoever to tell you what to think or how - even on clearest directions HOW TO CHANGE YOUR MIND (from one of TIME magazine's '100 Most Influential People,' mind you) - just wouldn't serve the purposes, values ultimately - for which you stand tall enough.
To which, agree or disagree (on this point or that, you name it), I say bravo - even 'encore.' I personally applaud, appreciate, admire just such stuff as that.
Agreed and yes yes the natives are restless and the peasants absolutely revolting. But you, I like.
Even if, to be sure, my conclusory perspective and outlook differs (I think) from yours - at least on the significance of 'intelligence officers' ('posting in subreddits like ...').
I wish I could consider along with you (unless I got you wrong) that the main source of the horribleness and awfulness - the disinfo pervading our 'post-truth' times - were the 'intelligence community' (some implacable governmental 'other' acting in official secrecy).
But with the comic strip POGO as touchstone my sense to the contrary echoes: We have met the enemy, and it is us. Hailing from the McCarthy inquisitorial 1950s such irony so sharply summed up is only consistent with - time-honored long-standing wisdom based in total human experience from across every boundary and line that otherwise divides us.
Namely: for all the merely physical ills that ail and natural disasters that visit death and destruction upon humanity - the far far greater portion of damage done to our kind, especially the deeper darker horror of it all is - has always been - of horribly human origin and self-inflicted, in sole solitary fashion or mutually, group-wise - one for all and all for one.
Whatever enemies we face outwardly, and have to deal with - the worst of all proves to be us, our own kind AKA 'we the people' (for the worse not better). It's an awful worm can in view of how limited our resources at hand really are, how little to work with we have - other than human goods the richest of all desperately needed.
We're all we've got, our own kind's last best hope yet at the same time our own worst enemy, the very hand at our own throat.
Big Brother figures 'in translation' like a kind of psychological projection of us - of our species' dark side within. I might even have to link a 1996 NY Times oped by J. Gleick www.nytimes.com/1996/09/29/magazine/big-brother-is-us.html [ http://archive.is/UNaPx ]: Behind Closed Doors: Big Brother Is Us
To reflect even more richly I'd shift from 1950s POGO, & real life 1996 - to another exhibit in arts & entertainment evidence. A 1960s 'text' OUTER LIMITS: O.B.I.T. not knowing if you've ever seen this blood-chilling exercise in fiction's seeming laser light of transcendent 'super truth' - above & beyond merely literal IRL factuality:
Sen. Orville (congressional inquiry): Colonel Grover, why weren't the American people notified of the existence of this equipment?
Col. G: An installation check has revealed they're in use on our military bases. And we've discovered that these machines are also being employed in civilian life - industry, education, communication networks all over the country. It's like a debilitating disease. There are no records; it's awful. I feel responsible. I should have spoken out. It's the most hideous creation ever conceived. No one can laugh or joke. It watches, saps the very spirit. The worst thing of all is - I watch it. I can't not look. It's like a drug, a horrible drug. You can't resist it.
It's an addiction.
Reviews of this episode prior to the advent of FACEBOOK sound one way, all entertained to hell. But reviews since bring up FB routinely, citing this show as a prophetic warning of 'things to come' (as they have).
But it gets better plot-wise. In the finale what's behind the subversion when ratted out proves a brilliantly allegorical science fictionalization of our own pure inhumanity, a fantasized projection of the dark side within to out-do even Big Brother, namely - a Thing From Outer Space:
Alien (parting words to the Earthers before making his 'getaway'): The machines are everywhere. Oh, you'll find them all, you're intelligent people. And you'll make a great show of smashing a few. But for every one destroyed, hundreds more will be built. And they'll demoralize you, break your spirit - create such rips and tensions that no one will be able to repair. Oh you're a sad, despairing planet. And when we come here to live, you friendless, demoralized flotsam will fall without a single shot being fired. Senator, enjoy the few years left you - there is no answer. You're all the same. You demand, you insist on knowing every private thought and hunger of everyone - your families, your neighbors. Everyone but yourselves.
The 1956 film 1984 starring Edmond O'Brien is a favorite too, for its dramatic depiction of the 'nature of the beast' and dire issues of humanity - the struggle of the individual under post-truth condition merely for his own being - as a person, not a subjugated personoid.
From fiction to real life - dunno if this relates by your standard. But for me what it spells out is like lightning, a flash so brief one has but an instant to take in what's revealed by so much bright light all at once - about a darkness so deep, a landscape of our times littered in every direction with antisocial disinfo, pathologizing propaganda:
< I was at my lowest point in December 2013. Invited by a friend to visit Ireland together I jumped at the chance. One afternoon ... overlooking Galway Bay ... I started replaying moments of what had been the most difficult months in my life. I realized that, through it all, the worst part was feeling completely alone. Neither the lawyers nor the judges nor the cops I'd turned to had ever made me feel protected. Instead I'd been repeatedly told there was nothing they could do.
Standing on that cliff, reflecting, I had an epiphany: horrible as my experience had been, I couldn't be the only one. There had to be other people out there who had suffered the same ... It occurred to me that they were probably searching for the same kind of support I had longed for in my darkest days ... who understood the threat and knew what to do when a psycho was spinning out of control.
In that moment, drenched in the pouring rain, I decided I was going to advocate for victims the way I wish someone had fought for me.
I had little money, and zero idea how ...
[Those] whom I consider friends are fierce and fearless warriors. No two are alike [not a 'community' of the 'like-minded']. I represent actors and activists, suburban moms and struggling artists, recent immigrants, celebutantes, the super-rich (own-their-own-jet rich) and folks getting by on food stamps. But while my clients are special and unique the offenders are not. They are as boring and predictable as they are dangerous. ... Frighteningly, these offenders are all around us masquerading as regular people ... predators, stalkers and abusers are nothing new. What's different now is that many have harnessed the power and reach of internet to facilitate their crimes. Armed with nothing but a laptop and shielded by anonymity, a single bad actor can wreak unmitigated chaos and ruin the lives of countless vicitms. They stop only when we fight back. ... the offenders are not distinct and unrelated ... all around us, connected like points in a web... everywhere. What makes them so terrifying is that many ... are compelled by the same impulses that trigger other offenders to drive cars into groups of [people] and fire assault rifles into churches or schools. They are driven by rage and a thirst to strip victims of their agency and control. These offenders want to dominate, manipulate and punish ... all of us have the power to fight back. I refuse to let them win. > C. Goldberg, NOBODY'S VICTIM ("Deeply personal yet achingly universal - a bold and much-needed analysis ... in the era of the Internet. This book is an urgent warning of a coming crisis, a predictor of imminent danger, and a weapon to take back control and protect ourselves—both online and off. www.amazon.com/Nobodys-Victim-Fighting-Psychos-Stalkers-ebook/dp/B07L7SBGBZ )
In life's journey, on the road toward humanity's future and fate - those who don't stand for something in a critical moment as you do even if it's just one's own integrity of inward being (!) - will fall for anything sooner or later, if not one thing than another.
It's one of the darker object lessons of our current 'post-truth era.'
From copping out by playing 'ostrich' i.e. sticking your head in the sand and just ignoring whatever 'strategically' like 'maybe it'll go away' - to 'joining' some militant 'cause' with 'strength in numbers' no more lonely nights only 'instant friends' of a feather waiting to cheer new pledges (each and every one about as dubious as the rest, although YMMV) - to me it seems you just haven't fallen for any of that, SSG. More like captain in competent command of your own ship, not even asleep at the wheel - at the helm and on top of your own perspective, whence - "it's lonely at the top."
Not to "do" Ann Landers with 'wise advice' - but let not thy mind be dismayed, oi sez. As Newark NJ might rally NYC: 'Be proud of yourself, ya could be Philadelphia."
To which NJ might only be able to add for NYC - thanks for being you, exactly who you are and how. Especially with what you stand for, not least of which here - where the rubber meets the road in all its twists and turns.
Walk thru a storm with your head up & you never walk alone - hell, you're in the best of all possible company.
Yeah, crazy story. The book I read about it was called Perfect Victim: The True Story of the Girl in the Box.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0440204429?pc_redir=1408593642&amp;robot_redir=1
I read this book years ago, and it was horrific. If I recall, immediately after being picked up while hitchhiking, a sensory-deprivation box was placed on her head. Everything went downhill from there. In the end, she was so much under her captor's control that she was even allowed to hold a job outside of the home.
The first true crime book I ever read was Perfect Victim: The True Story of the Girl in the Box about Colleen Stan who was kidnapped by a husband and wife, lived with them for 7 years as their "sex slave" and eventually their baby sitter, and even was allowed to visit her parents once during her captivity until eventually his wife told her that everything she believed about her captivity was false. It was a fascinating read.
I also recommend Fatal Vision about Dr. Jeffery MacDonald who hired a writer to write his side of the story of the murder of his wife and two children while he was at home. The writer eventually comes to his own conclusions about the case and ends up getting sued by the Dr. himself. A Wilderness of Error by Errol Morris takes a different take on the case than the first book.
And lastly you should read Helter Skelter about the Manson Murders written by the prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi. Another fascinating book with a ton of detail.
You may be interested in this. I read it for a criminal justice class this past semester and it spells out in clear detail exactly how a lot of this ridiculous bullshit happens. At one point, a guy goes to jail for walking his friend's unlicensed dogs because of a series of simple misunderstandings and a judge who was having a bad day.
I read Betraying Spinoza: The Renegade Jew Who Gave Us Modernity a couple months ago. Spinoza is popularly thought of as a pantheist, yet his philosophy was instrumental to Freethinking.
An especially enjoyable book, I say, is The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God by Carl Sagan. Or you might enjoy his novel Contact, which is essentially a novelization of Varieties.
As a public interest attorney who has worked in and out of the criminal courts and is relatively conservative politically (irony how about that), I think my gripes with the death penalty mirror your concerns as well as the tremendous cost to the tax payer and burdens to the system.
That said, the most cogent yet concise collection of thoughts on the death penalty, for me, is this. Yes, that is the same author who wrote 1L and a number of other bad lawyer pulp fiction. But he was also an AUSA in Chicago after Harvard and was on the panel reviewing Illinois's stance on the death penalty advising then Governor Ryan.
Yes! I wish the interview was longer. I also just got a copy of [Notorious RBG] (https://www.amazon.com/Notorious-RBG-Times-Bader-Ginsburg/dp/0062415832/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&amp;qid=&amp;sr=) and her time in law school was so inspiring as well.
Have you read Marching Powder? It's specifically about that prison and the tourist visits to it.
On a related note, if you're a reader and love RBG, you should check out this book.
Thanks for the info! Gifts can be so challenging. I'm sure she'll appreciate whatever you get her and that you went through the trouble of trying to find a thoughtful gift!
&#x200B;
One of these literary mugs would go great if you decide to do a coffee-themed gift!
&#x200B;
Tickets to a concert of a band she likes?
&#x200B;
Since she's studying psychology, she might get a kick of out this phrenology head bust. Especially if her end goal is to be a therapist or psychologist, she could ultimately put it in her office.
&#x200B;
Since she likes learning about influential people throughout history, if she's a fan of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, this book is super popular.
&#x200B;
Being in college, a portable charger would come in handy if she doesn't already have one! A nice bag 1, 2 would last a long time, so she could even use it at the start of her career. Or an Instant Pot for a quicker way for her to cook her meals. I wish Instant Pot would have been around when I was in college!
&#x200B;
Some other ideas:
If she lives in a dorm or apartment, she may like decorating with a wall tapestry (1, 2, 3, 4)
Ring with the coordinates of her school or hometown
Female empowerment necklace
&#x200B;
I just started this. I'm kind of in love.
Growing up near several chemical plants as a child... when he put his head in there... I actually got a chill, like when you see a bad accident about to happen... My son actually asked me why my face went white. I see a lot of shit on this OSHA Reddit but this one really got me.
For a few good reasons why please read: Cyanide Canary by Joseph Hilldorfer
Never, I mean NEVER, put your head (or any other part of your body) in a tank of any type no matter what size or length of duration in the tank without proper safety equipment.
Haven't read it personally yet (though it's on the list), but I've heard very good things about The Man to See about Edward Bennett Williams (legendary DC trial lawyer, founder of Williams & Connolly).
Echo the recommendation re: The Nine. It's obviously somewhat dated at this point, but gives good context for how the Court operates, how its changing composition/personalities affect its direction, etc.
she actually has a biography that's a New York Times bestseller by that name
I think you mean Barry Scheck’s "bullshit" not Johnny Cochran’s, especially since Scheck was the attorney on Oj’s team in charge of dealing with the DNA and other scientific evidence. Unless, (as your previously racist insinuation that people of color were manipulated into voting for acquittal despite the white people on the jury indicated), you saw the word “Black” in my user name and assumed that I too suspend all faculties for critical thinking as soon as another black person mentions the word racism.
As to your false assertion that there was no EDTA in those samples, this is even disputed in Marcia Clark’s book Without a Doubt. The prosecution’s argument was that certain amounts of EDTA are found in human blood naturally, and that it was unclear where EDTA on the gate and sock came from.
>Challenged by Clark that humans can have more EDTA naturally in their blood than Rieders said his research suggested, the toxicologist thundered, "That's absurd!" He suggested that higher levels of EDTA would mean some people would be walking around with blood that would not clot.
>
>Clark derided his testimony as "way off the deep end of speculation."
>
>But Rieders's testimony contained some potentially powerful evidence. On the sock, EDTA was found only on the bloody part of the sock, not on the unsoiled fabric, suggesting the EDTA did not come from detergent. As for the swatch of blood taken from the smear on the back gate at the crime scene, the gate did not hold EDTA -- only the blood on the gate did.
Also, Detective Lang didn’t even mention the drop of blood on the back gate in his original notes.
>Furthermore, Det. Tom Lange did not include the drop in his detailed notes about the gate during his initial inspection of the crime scene, as he acknowledged in his deposition Monday. The defense’s implication: that a rogue officer daubed a drop on the back gate straight from the vial containing O.J. Simpson’s blood sample.
You can continue to pretend that Oj was acquitted because of stupid black people on the jury if you want to, but if you want to avoid sounding like a racist idiot, perhaps you should better familiarize yourself with the facts of the case.
See my post below, it costs tens of millions more to execute someone than to keep them alive. As for whether or not solitary or death is more humane, I'm sure if we posed that question to him he'd choose solitary. As for your last question, the point isn't whether he deserves to be treated humanely, it's whether we as a society are the type to execute human beings. The vast vast majority of the civilized world has chosen not to, but America (mostly the South, i.e., Texas and Georgia) continues to.
If you or anybody else is actually interested in this topic, you should read Scott Turow's Ultimate Punishment: A Lawyer's Reflections on Dealing with the Death Penalty. He was appointed by the then governor of Illinois to determine what to do about Illinois' death penalty, and spends the book going through all the justifications and costs of the death penalty (costs, morality, victim's families, etc.). He begins the book and his research pro-death penalty and ends up recommending that the state abolish it.
Too late... there's already a market
There is a book written about the lawyer that made the Ban happen. And they are making a movie about him!
Correction: they made a movie and it is currently in theaters.
https://youtu.be/RvAOuhyunhY
Exposure: Poisoned Water, Corporate Greed, and One Lawyer's Twenty-Year Battle against DuPont https://www.amazon.com/dp/1501172816/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_i_SDr4DbKEFD8P9