It Must Be Something in the Water
It seems like there’s another new blawg by a Texas lawyer for every new one by a lawyer anywhere else in the country. Why is that? Today, I stumbled upon two blogs I’d never seen before, Bad Court Thingy and Not Guilty. The former is by a new lawyer who has inexplicably chosen to post anonymously, while the latter comes from a more experienced lawyer who is skirting the edges of the blawgosphere and self-promotion. Then, there’s the eponymous Life at the Harris County Criminal Justice Center, a tad parochial on the parochial side.
The odd thing about the Texas blawgs is that they tend to focus largely on the sovereign Nation of Texas. Some might think they are narrow for that reason. I just think they don’t give a hoot about what happens in foreign lands, like the United States of America.
Young Lawyers Discover the Wheel
It’s hardly surprising that a substantial number of blawgers are young. After all, this is new-fangled media, Web 2.0, and older lawyers tend not to acknowledge its existence, no less participate. But a product of this youth-oriented blawgosphere is their view of criminal law through their youthful eyes.
In one sense, it’s quite funny to read of their discovery of the joys of dealing with unpleasant clients, difficult judges and offensive adversaries. It’s similarly interesting to read of their epiphany when they realize that law may not be as perfect as they were taught in law school, or that their brethren in the criminal defense bar are not always as competent or ethical as they are. Every generation has to discover the obvious on their own, and each time it’s as new as the last.
For some of us slightly older lawyers, we need to remember that these young guys may not have the same breadth of experience yet, and while they are talking about trials all day long, they mean DWI trials and not murders or conspiracies. Whenever I read about somebody doing 3 trials in a day, I have to remind myself that we live in different professional worlds.
It’s a Strain for a Reason
An increasing phenomenon is the cross-bred blog, trying to straddle the practical blawgosphere and marketing. These involve posts about clients and cases that would hold some general interest, but for the fact that they are invariably built around the lawyer’s personal triumph or experience such that it becomes obvious that the substantive post exists solely to promote the lawyer.
These posts tend to be horribly strained, where it seems that the lawyer is desperately trying not to make the post sound purely self-promotional, while trying to make sure that one can’t read the post without concluding that this must be the greatest lawyer ever. I understand why they do this, and I can’t blame any lawyer for trying to use whatever tools are at his disposal to help his business. Hey, this is a business. But the strained language, the flagrant attempt to promote the writer while making it appear that this is not unmitigated self-promotion, makes the post painful to read.
If you want to self-promote, do it. If you want to be part of the larger conversation, do it. I don’t think you can do both successfully. Or at least I’ve yet to see anyone accomplish it.
I’ll See Your Link and Raise You
As more blawgs come online, there is an increase in emails seeking a place in the blogroll or a link in a post somewhere. I don’t bother with the requests that are obviously not blogs, but I will take a look at blawgs that link to me (unrequested) or include me in their post. That doesn’t mean that I’ll end up putting you into my blogroll, unless your blawg has something that I would want to read. This is going to get increasingly more difficult as more blawgs come along. There’s only so many that can riff off of Bennett and Gideon, repeating posts that they’ve already done so well.
But don’t feel offended. There are plenty of blawgs that I post about, and have in my blogroll, that don’t return the favor. Take Doc Berman’s Sentencing Law and Policy, for example. I link to his stuff all the time, and he doesn’t even know I exist. I do it because he’s got great information, not to try to catch his eye. It’s all about the substance, and there’s no doubt that there will be some other folks who don’t think Simple Justice is worth a mention. The only thing I can do about it is keep writing. If I write something that matters to them, maybe I’ll make it onto their radar. If I don’t, then I don’t deserve to be on their radar.
This problem also exists in the parochial nest of the Texas criminal law blawgs, where they seem to ignore the outside world and cross-breed internally. But that’s how isolationism happens, right President Bush? The only problem is that there are so many of them, and some are quite good, that it’s a shame that they don’t branch out more. It’s like a clique that will only chat amongst themselves. Except Bennett and Young Shawn, both of whom will talk with anyone.
Speeding Up and Slowing Down
Some of my favorite blawgs have started slowing their pace since the new year. Anne Reed at Deliberations, for example. Anne’s blawg is one of the best around, but she’s sticking to her New Year’s resolution to slow down on the blogging (and I guess bulk up on those billable hours). I miss her brilliant posts.
Then there’s my all-time favorite young Republican, Shawn Matlock of the blog with the fascinating name, The Matlock Blog, attesting to his imagination and branding capabilities. With Young Shawn, it’s either feast or famine. Nothing for a week, then 10 posts in a day. Pent up hostility? You be the judge.
And another MIA blawger is Jamie Spencer, whose posts are always exceptional but increasingly sporadic. Come on Jamie, hunker down and get to work.
And finally, there’s the quiet demise of Malum in Se, whose blawg burned bright until it burned out. I’m sorry to see him go. Maybe like the blawgosphere’s Phoenix, Norm Pattis, he’ll be back. If not, then we’ll keep our eye on Bad Court Thingy to see if he can fill the void, and perhaps take a lesson from Reasonable Doubts, where Todd Taylor decided to select a more fitting blawg name. An excellent choice, I might add.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Everything we write has been written. I’m going to start making stuff up now, just to get readers. Maybe I’ll start writing about sports or theater or quantum mechanics.
Seriously, though. I just link to whatever new crim blogs that I find. Why not? Who cares.
Funny, we have to stop this Scott, just yesterday, I was turning over the description that best fits a community somewhat near me. North Tonawanda. It’s provinchial. No, it’s parochial. No, it’s insular! It refers to geography as much as a state of mind, which, along with you reference to cross-breeding, is what you are getting at.
Nobody moves in. Nobody leaves. Inbred. And they like it that way. But nobody else cares.
Insular fits better than your term, parochial. You didn’t force me to look it up, but it was fun to do, just now.
pa·ro·chi·al [pə rṓkee əl]
adj
1. narrow-minded: concerned only with narrow local concerns without any regard for more general or wider issues
2. christianity of a parish: relating to or belonging to a parish, or to parishes
[14th century. Via Old French from ecclesiastical Latin parochia “parish.”]
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
in·su·lar [ínsələr, ínsyələr]
adj
1. limited in outlook: concerned only with your own country, society, or way of life and not interested in new ideas or different cultures
2. not close to others: physically or emotionally removed from others
3. of islands: relating to or originating in an island
4. anatomy of islands of cells: relating to a collection of cells or tissue reminiscent of an island
[Mid-16th century. Via French insulaire from late Latin insularis , from Latin insula “island.”]
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Excepting of course Bennett and Young Shawn.
I generally do too, not because “why not? who cares,” but because I’m interested and they bring new life and interest to the conversation. If they aren’t on the blogroll, it’s usually because I just haven’t updated it yet.
On rare occasion, I don’t care for one and then it doesn’t get on. I guess I see the blogroll as a reflection of blogs that I read, admire, feel are worth the time. It either means something or doesn’t. If I don’t like the blog or won’t read it, I don’t see any reason why it should be there.
On the other hand, most aren’t crim law, but pure marketing stuff. They don’t make it on the blogroll. I’m not here to advertise their practice. This may be a mindset difference between the PD and the private lawyer.
Or a difference between the serious blogger (which you have now become) and the recreational blogger (which I am).
Not a chance I’m letting that one go. I learned at your knee, Master Gideon, and I still pale in comparison to the Master. By the way, what does “WTF” mean? Is it one of those new youth-oriented computer acronyms?
HAH.
You seriously don’t know what WTF stands for? Think about it. What The …
Nah, I knew. I just wanted to see how you’d explain it to me.
Sheesh. Everyone’s a lexicographer. While I use insular on occasion, parochial works for me too.
And Bennett does this to me too, though I realize it’s only to cover his (ahem) inadequacies.
Forget Texas. What I want to know is where are the quality Chicago blawgers? Where’s that experienced defense attorney who’d appreciate my readership, my comments, and the occasional blogging tip and who would therefore owe me if I call him from the jailhouse someday.
I mean, if I ever get in deep doodoo in New York or Connecticut or Texas, I know who my first call is, but in my hometown I haven’t got a clue.
Good point. Where are all those big time Chi-Town defense lawyers?
Riiiight…
Iowa.
Yew. You have a point. Overdoing reading statutes lately. Appellate hair-splitting to affirm convictions. My 440 motion. Page 163 now…
For my part, it wasn’t so much the hours that suffered; it was the sleep. I really started missing sleep, and still can’t figure out how you manage without it. But calling me brilliant is like clapping for Tinkerbell. I hope to be around for awhile. (Thanks.)
That’s gobbledygook.
You’re right. Think I’ll take the afternoon off and get some fresh air. Underneath the palm trees. The ones in my backyard.
To Gid, not you Anne, though I sympathize. Enjoy your blog. Nice comments today.
What the hell did I do? And what’s wrong with my blog?
I think she was complimenting you.
I thought she was referring to Anne in the second part of that comment while clarifying in the first part that the previous comment was meant for me.
Manohman. Communication problem. Notwithstanding I am a high school graduate. Gideon got it right.
It’s okay. Scott deliberately likes to confuse. So. What’s wrong with my blog?
Hey, don’t blame me. I’m just trying to keep the peace between the two of you.
Nice try, Ban Ki-moon.
Nothing’s wrong with your blog. Is there? I told Annie I liked her blog. You didn’t have any nice comments today. She did.
Somewhere up there I conceded that you were right about gobbledygook, only because you appear not to know what a NY CPL s.440.10 motion. But your state must have the equivalent. I hope.
I don’t know. Sometimes my blog doesn’t work. I guess that could be something wrong. Sometimes I don’t post anything substantial. That’s another problem.
As for the motion, I could tell you whether we had an equivalent if I knew what it was.
Post-conviction relief separate from or following the appeal on grounds not appearing in the record and therefore not reviewable on direct appeal.
As in, he is innocent and is stuck in prison for 15-25 just because the attorneys — all of them — had other priorities than to ask for and read the medical records, including an exculpatory CAT scan, entered into evidence during the grand jury, and which were made known during discovery.
Therefore, the light bulb didn’t go off to enter it into evidence in the trial for their clients’ young lives, calling the radiologist and one or more attending physicians to assist the jury in acquitting the indictment for assault including gang assault, alleged as including a supposed broken nose by a supposed kick to the face by my client, as causative of the injuries. This is failure to investigate. Ineffective. Isn’t it? Among other issues.
The Appellate Division ruled that this is outside the record and appropriate for the motion and not direct appeal. They could have yanked the jury down from their pedestal on other grounds. But they did not.
As Scott knows, I could go on. But I won’t.
Your state must have this.
You mean…a petition for writ of habeas corpus?
Similar, but not exactly. It’s a statutory method of raising an issue, whether statutory or constitutional, that doesn’t appear in the record, is newly found evidence, or otherwise wasn’t available for direct appellate review. It creates a secondary post trial means of creating a record for decision and/or discretionary review.
For example, one of the most used claims in a 440.10 is IAC, which comes about because of an appellate decision that a viable issue was preserved for appeal. So, you go back, raise IAC for the failure to preserve, and try again. But New York has eliminated the great writs and provided for a statutory alternative that is somewhat more expansive.
I really don’t have much to say, but I wanted to see how far this software goes. Looks like we’re pushing it to the brink.
Anyway, that’s interesting. So no more recourse via the Great Writ in NY?
I never saw the comments pushed this far. Pretty cool, no?
So yes, the great writs are gone. No mandamus, habeas, nada. Replaced by what’s delightfully known as an Article 78. After all, if you had the choice between calling something an Article 78 or Habeas Corpus, wouldn’t you go for the cute numbers instead of that old funky latin junk?
Look at us. Pushing the envelope, as usual.
No, I’d rather go for the big sounding Latin Words, because that’s cool. Article whatever sounds new and cheap.
I agree completely. Are we at the end of the road?
It’s broken already. The timestamp doesn’t wrap.
What else did you guys do all night??
Rid the world of poverty.
Yeah. We didn’t get a lot of sleep.
This is insane. Will it get down to just one letter per line?
I’m late to this party, but if you call it an “Article 78” it’s less likely to be confused with something that the people actually have a constitutional right to.
ZING!
Yow.
Ha!
My sentiments exactly 😀
Let’s see how it handles a smiley.
I’m so glad to see you children are having fun.
This is work. Not fun.
Okay. Kathleen broke it. Time to stop.
Heeheehee.
Looks creative. Sorry I killed it.
Just as well. One more comment and the internet would have crashed.
My guess for the large of Texas law blawgs: First, it’ s not just law bloggers. I saw recently that Austin is the leading blog city nationwide in terms of number of bloggers per population and blog readership.
Also, Texas is huge – 23 million people. Doug Berman did a post about Kansas recently and I realized their entire state prison system is smaller than the Harris County Jail!
Plus we’ve got a lot of solos in Texas, and they’re just the kind of folks blogging appeals to – big egos with lots of opinions and a yen for self promotion. (Personally I don’t think they’re mutually exclusive – Doug Berman has “promoted” himself as an expert, e.g., by demonstrating himself as one, and become much more widely recognized as a result.)
Finally, Texas had several early adopters like Houston’s Clear Thinkers, Grits and the Texas Law Blog that spread the idea of blogging on state and local legal topics in TX pretty early on, inspiring others to try it.
Some combination of those reasons, plus several, I’m sure, I haven’t thought of, probably explain it.
All true, Scott, but not that dissimilar (except for footwear) from New York. Yet, NY has remarkably little to offer, and remarkably little interest from lawyers.
You are a particularly interesting study, especially compared to Doug Berman. You have one of the best known blawgs around, and I would venture to say one of the biggest in Texas (no small feat), yet you aren’t a lawyer. I suspect that few people who happen on Grits would ever believe that. The points is that the blawgosphere offers opportunity, whether to you or Doc Berman, to stand or fall by your content regardless of who you are or where you’re from. Quite an amazing thing, this blawgosphere.
It’s a passing fad. The new thing is to twitter.
Scott, I’d post more if I could, but I spend too much time reading your umpteen posts per day…
🙂
Just cut the wise-cracking and get back to work already. Sheesh.
Absence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder
So, Sally Field didn’t actually say, “You like me, you really really like me”…butIt does feel good to have been called out by a few folks for my light blogging recently; since you asked, I’ll try to do better….