You would think this would be a big deal amongst the small crowd of passionate anti-revenge porn advocates, as it was a huge victory for a woman harmed. Isn’t that what it’s all about?

In what might be Michigan’s first revenge-pornography case resulting in a monetary judgment, a woman was awarded $500,000 this week after her ex-boyfriend posted nude photographs of her on multiple Internet sites.

Half a mil is a lot of money, but that’s not all. The woman’s lawyer, Kyle Bristow, did a great job taking down this miscreant.

According to court records from the Oakland County (Mich.) Circuit Court, Judge Martha Anderson awarded the sum Wednesday, which is set to accrue interest over time. Anderson also granted a permanent injunction against the ex-boyfriend, forcing him to immediately destroy and never republish the photos to third-party websites. If he does, Bristow said, he can be held in contempt and face prison or additional fines.

Continue reading →

While the issue at its most superficial level might appear to be about the validity of climate change, it’s not. Not even a little bit. Believe or disbelieve, it doesn’t matter.* The issue at hand could be anything. That it happens to be the validity of “human induced climate change” doesn’t matter.  That some profs at University of Colorado-Colorado Springs are throwing a course where they announce, in advance, that no student can question their premise, does.

Three instructors co-teaching an online course called “Medical Humanities in the Digital Age” recently told their students through an email that climate change is not up for debate and those who think it is should not enroll in the course, according to documents first obtained by The College Fix.

“The point of departure for this course is based on the scientific premise that human induced climate change is valid and occurring,” the email sent to students read. “We will not, at any time, debate the science of climate change, nor will the ‘other side’ of the climate change debate be taught or discussed in this course.”

In reaction to the University of Chicago letter to incoming students, that the school does not support safe spaces and trigger warnings, Jeet Heer cried “academic freedom!” What if profs wanted to give trigger warnings? What if they wanted to make their classrooms “safe spaces,” replete with puppies and Play-Doh? What about the academic freedom? Heer’s complaint was unpersuasive, as if a physics prof could teach deviant gender studies if that’s what she felt like teaching because to require her to teach, you know, physics, would impair her academic freedom. Continue reading →

The New York Court of Appeals did what it said it wouldn’t.

[W]e agree with Janice R. that any change in the meaning of “parent” under our law should come by way of legislative enactment rather than judicial revamping of precedent.

A wise sentiment, that lasted all of six years until Judge Sheila Abdus-Salaam wrote the opinion that undid the bright line rule of the 1991 decision in Matter of Alison D. v Virginia M., which held that a person who was neither the biological nor adoptive parent of a child had no standing to seek custody or visitation of a child.  And replaced it with a steaming pile of feelz.

In Matter of Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A. C.C., the Court gave in to social justice and gave away the protection of children. Continue reading →

The reason why cops are allowed to moonlight is simple: it’s a job perk going back to the days when police, like most public employees, were underpaid relative to those in the private sector, and allowed to make some extra money on the side. The same was true for 20 and out pensions, another gimme to compensate for lower current wages that kicked the cost down the road enough for current politicians to proclaim what a great job they were doing saving the taxpayers’ money. It was more palatable than paying them adequately in the first place, or paying them today rather than later.

But then, for many cops, most notably those in cities who enjoy strong unions, those days aren’t even a memory. Pay is comparable to, if not better, than what they could make in the private sector, and a full pension at 42 years of age is the perfect launching platform for the second half of their productive life. Yet, the perk remains.

It’s been a target here for years, Wearing the uniform we bought them, carrying the gun we bought them, and with the power of the badge we pinned on their very proud chest, cops get to sell themselves after hours to the highest bidder. Some get to drive their police cruiser to their rent-a-cop job. All get to be an authorized law enforcement officer for whomever slips them an envelope full of cash at the end of the shift.

Seth Stoughton, once a cop and now a prawf at the South Carolina law school, has decided to spill the beans on cop moonlighting. Continue reading →

One of the legacies of its Jesuit heritage is that Georgetown University kept excellent records of the slaves it sold in 1838 to keep the joint afloat. To its credit, it’s now trying to do something about it, as the climate in 2016 is to “reflect upon [Georgetown] University’s history and involvement in the institution of slavery.” Even the Jesuits had slaves back then.

Georgetown University is taking a series of historically important steps to atone for the acts of 19th-century Jesuits who held African-American men, women and children in slavery and sold 272 of them to Southern sugar plantations to keep the college that became Georgetown operating.

Regardless of whether anyone else believes that the historical atrocity of slavery should be left in the past, Georgetown, as a private institution, has chosen to deal with it today. The institution’s decision is laudable, and doesn’t require anyone else’s approval. If it makes you feel badly because it’s doing what others are not, or refuse to do, that’s your issue. Georgetown University makes its own decisions. And lives with them. Continue reading →

Nine years ago, Geraldine and her daughter, Caroline, Burley were the victims of a forced entry into their home by masked men. They later came to learn that the men were identified as Team 11. Radley Balko was on it years ago, and is still on it now.

Geraldine, now 70, pleaded with the man to let her move to the floor slowly, explaining to him that she’d had both of her knees replaced. Instead, another officer approached, grabbed her by the face, demanded that she “get the [f–––] on the floor,” then threw her into a table. She tumbled to the ground. At that point, she said later in a deposition, everything turned to “a fire, white and ringing in my ear.” Another officer came up from the basement with her grandson, stepping on her knees in the process. She cried out again in pain.

Were these dangerous felons in need of a “dynamic entry,” the euphemism preferred by police because it sounds so much better than any more accurate phrase, by a SWAT team to rid society of their violent crimes?  Not quite.

According to the Burleys’ accounts, the officers who raided their home were clad in black. Some wore balaclava masks or face shields that hid all but their eyes. Others pulled their hats down low to shield their identities. They had also obscured their names and badge numbers. Once the Burleys’ house had been thoroughly searched, both women asked the officers for their names. After holding an impromptu meeting, the officers told the Burleys that they wouldn’t divulge any information that could identify them individually. Instead, they told the women that they had just been raided by “Team 11.”

Continue reading →

There are people for whom we can feel enormous sympathy. Real victims. True victims. Undeniable victims. And still, they can make poor choices and, ultimately, suffer the consequences in court.  For some of the victims of James Holmes’ rampage at Cinemark’s Century Aurora 16 theater in Aurora, Colorado, the bill just came due at $700,000.

The question was never whether the plaintiffs were injured. They were, and their injurious were grievous. And there was no fault on the part of the plaintiffs, ordinary people who did nothing more than go to see a movie.  The question was whether the movie theater breached a duty to these patrons by failing to provide sufficient security to address a crazed shooter like Holmes. Was the theater liable for their injuries? Of this, the plaintiffs were certain:

“It was the 12th hour, we were all feeling the same way. We all knew they were liable. We knew they were at fault,” [victim Marcus] Weaver said.

The plaintiffs knew what was coming. They were told. There was a state case that resulted in a jury verdict for Cinemark, that they couldn’t have foreseen Holme’s rampage.  Judge R. Brooke Jackson actually told them that he would issue a decision against them, ending the case, the following day.  And Cinemark put a settlement offer on the table. Not a good offer from the plaintiffs’ perspective, but an offer. Continue reading →