The Arbery Video: Alan Tucker Chose Poorly

After the video of the murder of Ahmaud Arbery went viral, the arrests of the two men in the video seemed certain.

The men, Gregory McMichael, 64, and his son Travis McMichael, 34, were each charged with murder and aggravated assault and booked into a jail in coastal Glynn County, Ga., where the killing took place, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said.

Of course, it’s not that the video wasn’t available to the police, prosecutors and GBI before it went viral, but there was no national outcry for action. While the person in the car who recorded the video cooperated with police, readily gave the video to anyone who wanted it, no one thought to make it public until Brunswick, Georgia, lawyer Alan Tucker. Continue reading →

The Wrongful Conviction Of The Not That Innocent

I’d known my client since he was a little kid, when his father was my client. His father was what cops call a “skell,” running low-rent smarmy scams without any shame, being a small cog in a bigger crime whenever he could make a buck out of it. On a personal level, he was one of those guys who pretended to be your best friend, waiting for the opportunity to shove a knife in your back.

But his son wasn’t a bad kid. He just never had a chance given the way he was raised. So when he got busted for drugs, he was one of the rare clients who just told me what happened without the usual story, the string of obvious lies that would make me the stupidest guy in the room. Instead, he gave me the information that I needed to defend him, so I knew what they knew, less whatever they wrongly thought they knew and what they made up. Not everybody lies, but most people do, at least to some extent.

We should have won the suppression hearing. We had the goods. The hearing went exactly as planned. The agent who testified admitted under cross that he lied in his report. Why? Continue reading →

Seaton: People You Meet In A Pandemic

It’s Friday, and I’m in a mood to take the piss out of a few people. Your humble humorist held his tongue far too long as everyone turned into miserable assholes in a global pandemic. Now I’m going to have a laugh at the expense of a few guilty parties and I hope you’ll join me.

The wishful among us thought this virus would unite humanity as one [Ed. Note: Just @ me next time, coward], make us all realize we were #InThisTogether, and see us emerge as a better species. The pragmatists watched as people reverted to comical stereotypes of their former selves. Continue reading →

Did DoE Forget Why Title IX Exists?

Teresa Manning, who heads the Title IX Project for the National Association of Scholars, was troubled, and gave me a call to ask if she missed something. What caught her attention was the third prong of the new Title IX regs definition of sexual harassment. To understand its significance, the path by which anything that happens on campus flows into a Title IX violation has to go through sexual harassment.

Despite all the claims otherwise, it’s the only “ill” giving rise to a Title IX violation, and all the other ills, from dirty jokes to rape, have to be funneled through it. Don’t blame me. That’s what the Supreme Court says. Continue reading →

Because You’re Not Flynn

The backchannels of criminal defense lawyers were on fire.

Have you? Never. You? Nope, can’t even imagine it.

The buzz was about the government’s motion to dismiss the information against Michael Flynn. It wasn’t even a defense motion, with the government conceding the point in response. It was the government’s motion. After a plea. After it prevailed against every attack. After General Flynn went through his plea allocution, under oath, admitting to the commission of the crime under 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2). Continue reading →

The New Title IX Regs, For Better And Worse

It took 2033 pages to try to create the appearance of acknowledging every cry, claim and demand, real or imagined, considered by the Department of Education before finalizing its new regulations for Title IX sex hearings. If you’ve got a lot of time to kill, and aren’t put off by the prospect of little payback for your investment, there are some nuggets in there worthy of note.

But what is mostly notable is that after three years, thousands of lives and screams of outrage that persist, most of which are false or absurdly hyped, it’s neither as big a deal, nor as much of a change, as anyone would have it. What becomes quickly clear is that the new regs are horse designed by committee, an effort to smooth over ruffled feathers, to provide some facsimile of the accouterments of due process that its predecessor, the 19-page 2011 Dear Colleague Letter, was deliberately crafted to overcome, and otherwise punt the hard problems, such as the impossibility of creating a viable definition of “consent” which was tacitly adopted, to colleges to figure out for themselves. Continue reading →

Our Rights End Where His Feelings Begin

Of the many potential arguments available in support of the lockdown, self-quarantining, mask wearing and, as will soon become ubiquitous, an army of apps and hireling to “trace” people, linking the means of controlling further outbreaks of COVID-19 to gun control is likely the worst. It’s unsound on a theoretical level. It’s needlessly divisive. It’s destined to further distinguish the deplorables who need to work to keep their businesses alive and feed their families, and who in the minds of urban editorial writers, are the sort of people who love guns.

Yet, the New York Times’ Opinion Writer at Large,* Charlie Warzel can’t control his worst impulses.

I first saw it on Twitter. “Someone poke holes in this scenario,” a tweet from Eric Nelson, the editorial director of Broadside Books, read. “We keep losing 1,000 to 2,000 a day to coronavirus. People get used to it. We get less vigilant as it very slowly spreads. By December we’re close to normal, but still losing 1,500 a day, and as we tick past 300,000 dead, most people aren’t concerned.” Continue reading →

Tuesday Talk*: At Least It’s Honestly Unprincipled

The patron saint of the woke, Senator Elizabeth Warren, has proffered a new rule worthy of consideration.

Elizabeth Warren on the Hill today said Joe Biden gave a “credible and convincing” denial to the Tara Reade allegations, and says she’s proud to have endorsed him.

It’s not that I take issue with her reasoning, per se, as an accused’s denial is tantamount to pleading not guilty. That pretty much covers the accused’s side of the equation until the accuser proves her claim. Some might argue that Warren is being just a wee bit disingenuous, saying this only for the sake of Biden and with utterly no sincerity toward any other man. Oh, you cynical wags. Continue reading →

A Pulitzer For The Post-Fact Era

The 2020 Pulitzers are out. Not only did I not win (again), but there seems to be a theme in who did, and it’s well represented in the Prize for Commentary.

Hannah-Jones won for the New York Times’ 1619 Project, which has not only had an enormous influence on the discussion of American History, but has given rise to a mass reinvention of the history curriculum in American public education. Continue reading →