MsGuy

Does anybody else here have a friend who insists on taking the simplest things and making them complicated?

"I relied entirely on intelligence as delivered by various US resources." "That my underlings bludgeoned the analysts into delivering the assessment we wanted is entirely besides the point."

Trial judges can already get away with anything short of whipping out a .357 and taking pot shots at random folks in their courtroom, so MsGuy is somewhat at a loss as to just what judicial behavior a new rule might be designed to protect.

Hmm... that a toxic miasma is already hovering over BoyToy waiting only the uttering of its name to burst forth upon us? Or possibly it's just coincidence.

Might I be permitted to point out that filing complaints with the CPA about being exorcised from a gay escort chat room is not the behavior of any normal being. Further, many scholars of the arcane posit that discussing such a being by name may well serve only to evoke its presence.

MsAnn, Mr. Dershowitz is a world class trial lawyer. World class trial lawyers are convincing. Therefore Mr. Dershowitz is convincing. It's his stock in trade. I agree though that Dershowitz is too good at what he does to tell a lie that he is likely to be caught out on. And I also agree that this situation has all the elements of an entertaining real life farce.

"Stop bitching and just be thankful he didn't make us wear the shirts."

Well you have to bare in mind that lawyers write the applicable rules and lawyers in general aren't very big on putting themselves at risk. On the other hand judges have their say so too & are a subset of lawyers who have a general interest in maintaining appearances and a special interest in not being publicly played for fools by trial attorneys. And of course there are concerns about efficient administration, justice to the parties blah blah blah like anybody actually cares. So the rule is (more or less) is that lawyers aren't supposed to lie to the judge or to assist their clients in so doing. On the other hand attorneys are supposed to vigorously represent the client which translates into presenting the client's version of the facts unless they know almost to a moral certainty that their client is lying through her teeth. The fig leaf is that it's not the lawyers function to judge the case but only to assist the client to present it. On the third hand, these days judges and bar associations are a little less inclined to tolerate the shenanigans of the flakes and knaves and Dershowitz is exactly the type to relentlessly press his case in such a highly public manner that, who knows, they may actually get a public reprimand or some such from the bar. Sooner or later Dershowitz is going to get a chance to interrogate their client under oath and, if she cracks and starts saying the lawyers have been coaching her in what lies to tell or, worse yet, have been slipping her a bit of cash from time to time to maintain her interest in pursuing her case (both of which are very likely true), Dershowitz may yet get his pound of flesh. As to what they could possibly been thinking, after a life time of dealing with human frailty, not excluding my own, I have found that there is no possible gain to be had pursuing that particular question. The entirety of the above post is, of course, entirely a fictional exercise along the lines of my Chance related posts and in no way should be interpeted to impugn the integrity of the Florida bar generally or the individual lawyers involved in this case. PS As I recall it, we spent all of 1/2 of one class period discussing this topic in my legal ethics course and more than half of that was spent on exploring how to evade &/or circumvent the rule w/o actually getting yourself disbarred. PPS Judges have a special set of rules for themselves which make it almost impossible to sue them no matter how egregious their actions. They can be impeached or, in some states, removed by the state Supreme Court or some other judicial forum, but not sued privately.

And now the lady in question drags Bill Clinton's good name through the mud. Come on, who would believe that? Well me for one. But that prissy old couple, Al and Tipper Gore? Less than credible, she shoudda stuck with Bill.

So do you think "Go Set a Watchman" will be as good as the one Truman Capote wrote?

I think Schneider was the building super on 'One Day At a Time.' And he acted like somebody a sitcom would call Dwayne. I have no clue as to the name of the actor.

Hito, I am really happy for you. You are a sweet, loving person and deserve this joy, every bit of it.

Agree with RA1. If sewing up the legs of some kid's pj's is all they can come up with, I don't think the bullying charge is going anywhere. It reads like the writer was assigned to do a hack job on Bush and just couldn't come up with anything.

If I ever meet the man of my dreams I hope he doesn't know about my dreams. & I'm very particular about hygiene. Before oral sex, I'll need you to wash your mouth.

Best drag queen ever.

So, Granny, you wouldn't go for it just to find out? With a spirit like that, Columbus would have spent his life fishing sardines in Genoa.

I might have known that all it would take to get you posting again was a Beiber thread.

Missed your presence.

LOL, I'm not that turned on by Afflect either, it's his fuck buddy that got my interest up. What if we substitute Jude for Ben in my script writing scenario? A little less bromance but a little more boning? See, I'm nothing if not flexible. I'll even let you go ahead and jack my thread. Just make it good for me, baby.

Sorry, lookin, I appreciate you trying, but on my 10 point Stiffie Scale, that registers about a 1.2.

Maybe you should look for a three bedroom apt. next trip.

Can't really disagree on Ripley, AS, but I would much prefer to see a young Matt's heels on young Ben's shoulders. Now quit trying to jack my thread and help flesh out our Good Will Hunting lost sex scene. Surely my late night writing scenario inspires you to some boner inducing addendum. Or if not mine, then maybe MsAnn's hot tub version gets your juices flowing. But none of your poetic nonsense. The key concept here is 'boner inducing' and I have yet to find a line from Stevens that inspired me to whack off. Not one.

Here, have two. And keep up the good work.

Actually I sympathise with the kid and hope for the best for him. ---- But maybe we should give it a few months and see what develops. "Dude, I'm itching like mad back there. Do you think I caught something?"

Do you see Matt with his ankles cocked up on Ben's shoulders or is it more like he would lock his legs around Ben's waist? I don't think doggy style really works for this scene...kinda lacks the intimacy, you know. (If we're gonna recreate the lost footage, let's make the effort to do it right, :tongue: )