For some people, Christmas means dressing up like a Nazi.

OK, I have not blogged in a long time. There are a number of reasons for this but they are mostly not worthy of discussion. Suffice to say that if Judge Kopf can post while undergoing cancer treatment, I can be better about posting while eating Reese's Peanut Butter Cups and thinking about March Madness.

Shamed, or at least censured, by his game.

Reader(s)™ may recall this post from April in which we discussed how Wayne County, Michigan Circuit Judge Wade H. McCree told the media "Hot Dog, yep that's me. I've got no shame in my game" upon being shown a picture by the Detroit Free Press of the judge sans shirt that he had given to his bailiff.  The bailiff's husband was not amused.

Is any publicity good publicity?

Some folks say that there is no such thing as bad publicity.  A Wisconsin attorney is evidently trying to find out if that is true.  As reported everywhere on the Internet, Kenneth Krause wrote to La Crosse, Wisconsin television personality Karen Livingston to tell her she was fat.  Ms. Livingston regarded Mr. Krause's communication as a form of bullying and did an on-air piece about it.  The result was that the story went viral and that most people seemed to conclude that Mr. Krause had been out of line.  Mr. Krause, perhaps recognizing that his fifteen minutes of fame were running, doubled down on his comments instead of apologizing. 

As a result of this controversy, a google search for "Kenneth Krause Wisconsin Attorney" yields mostly hits on the story rather than links to a website where one might find Mr. Krause's contact information if a person decided that a lawyer who calls a local celebrity fat is the sort of lawyer a person needs.  Thus, one might wonder if Mr. Krause is going to see a benefit to the story going viral.  What do you think Mr. Torvik will Mr. Krause's business pick up as a result of this story?

Do not post pictures of your client's underwear on your Facebook page.

You might think that the (non-legal) advice found in the title of this post was obvious to everyone.  You would be wrong. 

"Hot Dog, yep that's me. I've got no shame in my game."

Thus spoke Wayne County, Michigan Circuit Judge Wade H. McCree.  What prompted Judge McCree to discuss the lack of shame in his game?  He was asked by Detroit's Fox News affiliate to discuss this picture

A very strange idea.

In journalism, to bury the lede is to "begin a story with details of secondary importance to the reader while postponing more essential points or facts."  Pardon me while I bury the lede in this post.

The BBC provided a great example of this when it buried the lede in a story about Paul McCartney's son, James McCartney.  The headline for the story is "Paul McCartney's son James on playing the Cavern Club."  The Cavern Club, as many fans of the Beatles will tell you, is famous for hosting many gigs by the Beatles prior to Beatlemania sweeping the world in the first half of the 1960s.  The club, which was underground, was closed and filled-in during the 1970s but in 1984 a new Cavern Club was built on part of the site and made to look like the Cavern Club in its heyday.

Anyway, the BBC interviewed James McCartney about playing at the Cavern Club, his musical relationship with his father, and a few other things.  Then, at the bottom of the article comes the little tidbit that James McCartney has apparently spoke with Dhani Harrison, Sean Lennon, and Zak Starkey about forming some sort of next generation Beatles.  Mr. Starkey, who has a legitimate career as a drummer, was apparently not receptive to the idea.  However, the article quotes James as saying "Sean seemed to be into it, Dhani seemed to be into it" and speculating that perhaps Jason Starkey, another of Ringo Starr's sons, would be interested in playing the drums.  No word on whether anyone asked Julian Lennon.

Obviously a possible "Beatles Jr." band is a lot bigger story than the fact that James McCartney is playing a club that is an homage/rip-off of a more famous club of the same name. Even more obviously (if that is possible) is that "Beatles Jr." is a preposterously, stupendously bad idea.  However, it is also a thing that would probably make a lot of money.  For that reason, I won't be surprised when it turns out to be a real thing.

Inflammmatory stupidity loses again.

Now that the Obamacare oral arguments are over, America can get back to asking questions rather than listening to nine middle-aged/old people ask questions.  One question on the minds of many, whatever happened to Andrew Shirvell?  We did a fair number of posts about him in the fall of 2010 but since then we have not done any. 

Chuck Woolery is an idiot...or is he?

For people of a certain age, a sickday from school wasn't complete unless one watched the latest episode of "Love Connection." "Love Connection" was, compared to today's reality television, a naive show that hooked people up on blind dates and then had one of them sit down and discuss the date with the show's genial host Chuck Woolery. Mr. Woolery was also the original host of "Wheel of Fortune" as well as other game shows.

If you have ever wondered if Mr. Woolery is an idiot, the Huffington Post may have your answer.

Why would anyone do that?

We don't blog much about Minnesota. In fact, before this post we had as many posts tagged Milwaukee as we do Minnesota. I won't speak for Mr. Torvik, but one reason that I don't blog about Minnesota much is that I generally feel like the folks at Minnesota Litigator have the ground covered.

That said, I did have a thought about this recent Minnesota Litigator post. The post concerns a recent discovery order in a sexual harassment case. The plaintiff's computer forensics expert was allowed to examine the alleged harasser's work computer and discovered that the alleged harasser spent a lot of time during working hours looking at pornographic websites on his work computer. I assume that this information is relevant to the sex harassment claim because the employer is not involved in the pornography business.

I do not consider myself naive and this isn't the first time that I have heard of this sort of activity. I once attended a deposition where the printouts of the thumbnails for the number of pornographic websites an individual looked at work ran to over 400 pages. However, every time I hear about something like this I ask myself what kind of an idiot looks at this stuff at work. Setting aside any moral issues one might have with pornography, why would anyone think that these are the sort of websites one should look at at work? Why would anyone think such behaviour was a good idea?

Mr. Torvik, do you have any desire to perform a feat of zealous advocacy and give our readers a good reason to look at Internet porn at work?

Note to readers: Do not threaten Judges in the comments. We don't want to get sanctioned.

As KAAL-TV reports, Carver County Judge Richard Perkins has ordered portions of the Carver County Corruption blog shut down. The blog seems to focus on the child custody proceedings of Lea Banken, the blog's host. Judge Perkins is overseeing those proceedings.

Apparently, Judge Perkins was unhappy with some of the comments posted on the blog. Among other things, one comment stated that the judge "should be castrated, tortured and bleed to death." Other comments stated that the judge should be hung. However there was some dispute over whether the hanging should be in downtown Chaska, Minnesota or from the nearest tree. According to the article Judge Perkins has also fined Ms. Banken $10,000 for contempt of the order.

We have previously pointed out that suggesting that judges should be killed is a bad idea. However, in that case the person threatening the judge was punished, not the person providing the forum for threatening the judge.

Of course, Ms. Banken posted about the Judge's order directing that the comments be removed. People commenting on the post responded with exactly the sort of reasoned discourse one might expect. A comment from Linn informs us that the judge is the "biggest DOUCH BAG EVER." (capitalization in original.) Linn asks "how the hell does this man function with no soul!!!??" (exclamation point and question mark usage in original.) Linn also informs us that "HELL HAS A SPECIAL PLACE FOR people" like the judge. (capitalization in original.) Linn also makes it clear that she wants "SEE A MENTAL EVALUATION DONE ON THIS SICK JUDGE!!" (capitalization and exclamation point usage in original.)

While it is possible that Linn is a writer for "IRISH ARGUMENTS WEEKLY," if I were to make a list of ways to ensure that a "mental evaluation" is not done on someone, making that request in all caps would be high on the list—perhaps even in the top 5.

In any event, the Carver County Corruption blog and the Court's orders are a sad reminder that family law cases are often very bitter disputes. Reviewing the CCCB's comments also made me thankful that the people (person?) who comment on this blog keep the discourse at a higher level. We are nearing our two-year anniversary and we have yet to be fined of held in contempt because of a comment made on this blog.

LaVar Arrington isn't afraid to take a stand when a stand is needed.

I don't believe that we have posted about the horrific allegations surrounding former Penn State University defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky and the fact that the University, including Joe Paterno, allegedly knew that Mr. Sandusky was sexually assaulting children and took no actions. Those unfamiliar with the story can read about it here.

Former Penn State linebacker LaVar Arrington spoke out yesterday about his feelings of anger and embarrassment regarding the way Penn State is handling things. Mr. Arrington said that he would put "in storage" anything that relates to his time at Penn State. Among Mr. Arrington's possessions are an Alamo MVP trophy and the Butkus Award, an award given to the best linebacker in college football each year.

My first thought on seeing the article was that it was about time that a famous Penn State player criticized the way the University handled the scandal. However, on further review of the article, it turns out that Mr. Arrington is not complaining about how the university is handling the scandal. Instead, Mr. Arrington is upset that Penn State is apparently going to hire a head football coach who has no previous connection with Penn State.

While I understand that every person has a point at which a situation becomes so intolerable that they need to protest, I am not sure that Mr. Arrington was wise in determining what actions by Penn State forced him to stop supporting his alma mater.

Not all advice is good advice

I hope to write a longer post on the topic of people using bad judgment over the weekend. In the meantime, today’s news brings us the story of Carlos Lam.

Mr. Lam was, until Thursday, a deputy prosecutor in Johnson County, Indiana. As reported by the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, Mr. Lam emailed Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, on February 19, 2010, and suggested that Governor Walker generate sympathy for his recent budget proposals by using “a ‘false flag’ operation.” Specifically, Mr. Lam suggested Governor Walker “employ an associate who pretends to be sympathetic to the unions’ cause to physically attack you (or even use a firearm against you), you could discredit the unions.”

In other words, Governor Walker should have one of his supporters attack him (with a gun!)while pretending to be a supporter of Governor Walker’s opponents.

When first contacted by the Center, Mr. Lam denied being the author of the email. Adopting the “Shaggy defense,” Mr. Lam stated, ““I am flabbergasted [by the email] and would never advocate for something like this, and would like everyone to be sure that that’s just not me.” Mr. Lam told the reporter that he was out shopping for a minivan with his family when the email was sent.

Initially, Mr. Lam’s protestations of innocence worked. His boss, Brad Cooper, the Prosecuting Attorney for Johnson County, defended Mr. Lam and announced there would be no investigation of the emails because Mr. Lam did not send them. However, by Thursday morning, Mr. Lam decided to fess up and resign.

Oddly, Mr. Lam is not the first prosecutor in Indiana to lose his job over current events in Wisconsin. Jeff Cox, an attorney with the Indiana Attorney General’s office, was fired after he tweeted that authorities should use live ammunition and deadly force to deal with the protesters in Wisconsin.

Mr. Lam and Mr. Cox have First Amendment right to say stupid things via email or via the Internet. Nevertheless, both of these individuals displayed appallingly bad judgment in deciding to transmit their respective messages. Mr. Lam’s email raises two basic questions. First, why did he think the Governor of Wisconsin needed his advice on how to handle the protests? Second, why did he think that faking an assassination attempt would be a good way to change the narrative in Wisconsin? It is difficult to fathom how such “false flag operation” would go undiscovered. Among other things there is a publicly available email from Mr. Lam suggesting the attempt.

In any event, it seems like Mr. Lam’s email is a good reminder that not every idea needs to be expressed and that lawyers representing the public should think twice before sending emails, publishing tweets, or writing blog posts.

Inflammatory stupidity is only a privilege on one's own time.

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox has fired Andrew Shirvell. A discussion of the very odd blog Mr. Shirvell created is here. As Mr. Torvik noted at the time Mr. Shirvell's antics came to light, Mr. Shirvell couldn't be fired for what he wrote on his blog because that would violate the First Amendment. However, it would appear that Mr. Shirvell was writing his blog when he should have been working for the taxpayers of Michigan. Thus, Mr. Shirvell was not fired for something he said, he was fired for when he said it. As Nigel Tufnel once said, there is a fine line between clever and stupid.

What is it with prosecuting attorneys this week?

While this isn't as bad as Kenneth Kratz, an attorney in the Michigan Attorney General's office is engaged in some deeply weird blogging. Clearly some public officials have too much free time.

Andrew Shirvell, an assistant attorney general in Michigan, has a blog devoted to expressing his contempt of one gay person. I wrote that correctly, it is a blog dedicated to picking on one gay person. That person is University of Michigan Student Assembly president Chris Armstrong. Now, Mr. Shirvell doesn't like gay people, period. Still, the blog is really about one particular gay person. In fact, Mr. Shirvell has written 27 posts about one person. Who has the energy for that? Mr. Kratz or Ieshuh Griifin are going to have to make a lot more news before we come close to topping that figure.

Mr. Shirvell accuses this college student of being a “Nazi-like” recruiter to the “cult of homosexuality.” The analogy sort of breaks down when you consider that Nazi’s did not like homosexuals very much. Maybe less blogging about one gay student and more history study is in order. It certainly couldn't hurt.

The Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct seem to discourage this sort of thing. Rule 6.5(a) says:

A lawyer shall treat with courtesy and respect all persons involved in the legal process. A lawyer shall take particular care to avoid treating such a person discourteously or disrespectfully because of the person’s race, gender, or other protected personal characteristic.

I suppose Mr. Shirvell has two explanations for why he is not violating the rule. One is that sexual orientation is not a “protected personal characteristic.” However, Michigan does prohibit some forms of sexual orientation discrimination. The other may be that Mr. Armstrong is not, as of yet, “involved in the legal process”. But, as the comment to Rule 6.5 notes:

A lawyer must take particular care to avoid words or actions that appear to be improperly based upon a person’s race, gender, or other protected personal characteristic. Legal institutions, and those who serve them, should take leadership roles in assuring equal treatment for all.

It’s probably fair to say that Mr. Shirvell is falling short of that ideal. His blog is certainly based on one protected personal characteristic. I suspect that homosexuals who have been victims of crimes would not want Mr. Shirvell involved in their case.

So what to make of Mr. Shirvell’s hobby? Given that no one likes a bully, it seems like Mr. Shirvell should get a new pastime. Especially since his boss does not like it. Of course, now that his boss is on the record as not liking it, Mr. Shirvell will have a First Amendment retaliation claim if he gets fired or disciplined in the near future. In any event, if he directed some of the energy he devotes to Mr. Armstrong towards model trains, I bet Mr. Shirvell could make something like this. At the very least, it would keep him off the computer.