Posts Tagged ‘judge’

The Succubus has bat wings now – I loved the fallen-angel look before but this just looks even wrongerer.  As in “Oh boy, I should run now.”

When I installed Windows 7 something… bad happened to my fonts and I am very very upset because I don’t know where these favorite ones of my went.


The news today was just weird.

French Judge Issues International Warrant for the Arrest of Floyd Landis

A French judge spat on an American flag as he issued an international arrest warrant for US cycling poseur Floyd Landis who cheated in order to win the Tour de France (just like all Americans who have won the Tour have done).

Landis was stripped of his title for the 2006 Tour de France following an anti-doping test failure.

He now faces charges of kitten stomping, mugging of the elderly, computer hacking, drinking wine with ice in it, and making disparaging remarks about Jerry Lewis.  The least-serious charge of hacking originated from France’s completely unbiased anti-doping agency the AFLD because they were hacked before Landis’ failed blood test.

The cyclist and world-class master hacker could not be reached for comment, which would have been dismissed as pure American lies anyway.

And in Utah:

Lawmakers Discuss Early High School Graduation

Sen. Chris Buttars isn’t talking about dropping the senior year of high school.

He’s talking about making the 3rd thru 12th grades optional for those students who finish their required credits early — much to the interest of many other lawma kers, particularly the Public Education Appropriations Subcommittee.

Buttars, R-West Jordan, is proposing the state save bazillions by giving students the option of graduating from high school up to nine years early.  Buttars’ proposal would provide attractive incentives for students to do just that.

“There are some [students] that have a great school experience, but you talk to 100 kids and their parents, and I believe the majority of them will say, ‘Well, my kid didn’t do much from the 3rd to 12th grade,'” Buttars said. ”

Several lawmakers praised Buttars on Monday for trying to ease the state’s budget troubles.

“Why shouldn’t we push them out younger and younger if they’re just going to suck us dry?” Rep. Greg Hughes, R-Draper, asked the committee. “Why not put a stake in the heart of the parasites and get them out of here?”

“We got killed last year with a 20 percent tax increase,” said Marcy Rhodes, a parent who lives in the Jordan District. “Personally I’d rather buy a new BBQ and vacuum cleaner than support students one more day than necessary.”

Also, Buttars is proposing that students who graduate from grade school early be allowed to work in factories until they are mature enough to enter college.  “At least this way they can pay into the system in the form of taxes on their minimum-wage jobs rather than take-take-take,” he said.

State Superintendent Larry Shumway said Buttars’ idea raises important questions about the effectiveness of 3rd-12th grade, which is why he’s decided to create a task force to examine the issue over coming months.

Note:  Recognize mockery and satire when you see it, please.

Read Full Post »

You’ve probably heard my assertions that free speech should really be construed to apply to political speech and that local governments should be allowed to set the obscenity/decency standards for their region.

If you let local governments – state, county, city – establish decency standards then the odds are pretty good that standards will be set that represent the will of the people in a given region. Almost everyone agrees that certain behaviors are inappropriate and laws are enforced to ensure that – and the correctness of those laws is dictated by the prevalent attitudes regarding what constitutes porn. Examples would be vile swearing and harsh language in a public place where there might be a lot of kids, not being allowed to drop trou in a grocery store, and performing disgusting sexual acts in a public walkway (unless you are in Berkeley, apparently).

But then, we have individuals who, for lack of a better way of putting it, cross way way way over the line of 99% of the people out there and claim it is ok and protected.

The trial in question is centered around distribution of materials that have topics: combining sex and excretory material, animals, misogynist sex, and other “things”.

“It’s the most extreme material that’s ever been put on trial. I don’t know of anything more disgusting,” said Roger Jon Diamond _ Isaacs’ own defense attorney.

The case is the most visible effort of a new federal task force designed to crack down on smut in America. Isaacs, however, says his work is an extreme but constitutionally protected form of art.

“There’s no question the stuff is disgusting,” said Diamond, who has spent much of his career representing pornographers. “The question is should we throw people in jail for it?”

Isaacs, 57, a Los Angeles advertising agency owner who says he used to market fine art in commercial projects, calls himself a “shock artist” and says he went into distributing and producing films about fetishes because “I wanted to do something extreme.”

“I’m fighting for art,” he said in an interview before his federal trial got under way. “Art is on trial.”

He plans to testify as his own expert witness and said he will cite the historic battles over obscenity involving authors James Joyce and D.H. Lawrence.

One of his exhibits, he said, will be a picture of famed artist Marcel Duchamp’s “Fountain,” a porcelain urinal signed by the artist in 1917.

Diamond said Isaacs also will tell jurors the works have therapeutic value for people with the same fetishes depicted on screen.

“They don’t feel so isolated,” Diamond said. “They have fetishes that other people have.”


So the question the lawyer poses is “should we throw people in jail for it”? Absolutely, if it violates laws on the books.

Jean Rosenbluth, a former federal prosecutor and law professor at University of Southern California, said such prosecutions were rare until the creation of the U.S. Department of Justice Obscenity Prosecution Task Force. Child pornography cases are handled by a separate unit.

“The problem with obscenity is no one really knows what it is,” she said. “It’s relatively simple to paint something as an artistic effort even if it’s offensive.”

This is utter BS. People know darned well what obscenity is. Where did the idea that one could do horribly obscene things and call it “art” come from? Why should “art” be protected? Is there something special about “art”? As long as you have people that make statements like “no one really knows what it is” you can pretty much fly in the face of common reason and prevailing attitudes via short-circuits and end-runs. And there are plenty of tools willing to step up to the plate.

But it gets better…

In an unusual twist, the trial is being presided over by the chief judge of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Alex Kozinski, under a program that allows appellate judges to occasionally handle criminal trials at the District Court level. Kozinski is known as a strong defender of free speech and First Amendment rights.

This came to light on Wednesday (thereabouts). Now we learn more about our dear Judge Kozinski, who apparently was loathe to recuse himself because he now had access to more of his kind of “art”.

Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, granted a 48-hour stay in the obscenity trial of a Hollywood adult filmmaker after the prosecutor requested time to explore “a potential conflict of interest concerning the court having a . . . sexually explicit website with similar material to what is on trial here.”

Source: LA Times

Kozinski had things to say to a reporter, surprisingly:

In an interview Tuesday with The Times, Kozinski acknowledged posting sexual content on his website. Among the images on the site were a photo of naked women on all fours painted to look like cows and a video of a half-dressed man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal. He defended some of the adult content as “funny” but conceded that other postings were inappropriate.

Ah, the same type of argument used by Pete Townshend when arrested for having child pornography… he was researching a book. Ah. Yes, that’s it. Perhaps Townshend could merely say that he was researching for a book on “art”.

To be fair, Townshend was not alone:

British police have arrested 1,300 people, including a judge, magistrates, dentists, hospital consultants and a deputy school headmaster, as part of Operation Ore, a crackdown on people who view child pornography on the Internet. Fifty police officers also have been arrested, and eight of them have been charged with offenses.

The argument could be made that Townshend was legitimately researching a book. However, given the sensitive nature of the entire issue, contacting the police would have been prudent.

Back to our judge… many prospective jurors requested to be excused because of the subject matter. The part that is truly damning about this judge is that he did not recuse himself and while not lying, did a damn fine job of deceit:

Several prospects marched up to the judge’s bench for private conferences when he told them that the films also involved violence against women. They, too, were excused, as were several who cited their religious beliefs.

Asked how long they would have to watch the movies, Kozinski told them it would be about five hours and “I will be there watching with you. This is part of the job we’re doing.”

Such sacrifice.

Read Full Post »