About This Blog

Judging Crimes is a blog about criminal law, violent crime and the judiciary, dedicated to making the liberal case for greater democratic control of the criminal justice system.  It's a "view from the trenches" because it's written by a practitioner, not an academic or journalist.  It examines the changing role of the judiciary in American society by looking at what judges actually do, rather than what they say.  I know what they do because I deal with the consequences every day. 

Opinions issued by judges, from Supreme Court justices on down, are justifications for the exercise of governmental power.  But it is the exercise of power itself that should command our attention, not the justifications.  Judging Crimes is concerned with the reality of judicial power rather than the verbal formulas used to defend it. 

American law professors have long liked to say they teach their students "to think like a lawyer."  Learning to think that way is a matter of internalizing certain assumptions.  The practice of judging is likewise based on a foundation of shared assumptions, among them that the United States Constitution -- a document of 8,335 words, the length of a book chapter -- provides an answer to every question.  Rather like a Ouija board.

These assumptions are so ingrained -- and their internalization is so necessary to the successful practice of law -- that most people who subscribe to them aren't even aware of having done so.  Judging Crimes will try to engage not just with the expressions of judicial power, but with the assumptions on which those expressions  rest.  

Judging Crimes won't be filled with daily entries commenting on the day's events or provide a best-of-the-web welter of links.  Many other blogs already do that, far better than I could hope to do.  (Check out these.)  Instead, Judging Crimes will contain pieces of a length that might seem long for a blog but would be short in a serious magazine.  I hope to post new pieces several times a week.

Powered by Squarespace
What's not to like?

Hit the "like" button on Facebook to be notified of mini-blog entries and new posts and columns.

In Our Name
Test Drive the Book!
« 297. Raising the rhetorical stakes | Main | 296. Quick visit to reality »
Tuesday
Jul312007

Pretty pathetic

Lawyers as a profession have a lot to answer for, but until today I wouldn't have included the demise of the American newspaper in the tally:

[I]n the end what appears to have turned things in Murdoch's favor was not any pledge of journalistic integrity but a promise by News Corp. to pay the Bancroft trust's deal-related legal fees. That, the Journal reported today, swung a key holdout, a Denver-based family trust that controls 9.1% of Dow Jones voting shares, into Murdoch's camp.

According to one report, the lawyers' fees total $30 million, or about a third of a million per day since Murdoch made his offer May 1.  Now that's client service.  Or client something.

When I was in law school in Chicago, Murdoch offered to buy the Sun-Times from Marshall Field, IV.  Field first resisted, posing on his high horse.  But then Murdoch sweetened his offer.  The Chicago Daily Law Bulletin (I think it was) published a parody, to be sung to the tune of Kenny Rogers' The Gambler.  I've always remembered the concluding couplet.  After complimenting Field on his high morals, Murdoch asks:

"... but how's ninety million dollars make you feel?"

"Murdoch, you're a scoundrel but you've got yourself a deal."

Reader Comments (1)

Don't have a lot of cash to buy some real estate? You should not worry, because it's real to get the <a href="http://lowest-rate-loans.com/topics/business-loans">http://lowest-rate-loans.com</a> to solve such problems. So take a auto loan to buy all you require.
June 29, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterRANDOLPH35KATINA

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.