|
|
Post by countjohn on May 12, 2019 4:53:52 GMT
www.cnn.com/2019/05/11/us/harvard-law-professor-ronald-sullivan-loses-deanship-harvey-weinstein/index.htmlWhat do we think of this? To me, the idea of retaliating against a lawyer due to the clients they represent is a bad road to go down. I'd never want to be a defense attourney and have to defend guilty people, but that's part of the job. The fact that the faculty and students at a law school don't seem to understand that is disturbing. If he were defending someone who did something worse than Weinstein, like a terrorist who blew up a building or just your garden variety murderer, but didn't have this specific political baggage, this probably would not have happened. Hell, Nazi war criminals were given defense attorneys at the Nuremberg trials and that is viewed as a triumph of American liberalism and not in any way pro Nazi.
|
|
cherry68
Based
Man is unhappy because he doesn't know he's happy. It's only that.
Posts: 3,669 
Likes: 2,107
|
Post by cherry68 on May 12, 2019 5:02:14 GMT
Anyone deserves the best defense possible, even murderers.
I guess someone might find getting huge money for defending some criminals immoral though.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on May 12, 2019 10:20:13 GMT
It's part of what made Donald Trump President and will likely again - it's censorship on the Left by the Left for vague principles.......and it's a big problem that goes down weird tributaries like college campus discourse in general, and even Free Speech overall that seem unconnected to this but are related to a weird human impulse to be protected and feel safe and be "right" that is both anti-intellectual and anti-American.
I just posted yesterday the song lyrics to Graham Parker's great song "You Can't Be Too Strong" a 40 year old anti-abortion (leaning) song that could not get released today on major record company yet which has nothing offensive in it whatsoever - it's that world we live in now. The fact that some disagree with it in principle would shut that song down. You see it on this board when people argue against basic law - basic US law for Godsakes - in regards to the Polanski legal case all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on May 12, 2019 10:30:19 GMT
By reading the article, it sounds like Harvard is being purposefully vague about "why" he is being removed. And in a situation like this, you can't be vague. Or people will assume that this is because of Weinstein.
Which it probably is, because Harvard isn't presenting any other reasons.
|
|
LaraQ
Badass
English Rose
Posts: 2,300
Likes: 2,833
Member is Online
|
Post by LaraQ on May 12, 2019 12:02:41 GMT
This is disturbing.Everybody, no matter how Heinous their crime,is entitled to representation.
|
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on May 13, 2019 19:55:34 GMT
Trully sad news. Harvard is suppose to be the best University of the World. And looks like a stupid public left University of the 3rd World.
Is a fascist descition. Maybe the antifascist are the new fascist.
|
|
Zeb31
Based
Bernardo is not believing que vous êtes come to bing bing avec nous
Posts: 2,557 
Likes: 3,794
|
Post by Zeb31 on May 14, 2019 0:56:08 GMT
I just posted yesterday the song lyrics to Graham Parker's great song "You Can't Be Too Strong" a 40 year old anti-abortion (leaning) song that could not get released today on major record company yet which has nothing offensive in it whatsoever - it's that world we live in now. The fact that some disagree with it in principle would shut that song down. You see it on this board when people argue against basic law - basic US law for Godsakes - in regards to the Polanski legal case all the time. The notion that an anti-abortion song couldn't get released in a world where this gets a wide theatrical rollout and debuts at #4 at the box office has no leg to stand on. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on May 14, 2019 10:10:10 GMT
I just posted yesterday the song lyrics to Graham Parker's great song "You Can't Be Too Strong" a 40 year old anti-abortion (leaning) song that could not get released today on major record company yet which has nothing offensive in it whatsoever - it's that world we live in now. The fact t yhat some disagree with it in principle would shut that song down. You see it on this board when people argue against basic law - basic US law for Godsakes - in regards to the Polanski legal case all the time.The notion that an anti-abortion song couldn't get released in a world where this gets a wide theatrical rollout and debuts at #4 at the box office has no leg to stand on.  Good point........please note I did say "could not get released on a major record company" which is probably true for this film as well ........#4 at the box office but not a major studio/distributor right? I'm almost afraid to look up who released the film...........shudder ............but point well taken........ |
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on May 14, 2019 21:21:23 GMT
OK, when I first read this title I assumed this was just some asshole professor defending a monster in his personal life or in the classroom or something. I could understand the reasoning behind firing someone in that kind of situation.
But firing a defense attorney for advocating for fair and just representation even of reprehensible defendants is...kind of mind-boggling. This is a law school, and that principle is the foundation of our legal system. I'd like to know more about the situation but this doesn't look good at all for Harvard. I guess I am curious why Sullivan seems so intent on representing Weinstein in the first place. Is it just to make an ideological point? To play devil's advocate? I don't understand what it would take to actively want to pursue a case like this on the defense side. It certainly raises some questions, but I guess none of that really matters because defendants are entitled representation, bottom line. No one has to like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on May 16, 2019 8:20:56 GMT
Oh honey, I couldn't get passed the line forcibly performing oral sex...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2019 23:17:29 GMT
Oh honey, I couldn't get passed the line forcibly performing oral sex...  |
|
Film Socialism
Based
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,555
Likes: 1,388
|
Post by Film Socialism on May 21, 2019 13:18:29 GMT
siiickkk also currentaffairs as usual had a good piece on this (dude who wrote that is a lawyer before yall come in w the heat) |
|
clunkybob2
Junior Member
clunky's posts should be locked in a cell
Posts: 262
Likes: 94
|
Post by clunkybob2 on Jun 5, 2019 11:26:03 GMT
The fact that there are lawyers still working despite the fact that many of their previous clients are convicted felons is extremely disturbing
|
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Jun 5, 2019 15:22:01 GMT
The fact that there are lawyers still working despite the fact that many of their previous clients are convicted felons is extremely disturbing everybody has a right to a defense. However, I could never be a defense attorney for the same reasons you mentioned. |
|
cherry68
Based
Man is unhappy because he doesn't know he's happy. It's only that.
Posts: 3,669
Likes: 2,107
|
Post by cherry68 on Jun 5, 2019 16:31:03 GMT
The fact that there are lawyers still working despite the fact that many of their previous clients are convicted felons is extremely disturbing everybody has a right to a defense. However, I could never be a defense attorney for the same reasons you mentioned. Maybe he meant that, if most clients are in prison, they aren't good lawyers and it's surprising someone still hires them. 🤔 |
|
clunkybob2
Junior Member
clunky's posts should be locked in a cell
Posts: 262
Likes: 94
|
Post by clunkybob2 on Jun 6, 2019 8:55:56 GMT
The fact that there are lawyers still working despite the fact that many of their previous clients are convicted felons is extremely disturbing everybody has a right to a defense. However, I could never be a defense attorney for the same reasons you mentioned. But if they are involved with a proven criminal doesn't that make them an accessory to the crime? |
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jun 6, 2019 21:05:27 GMT
everybody has a right to a defense. However, I could never be a defense attorney for the same reasons you mentioned. But if they are involved with a proven criminal doesn't that make them an accessory to the crime? Can't tell if you are trolling or not but that's not how the criminal justice system works. Every criminal trial is not an "I Quit" match where the loser has to turn in their law license. |
|
