NEW YORK — A New York attorney on Thursday said the life of a murdered transgender woman wasn’t worth the same punishment as if his client had killed someone “in the higher end of the community.”
Piece of scum attorney.My blood is fucking boiling.
The attorney and whomever that scum is defending are the worthless ones
All right, listen up, Tumblr. This is one of the few times I’ll actually give a social commentary, so here we go. When you’re a lawyer, your job is to fight for your client. No questions asked. You make whatever argument you can. You verbally rip apart people on the stand when they side against you. You say whatever you need to. Do I think this murderer is a piece of scum? Yes. Do I think his lawyer is probably a piece of scum too? Yes. But this has to be said. When you’re a lawyer, sometimes you’re forced to do dirty work. Because at the end of the day, if people stop fighting for the guilty ones, sooner or later, there’s no one to fight for the innocent ones either. You got a problem with that? Don’t be a lawyer. Problem solved. Does what this lawyer said suck? Yes. But it wasn’t your friend or family member that got murdered and it’s not years of your freedom on the line, so kindly fuck off. This lawyer’s job is probably hard enough as it is.
You’re fucking awful. Kindly fuck off
He said she was less than human.
What does that have to do with his job at all.
How does that make the murderer any less guilty?
I am a lawyer. (Disclaimer: I am not your lawyer. Consult a lawyer in your own state for anything that affects your rights.)
What this scumbag said does not fall under the ambit of zealous representation.
Arguments made to a court have to have a basis in law or a reasonable argument for reversing existing law and/or making new law. (I’m paraphrasing.)
There is no basis in law to argue that the murder laws do not or should not apply to transgender women or sex workers because of what kind of people they are or because their lives are somehow less valuable. None. Zero. Nada.
If I were that judge, I’d have reported the attorney for a Rule 11* violation for even making that argument, and be looking into my state’s rules of professional conduct to see what else he might have violated by doing so. In my state, even without a provision specifically protecting people on the basis of gender identity, I would be comfortable making the argument that this lawyer’s conduct was prejudicial to the administration of justice as a knowing manifestation of bias or prejudice based on sex. See TNRPC 8.4(d) and Comment 3 thereto.
Attorneys get enough shit for legitimate zealous representation issues without muddying the water as if every argument an attorney makes is ok because of zealous representation. It is not. This is not ok.
Also, if the commenter who posted that is a lawyer, they need to take a few more PR CLEs, because zealous representation does not and has never meant “you say whatever you need to.” Doing so violates Rule 11, shows a lack of candor toward the tribunal, and contributes to the degradation of the profession.
Does zealous representation mean we sometimes have to do things that seem unfair - hell, that are unfair? Yep. I can’t give a specific example because of my own professional limitations, but even in the short time I have been practicing law I have had to make arguments based on existing law that I know is unfair.
Does zealous representation extend to making an argument that a human being wasn’t really a person worthy of protection of the laws against violence because of who they were or what job they did? No, I can’t think of a set of facts where that would be true even in a PR hypothetical for students, much less real life. To make a Rule 11-compliant argument, the lawyer would need a cogent and reasoned analysis as to why the Fourteenth Amendment doesn’t apply to this victim such that they should be exempted from the protection of the laws against murder. “Because bigotry” is not such an argument. Again, I can’t think of any argument that would pass Rule 11 to get around equal protection of the laws against murder because of the status of the victim.
This is not just a “oh, popelizbet is a dang hippie lawyer” argument, either. Prominent law bloggers with many more years of service than I, whose politics barely brush mine, are condemning this. This kind of hateful garbage brings disrepute on our profession because it is morally wrong to make these kinds of arguments. Scummy lawyers get away with enough fuckery without people excusing things they do that are inexcusable based on their complete misunderstanding of what zealous representation actually is.
*Some states may not designate the rule with this rule number, but in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11 is, in part, the rule against making arguments to the court that are not supported in law or do not advance a colorable argument to change existing law. A similar Rule exists in the Rules of Criminal Procedure. To my knowledge, every state has adopted this portion of the Federal Rules.
are u FRICKING KIDDING ME KIMBELL ART MUSEUM WHY ARE YOU CLOSED TOMORROW ITS GOING TO BE IN THE UPPER 40’s STOP BEING BABIES I NEED TO SEE SOME DAMN ART
I made the mistake of checking out my downtown area stitches and let me tell u this if u ever tear/ get an episiotomy when u have a baby don’t look don’t even think about it just trust me
just to avoid accidentally using offensive language i’m going to start using 90s surfer dude slang because inadvertently offending someone is totally bogus dude
people might not want to be called dude
you are radically right and that is so not tubular my friend i apologise
I find your poor grammar and spelling to be offensive to my eyes.
watch me catch this gnarly wave of i don’t care
I have figured out a few things (probably):
- Sexuality is fluid.
- Sexual fluidity varies in viscosity for different people.
- If you identify as something, it doesn’t matter who you’re dating/have dated/have never dated. You are who you decide you are, and nobody should be able to tell you otherwise.
- Don’t make assumptions about other people’s sexualities. I don’t care if you know a boy who has been in a three-year relationship with another boy. He might not be gay (or even a he).
- Not a lot of people have it all figured out. As I’ve shared my personal confusion, a lot of people have confided their own struggles to me as well.
- Living in a binary-obsessed society is the pits.
So go out there and make out with whomever you please. Or with no one at all. Your call."
Crystal Ragin, an Army sergeant serving at Fort Eustis, told a judge that she feared for her life and didn’t know what would happen to her and her four children once she left the courthouse. Earlier, she had testified against her husband in a domestic abuse case accusing him of picking her up and throwing her to the floor.
The judge issued the protective order that day barring John Ragin from having any contact with Crystal. But before it could be served, the Ragins got into a dispute at Crystal’s home. Police arriving to that call for help couldn’t find the order in the system and let John Ragin go. The next afternoon, Crystal and three of her children were found stabbed to death. One child, John Ragin’s biological son, was left unharmed and taken by John Ragin to South Carolina after the murders.
A sheriff’s deputy arriving to serve the protective order 24 hours after it was issued found police searching Ragin’s Newport News home. Ragin, who was arrested in South Carolina, faces charges of capital murder and is awaiting trial."