RSS FeedJudge’s Daughter Sues Driver After Accidentally Killing His Passenger While Intoxicated
Elizabeth Shelton, the 21-year old daughter of a state district juvenile judge, was convicted last year of intoxication manslaughter for the death of her boyfriend. Shelton caused his death when she crashed a Lexus SUV into the back of a truck he was passenger to.
Her blood alcohol concentration was more than three times the legal limit at the time, two tests showed.
Shelton was sentenced to four months in jail and eight years probation.
Now, Shelton, her family and the family of the boyfriend who was killed are suing for $20,000 for the destruction of the Lexus SUV she was driving and an undetermined amount for mental anguish, pain and suffering.
Shelton has named 16 defendants, including insurance companies and banks. According to the defence, “They’re just throwing everything against the wall to see if anything sticks.”
During Shelton’s trial, it was disputed by experts brought in by the defence and prosecution whether or not the other driver had swerved into Shelton’s lane.
Testimony also showed that the company the driver was working for let the insurance on the truck lapse.
Writing in the lawsuit, Shelton’s attorney claims that “The injuries and property damage sustained by (Shelton and her family) were not the result of intentional acts, but were accidental and caused by the negligence of the uninsured/underinsured driver.”
It stands to wonder how a sober Shelton would have reacted to the disputed swerve. It seems that Shelton is responsible for at least the bulk of the damage to the car and her own mental anguish, pain and suffering.
Also, a truck is not made more likely to swerve by being uninsured. Presumably, the company had to pay either way for liable damages, whether directly or through an insurance company, as well as any state fines that resulted for having the truck on the road uninsured.
This lawsuit is akin to a negligent shooter suing the friend of the victim for the cost of the bullet and its tragic, avoidable consequences.
Attention: Lunatic Atheists and Their Lawyers
This is a public service announcement:
h/t Michael Lewchuk of Seton Hall
Saddam Hussein’s Dysfunctional House of War
House of Saddam. Although I only caught a few episodes, here are my preliminary thoughts on the series.
Accurate Information in the Fog of War
Alex Homes, one of the researchers for the series, shares the difficulty in finding accurate information on Saddam’s life.
Sally and I started by reading all the biographies that had been written over the years. The first thing that struck us was how the accounts of Saddam changed over time. Fuad Matar’s biography, written in 1981 and containing extensive face to face interviews with Saddam, could not be more different that those written by Western journalists after the 1991 invasion of Kuwait. Finding incontrovertible facts was going to be a problem.
The context in which this series is written is essentially crucial, as the American electorate still struggles with a highly controversial conflict that they are still uncertain over why they are there. The infamous 2003 USA Today poll indicated that 70% believed Saddam was behind 9-11.
What We Won’t Hear Much Of
Biographical entries that will likely be glossed over or omitted from the series include how the CIA helped put Saddam in power in the first place, and helped him create lists of names for his mass graves,
In 1959, there was a failed assassination attempt on Qasim. The failed assassin was none other than a young Saddam Hussein. In 1963, a CIA-organized coup did successfully assassinate Qasim and Saddam’s Ba’ath Party came to power for the first time. Saddam returned from exile in Egypt and took up the key post as head of Iraq’s secret service. The CIA then provided the new pliant, Iraqi regime with the names of thousands of communists, and other leftist activists and organizers. Thousands of these supporters of Qasim and his policies were soon dead in a rampage of mass murder carried out by the CIA’s close friends in Iraq.
They will probably also overlook that the American administration helped arm Saddam with WMDs, and disregard the remarks by (Canadian born) U.S. ambassador April Glaspie, the State Department, and Assistant Secretary of State John Kelly over the Kuwaiti invasion.
America’s complicity in Saddam’s crimes will clearly be ignored, and of course the entire Iran-contra affair probably won’t even get a peep.
These inner corners of American politics, and how this knowledge affected the psyche and perspectives of Saddam, will be deliberately omitted.
As a reult, the series will eventually go down in history as a well-designed propaganda piece for an illegal war that destabilized the world for decades.
Defending the “Guilty”
An interesting situation is developing in India as certain members of the Bombay Bar have unofficially declared that no lawyer is going to defend the lone terrorist caught in the Mumbai attacks of 26/11. At the same time, the Country’s top criminal lawyer sitting in New Delhi has stated that the terrorist must be given a good defence and even he may step in to do so. While a large part of the country is in shock for his comments, a greater question that has always remained is the idea of a lawyer defending the “guilty” .
This brings me to another parallel situation; that of Radovon Karadzic. Karadzic is accused of genocide in Bosnia and Kevin Jon Heller is defending him. In this post , Kevin explains to friends and peers as to why he’s defending Karadzic. His views may be an answer to the situation above. He brings forth the idea of a fair trial and a good defense for everyone as a matter of right and uses it to suport his argument. His 3 reasons in brief that he elucidates later are;
- The first is the one that defense attorneys always use, which is no less true for that fact: every defendant, even one accused of committing horrific international crimes, needs a good defense.
-The second answer is that every defendant, even one accused of committing horrific international crimes, deserves a good defense. The right to a fair trial is a basic human right, one enshrined in every important human-rights document of the modern era, from the Magna Carta to the ICCPR.
-The third answer is pragmatic: the ICTY needs Dr. Karadzic to receive a fair trial and that this is important for its legacy to sustain to future generations.
At the end of articulating his reasons he states;
“These, in any case, are the reasons why I will devote much of my professional life in the coming years to helping defend a man most people believe is responsible for some of the worst crimes since World War II. I am honored to be involved in such an important case. Indeed, given the stakes, I think “how could you defend Radovan Karadzic?” is the wrong question. The better question, I believe, is how could I not?”
Who Says Lawyers Are Rats?
The Globe & Mail recently reported on a recurring event that flies in the face of the popular stereotype of lawyers 
being vile creatures beyond salvation. The Lawyers Feed the Hungry program has been providing several free meals per week to the hungry for ten years now and there’s no end in sight despite a slowing economy.
Since its inception, the event has been funded by donations, operated by lawyers, judges and law students, and located in the cafeteria of the Law Society of Upper Canada.
So this event is nothing new, but the pièce de résistance of this delectable deed has to be the upcoming Christmas dinner, including a savory serving of filet mignon, purchased personally by Martin Teplitsky, the event’s founder (no more alliterations, I promise).
As if the deed wasn’t kind enough, Teplitsky will also be giving ten dollars of his own money to each of the 600 expected guests. The Globe & Mail quoted him as saying that people who have nothing would be grateful “just having ten bucks to buy cigarettes or a bottle of wine.”
I think that’s the fact that gets me the most. It runs completely contrary to the most famous cop out so many of us use to justify not giving money to the poor: “They’re just going to blow it on cigarettes and booze.”
Teplitsky clearly recognizes that people who are down on their luck have just as much of a right to some vices as the rest of us. And I don’t know about everyone else, but if I was dependent on charity for Christmas dinner, I’d probably want a little wine myself. I’m also willing to bet that the proportion of lawyers plagued by alcoholism is probably close to that of the homeless, so be wary of lawyers asking for loans.
Speaking of wine, this Christmas dinner I’ll be raising my glass to all of the good folks involved in the program, working hard to help the hard up. Here’s to another ten years.
If you’re interested in making a donation, you can send a cheque or questions/comments to:
The Law Society Foundation
130 Queen Street West
Toronto, ON, M5H 2N6
lsf@lsuc.on.ca
US Lawyers Predict the Future, in a Recession
We previously mentioned the ABA survey on the economy.
Well here are the results from the almost 1,500 lawyers who responded.
Quami Frederick Forged Law School Marks Too!
I have just a little bit of sympathy for Quami Frederick, the young woman who faked her undergrad degree to get into Osgoode Hall.
A single mother, she now has $80,000 in student debt that she will have a tougher time paying back without a law career.
Fredrick recently resigned from her position at Wildeboer Dellelce.
But the sympathy quickly dissolves when The Star reveals today that she faked her law school marks too to get the job with Wildeboer Dellelce.
The altered marks, with a C upgraded to A in some cases, came to light when the law firm and Osgoode shared notes on Frederick.
Fredrick will be going to formal inquiry at Osgoode. Whereas some leniency or remedial work may have been possible with just the undergrad situation, the fact that she continued this dishonesty all the way through law school does not bode well for her future.
Dale Brazao at The Star also gives us a shout out,
In the last three days Frederick has become a cause célèbre among bloggers on the Internet, who have posted reactions ranging from outrage and mockery to praise for Frederick for beating the system.
We love you too, especially for catching the dishonest people that exclude other hard-working applicants to law school, and perpetuate fraud in the legal hiring practice.
Law Blogs, the Great Equalizer
The Canadian Bar Association (CBA) has an article by Kevin O’Keefe in their publication, Addendum, on the use of blogs by lawyers.
They discuss how blogs can help develop lawyers to become opinion leaders in their area of practice.
The more the blog has a niche, the more effective it will be as a marketing tool. Active bloggers are finding up to 80 per cent of their work coming to them through their site.
One hundred years ago, lawyer marketing was all about entering into conversations with opinion leaders, business associates, and the public to spread word of one’s passion, expertise, and care and to further enhance one’s reputation as a trusted authority. Today, it’s still the same – except that the conversation has moved online.
What I would have included on my application to Osgoode, had I known you were permitted to make things up
This site’s readership will be all too familiar with the rigorous process of applying to Canadian law schools, starting with the LSAT and ending (it is to be presumed) with a vetting of one’s academic and professional credentials against those of one’s fellow candidates. The most deserving students receive early confirmation of acceptance to their first-choice schools. For the rest of us, months may pass before a position is secured; unease turns to anxiety turns to panic, until we would accept an invitation to the Novgorod School of Law just to return some certainty to our lives.
But fear not, would-be law school freshmen, for there is an easier way! Third year (former) LLB candidate Quami Frederick has the secret to a stress-free application process: fabricating a significant element of your application. As previously reported here, Frederick’s artificial B.Sc. in Business Administration opened the door to Osgoode Hall and might have launched a stellar legal career, but for the investigative journalism of the Toronto Star.
I, for one, would have welcomed this alternative in late July 2007, when I was losing hope of being accepted anywhere, and was considering making a career of my summer job at the Maple Leaf Foods chicken slaughterhouse. Had I known then what I know now, my application might have looked very different:
- graduated magna cum laude from the Bill Clinton President School (TM)
- holds two simultaneous parliamentary seats, for Calgary Southwest and Laurier Sainte-Marie
- in 2005, Rt. Hon. Beverley McLachlin, P.C. called me “the son [she] never had”
- has two thousand Facebook friends
- prepared to bequeath a substantial personal fortune to the first law school to accept
- Nobel Prize nominee, 2007, for brokering landmark peace agreement between scissors and rock
- autobiography The Audacity of Hope was on the New York Times Bestseller list for thirty weeks
- middle name is “Osgoode Hall Law School”
- can read minds
UWO Strike Averted
A strike at the University of Western Ontario has been averted after the school reached an agreement with the union.
The bizarre union – International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 772 – is comprised of only 10 members. These 10 employees run the obsolete steam plant which heats both Western and University Hospital. They also keep the tunnels beneath the school nice and toasty warm.
An email was sent to Western students earlier this week to warn of a possible strike and to set out steps to help students avoid disruption of classes and transportation networks. Local 772 would have been in a legal position to strike as of midnight tonight.
Fortunately, Western News reports that a tentative collective bargaining agreement has now been reached, subject to ratification by the Board of Governors.
No word yet on York’s ongoing battle with its TA/Grad Student/Contract Faculty union. It’s an issue we’ve been following for some time now.
See e.g.:
- “We Object!” – The Impossibility of Satisfying Everybody – Dec. 1, 2008
- Classes Resume at Osgoode Hall – Nov. 26, 2008
- CUPE 3903 Strike Update from Osgoode – Nov. 20, 2008
- The Privileged and the Impoverished: Now One and the Same? – Nov. 10, 2008
- Strike Confirmed at York – Nov. 6, 2008
- Yet Another Strike at York University (and Osgoode Hall)? – Nov. 2, 2008
Bah, humbug to Tarek Fatah
Ihsaan Gardee, The Calgary Herald
December 14, 2008
Reproduced with the permission
While Canadians hunker down for the festive season, bombarded by incessant shopping jingles and reruns of A Christmas Carol, many are also simply trying to weather the economic storm which is now battering the world and has finally reached our shores.
It was with this in mind that the initiative to launch a food drive in conjunction with the CBC and the cast and crew of one of Canada’s newest and most talked-about sitcoms, Little Mosque on the Prairie, embarked.
No holiday season would be complete, however, without the naysayers and those who would seek to divide Canadians instead of uniting to help them in their time of need. In this case, the role of Ebenezer Scrooge is played with aplomb by Tarek Fatah [who writes for and is frequently interviewed by Maclean's magazine], who has taken it upon himself to bah, humbug this project.
In the rush to pen his Dec. 11 column, “CBC and jihad,” attacking the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. for teaming up with the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIRCAN) on an anti-hunger initiative, Fatah omitted more than just facts. Accuracy and truth went out the window too.
Apart from a passing mention of CAIR-CAN’s involvement in what he terms “an admirable deed,” Fatah’s diatribe seems to focus more on his own fears and insecurities–seeing Islamists lurking around every corner and hiding in every shadow–while mudslinging at highly respected grassroots organizations. Perhaps using the logic that a lie repeated a thousand times becomes the truth, Fatah seems content to spew the same unsubstantiated allegations time and time again.
To paraphrase from the movie The American President, many of us operated under the assumption that the reason that Fatah (and those like him) devotes so much time and energy shouting at the rain is that he simply doesn’t get it. Well, we were wrong. Fatah’s problem isn’t that he doesn’t get it. Fatah’s problem is that he just can’t sell it.
For the record, CAIR-CAN is an organization whose vision is to be a leading voice that enriches Canadian society through Muslim civic engagement (such as this project) and the promotion of human rights. Formed as a sister organization of the U. S.-based CAIR, the two remain completely distinct and autonomous operationally while co-operating on issues of mutual concern and sharing best practices.
Furthermore, CAIR-CAN has acted as an intervener on several high-profile human rights cases, including that of Maher Arar’s rendition to torture in Syria, and continues its work on day-to-day issues of discrimination and civil liberties violations. Recognized for its professionalism and commitment to the universal principles enshrined in our Constitution by organizations and individuals such as Amnesty International and author/ activist Naomi Klein, CAIR-CAN has worked and will continue to work on behalf of all Canadians.
Finally, CAIR-CAN does not now nor will it ever receive or accept funding from foreign governments. Period.
Having said this, even in the story, there is hope at the end for Ebenezer Scrooge.
We welcome Tarek Fatah to come out and help distribute the food collected by this initiative to feed the hungry this holiday season. Then, just maybe, he’ll see for himself that when, as Canadians, we are united, we can accomplish miracles.
Ihsaan Gardee is the executive director of the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-CAN).
Kashif Ahmed of Law is Cool is a Board Member of CAIR-CAN. Note that this piece is provided for interest alone.
Walking in the Other Person’s Steel Toed Boots
Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.
- Master Yoda, P.C., C.J.C.
In this award-winning 2006 film produced in cooperation with the CBC, Steel Toes tells the story of a neo-Nazi living in Montreal. He viciously attacks an Indian immigrant without provocation, mistaking him for a Muslim, with serious injuries that resulted in death.
He is frustrated, angry with the millions of immigrants who come to Canada and reproduce in large numbers. They supposedly take jobs away from working-class whites like him and are changing his white way of life in Canada.
The young man, who stopped his education in high school, is forced to confront his racial ideology within himself, discovering that if he takes the stand with his racial rhetoric he will likely never be released.
But another man is also on trial in this film – the Jewish lawyer assigned to defend him, despite having his client tell him to his face,
In an ideal world we would have you eliminated.
But his client’s paradox is that he also says,
In this world, I need you more than anyone.
Derided by his Jewish family and friends as a super liberal humanist Jew, the lawyer also struggles with advocating on behalf of someone who despises the multi-racial society – it’s multicultural, the lawyer corrects him – which they live in.
His friends ask him if he has forgotten what his people have gone through, what his family has gone through. But it is actually his family that provides him with the conviction to move ahead.
He thinks back to his childhood and his father telling him that he should give people a chance, especially those who want you dead. When the son responds that it sounds “soft,” the father replies that it is the toughest thing of all to do,
Soft? It’s the hardest kind of right there is. Otherwise the killing won’t stop. Somebody has to stop the killing and that’s you and that’s me. “Thou shalt not kill.” It’s the basis of our entire civilization.
You don’t have to have the slightest interest in practicing criminal law to enjoy this movie, which is essentially about compassion for someone who is different. The neo-Nazi overcoming his guilt and prejudice towards the accented immigrant, the lawyer overcoming his anger towards the criminal, and even the victim who forgives his killer before he dies.
But it’s the transformational ability of advocacy that really makes a difference in the story. The young man finally comes to the realization that the Jewish lawyer who so selflessly helps him at the expense of risking his career, family and personal life could hardly be a devil.
Only by overcoming this fear and hatred can the young man accept the possibility of rehabilitation, and eagerly seek to re-educate himself by reading new materials and embracing new ideas.
It’s an inspiring story and a reminder of the reasons why we love and uphold the justice system.
Cross-posted from Slaw
