After the hearing, the Judge decided that the habeas petition be denied. He made this decision because Stearns had passed a new rule that the defendant need only show that Ortega did not consent to Kops’ failure to file for appeal to be titled relief.
The findings were adopted from the Magistrate Judge and recommendations, and denied the relief.
Though, because Ortega did not consent to the failure of Kops, he was entitled to a Relief due to the Stearns law.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
ISSUES OF THE CASE: ROE V. FLORES-ORTEGA
The case came before the court, because Ortega had filed for a federal habeas due to Kops’ failure in filing for an appeal 60 days after Ortega’s trial.
The efforts for Ortega’s appeal, due to Kops negligence, came out untimely, and he was unable to file for an appeal.
The matter was referred to a Magistrate Judge by the United States District Court for Eastern California.
The Judge took the matter and ordered a hearing on wither Kops made the promise to help with Ortega’s appeal
In conclusion of the case that followed suit, the Judge said, “The evidence in this case is, I think, quite clear that there was no consent to a failure to file a notice of appeal”.
The point was argued. They recollected a conversation between Kops and Ortega while he was behind bars involving the appeal process. They discussed how Kops did not recall the promise, but at the same time, she was a professional and experience defense counsel, and that if Ortega had requested an appeal, Kops would have obliged without backing down.
The efforts for Ortega’s appeal, due to Kops negligence, came out untimely, and he was unable to file for an appeal.
The matter was referred to a Magistrate Judge by the United States District Court for Eastern California.
The Judge took the matter and ordered a hearing on wither Kops made the promise to help with Ortega’s appeal
In conclusion of the case that followed suit, the Judge said, “The evidence in this case is, I think, quite clear that there was no consent to a failure to file a notice of appeal”.
The point was argued. They recollected a conversation between Kops and Ortega while he was behind bars involving the appeal process. They discussed how Kops did not recall the promise, but at the same time, she was a professional and experience defense counsel, and that if Ortega had requested an appeal, Kops would have obliged without backing down.
FACTS OF THE CASE: ROE WARDEN V. FLORES-ORTEGA
California found Lucio Flores-Ortega, who had one count of murder, two counts of assault, and a personal use of a deadly weapon, guilty. He pleads guilty in October 1993 in Superior Court. He was accompanied by his public defender, Nancy Kops, and a Spanish language interpreter.
Because of his guilty plea, both assault charges were dropped. The prosecutor of the state also moved to strike the allegation on Ortega’s personal use of a deadly weapon charge.
Ortega was sentenced to 15 years to life in state prison.
The judge informed Ortega, after the sentence that he may file for appeal within 60 days after his appearance in court.
Ms. Kops was appointed to help him file for appeal, and even told Mr. Ortega to bring appeal papers.
No notice of appeal was filed within Ortega’s 60 day limit allowed by the state law.
Ortega tried to file for an appeal but it was seen as untimely.
Kops had not filed for the appeal like she had promised Mr. Ortega.
Ortega filed a federal habeas petition based on his ineffective assistance due to Kop’s failure in noting his appeal after she had promised him she would.
Because of his guilty plea, both assault charges were dropped. The prosecutor of the state also moved to strike the allegation on Ortega’s personal use of a deadly weapon charge.
Ortega was sentenced to 15 years to life in state prison.
The judge informed Ortega, after the sentence that he may file for appeal within 60 days after his appearance in court.
Ms. Kops was appointed to help him file for appeal, and even told Mr. Ortega to bring appeal papers.
No notice of appeal was filed within Ortega’s 60 day limit allowed by the state law.
Ortega tried to file for an appeal but it was seen as untimely.
Kops had not filed for the appeal like she had promised Mr. Ortega.
Ortega filed a federal habeas petition based on his ineffective assistance due to Kop’s failure in noting his appeal after she had promised him she would.
First Monday in October Film
We viewed part of a film in class today titled, “The First Monday in October”. The film is about the decisions of the Supreme Court on a pornographic film. A female justice, Loomis, is offended that Justice Snow, a liberal man, did not go to the film screening to review what has been shown in the film. He believes that the film maker, Malony, should be able to do what he wants.
My opinion of this film and what had happened is two sided. In a sense I agree with both of them. I do think pornography is dirty, and just the thought that something so vile could be shown in front of children makes me feel kind of sick. On the other hand, pornography should be allowed because people have the right to do what they want, and express themselves how they want. If they decide to use pornography to do that, then that is what they do. It is degrading, and it does distort the human nature of love making or whatever you feel comfortable calling it, but it’s how the producer of the film decided to express himself. Now, I am not saying it’s completely ok to openly display porn, though now it’s quite commonly viewed, but what I am saying is that people should be allowed to produce porn, and watch it if that’s what they want to do. I am somewhat of a liberal myself, so I believe people do have a right to do as they want, as long as no one else is harmed by it, or to a certain degree.
My opinion of this film and what had happened is two sided. In a sense I agree with both of them. I do think pornography is dirty, and just the thought that something so vile could be shown in front of children makes me feel kind of sick. On the other hand, pornography should be allowed because people have the right to do what they want, and express themselves how they want. If they decide to use pornography to do that, then that is what they do. It is degrading, and it does distort the human nature of love making or whatever you feel comfortable calling it, but it’s how the producer of the film decided to express himself. Now, I am not saying it’s completely ok to openly display porn, though now it’s quite commonly viewed, but what I am saying is that people should be allowed to produce porn, and watch it if that’s what they want to do. I am somewhat of a liberal myself, so I believe people do have a right to do as they want, as long as no one else is harmed by it, or to a certain degree.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Illegal Market Views
As a class, we have watched a documentary about illegal trade, and counterfeit products. The video demonstrated how the goods are sold, produced, and the damages they cause. After seeing this video, I feel kind of guilty that this kind of trade happens throughout the world. Unfortunately, there isn’t much we can do to stop it.
When asked how I feel about it, I guess I feel like I have distributed in some way. We all have. It makes me feel that there is something I could have done to help minimize the percentage of illegal trade, download, or purchase. It made me sick to see people create fake medicine, and how it killed innocent people who thought they were going to recover by taking the medicine. It made me sad to see women get excited over their brand new Proda bag, when in all reality, it was fake. Though it makes me think twice about what I do, or what I buy, I know that this is a trade that is going to be hard to demolish. The video did say that its fast spread, and if it is spreading like a contagious disease, it’s going to take a long time to fight off the infection of the black market, or illegal trade.
All in all, I feel awful that this is happening. I know that I can be one of those people who don’t contribute, but then again, I never know when I am or when I am not. Like the victims in the video, we don’t know any better. The best thing we can do is to be cautious.
When asked how I feel about it, I guess I feel like I have distributed in some way. We all have. It makes me feel that there is something I could have done to help minimize the percentage of illegal trade, download, or purchase. It made me sick to see people create fake medicine, and how it killed innocent people who thought they were going to recover by taking the medicine. It made me sad to see women get excited over their brand new Proda bag, when in all reality, it was fake. Though it makes me think twice about what I do, or what I buy, I know that this is a trade that is going to be hard to demolish. The video did say that its fast spread, and if it is spreading like a contagious disease, it’s going to take a long time to fight off the infection of the black market, or illegal trade.
All in all, I feel awful that this is happening. I know that I can be one of those people who don’t contribute, but then again, I never know when I am or when I am not. Like the victims in the video, we don’t know any better. The best thing we can do is to be cautious.
Research plan for my case
I am fairly new to the research of court cases, and so I decided to start with the basics.
Originally, I found the Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega case on this site, http://www.findlaw.com/.
It was a helpful site, and it has related cases to the appeal that I am going to research. I do a lot of my searching on Google, and so I plan to research this case through that search engine. I plan to research the decisions made for the case, and to find out what has happened. I am also curious about the actual murder case, because the Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega case is about a respondent who was convicted of second-degree murder. I may apply this to my research for my project.
I found several other sites that will help me research this case and appeal.
www.law.cornell.edu
www.oyez.org
http://law.onecle.com/ussc/528/528us476.html
I will look through these, and see what more I can find involving this case.
Originally, I found the Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega case on this site, http://www.findlaw.com/.
It was a helpful site, and it has related cases to the appeal that I am going to research. I do a lot of my searching on Google, and so I plan to research this case through that search engine. I plan to research the decisions made for the case, and to find out what has happened. I am also curious about the actual murder case, because the Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega case is about a respondent who was convicted of second-degree murder. I may apply this to my research for my project.
I found several other sites that will help me research this case and appeal.
www.law.cornell.edu
www.oyez.org
http://law.onecle.com/ussc/528/528us476.html
I will look through these, and see what more I can find involving this case.
ROE, WARDEN v. FLORES-ORTEGA
ROE, WARDEN v. FLORES-ORTEGA
Searching through cases, I decided to research the Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega appeal case.
After pleading guilty to second-degree murder, the respondent in his case was advised by the judge that he had 60 days to file an appeal. The judge advised him of this after his sentencing. Ms. Kops, his council in charge of his appeal papers, had told him to bring the papers into her file so that she may file a notice. She failed to make the appeal notice, and by the time of the respondent’s appeal, it was rejected as an untimely file. He tried to secure state habeas relief was unsuccessful. He filed a federal habeas petition due to Kops’ failure to fulfill her promise, and file for appeal. Unfortunately for the respondent, the relief was denied by the District Court. The Ninth Circuit reversed showing that the respondent was indeed entitled to relief because the habeas only had to show that his counsel, Kops, has failed to file a notice of appeal. This was without the petitioner’s consent.
Searching through cases, I decided to research the Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega appeal case.
After pleading guilty to second-degree murder, the respondent in his case was advised by the judge that he had 60 days to file an appeal. The judge advised him of this after his sentencing. Ms. Kops, his council in charge of his appeal papers, had told him to bring the papers into her file so that she may file a notice. She failed to make the appeal notice, and by the time of the respondent’s appeal, it was rejected as an untimely file. He tried to secure state habeas relief was unsuccessful. He filed a federal habeas petition due to Kops’ failure to fulfill her promise, and file for appeal. Unfortunately for the respondent, the relief was denied by the District Court. The Ninth Circuit reversed showing that the respondent was indeed entitled to relief because the habeas only had to show that his counsel, Kops, has failed to file a notice of appeal. This was without the petitioner’s consent.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Smashing Good Times
Bernie Madoff, a man who had been arrested for a Ponzi scheme was the inspiration for a toy called “Smash-me Bernie”. This is a small figurine in which Bernie Madoff is in a devil’s uniform, and it comes with a hammer so that you can smash the figurine. After the toy’s success, the company that made the toy, ModelWorks, also offers a custom “smash-me” doll for those who have not felt the harsh scheme of Bernie, but may have felt ripped-off, or ticked-off by someone else.
Now, if I were to purchase one of these toys, I would want one of George W. Bush. I have never been a fan of this man, or the way he had run our country for the last 8 years. We are now in a big economic downfall, and our troops are still in Iraq for reasons unknown. I think that all of this is pointless, and I am really unhappy with the way things are going. I don’t know who ultimately is to blame for all of this, but I can only assume that George W. Bush is the main cause. Mind you, I am neither democratic, nor republican. I simply want a good man to run our country the way it needs to be run. George did not provide us with what we needed. We are suffering from the pieces of the mess he created, and did not clean up. Therefore, I would really love to own a “smash-me Bush” doll, so I can take a golden hammer, and smash the doll. Then again, I don’t think I would smash the doll since I spent one-hundred dollars on it. I might just leave it on display for everyone to laugh at?
Now, if I were to purchase one of these toys, I would want one of George W. Bush. I have never been a fan of this man, or the way he had run our country for the last 8 years. We are now in a big economic downfall, and our troops are still in Iraq for reasons unknown. I think that all of this is pointless, and I am really unhappy with the way things are going. I don’t know who ultimately is to blame for all of this, but I can only assume that George W. Bush is the main cause. Mind you, I am neither democratic, nor republican. I simply want a good man to run our country the way it needs to be run. George did not provide us with what we needed. We are suffering from the pieces of the mess he created, and did not clean up. Therefore, I would really love to own a “smash-me Bush” doll, so I can take a golden hammer, and smash the doll. Then again, I don’t think I would smash the doll since I spent one-hundred dollars on it. I might just leave it on display for everyone to laugh at?
Greed Is Good
We all tend to agree that greed is an awful thing. It is listed as one of the seven deadly sins, and we often loath greedy people. But is greed really that bad?
After reading an article in class, it is known that greed is not bad at all. Greed is what made our Country what it is today. People make business plans, but others will turn them around to gain more money, and pocket the money they have made. Wealthy people will get big bonuses when they do not need them. Work becomes based on how well one leads rather than how well one works. Maybe we see this as bad because these people are making more money than we are? They have the brain power to come up with how to make more money, while we strive on day to day life just earning enough to put a roof over our heads. Of course, people who work hard are being screwed out of something they had planned, but in the end, the man with the thicker wallet, and high charisma, is the man who will be walking away with even more money. Shareholders are the ones who tend to come out better than the stockholders, or anyone else in an organization or a business. Most people are greedy, if not all. We all have a desire to gain more than someone else. We all have to survive. However, it is not always good. There are times in which greed is bad. Take example, those who make promises to invest other people’s money, and pocket every cent. This is not good, and it is very dishonest.
After viewing a movie clip from the film, “Wall Street”, we learn that our antagonist, Gordon Gekko strongly believes that greed is right and good. He believes greed is what America’s power is based off of. It is known that money is power. The more money a man has, the more powerful he is. Because America is ‘greedy’ and we strive off of our freedom, we have the free reign to gain money, or lose money. America is powerful because of its greed, and this is something I kind of believe.
After reading an article in class, it is known that greed is not bad at all. Greed is what made our Country what it is today. People make business plans, but others will turn them around to gain more money, and pocket the money they have made. Wealthy people will get big bonuses when they do not need them. Work becomes based on how well one leads rather than how well one works. Maybe we see this as bad because these people are making more money than we are? They have the brain power to come up with how to make more money, while we strive on day to day life just earning enough to put a roof over our heads. Of course, people who work hard are being screwed out of something they had planned, but in the end, the man with the thicker wallet, and high charisma, is the man who will be walking away with even more money. Shareholders are the ones who tend to come out better than the stockholders, or anyone else in an organization or a business. Most people are greedy, if not all. We all have a desire to gain more than someone else. We all have to survive. However, it is not always good. There are times in which greed is bad. Take example, those who make promises to invest other people’s money, and pocket every cent. This is not good, and it is very dishonest.
After viewing a movie clip from the film, “Wall Street”, we learn that our antagonist, Gordon Gekko strongly believes that greed is right and good. He believes greed is what America’s power is based off of. It is known that money is power. The more money a man has, the more powerful he is. Because America is ‘greedy’ and we strive off of our freedom, we have the free reign to gain money, or lose money. America is powerful because of its greed, and this is something I kind of believe.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
The MySpace Hoax Comments
“It’s very sad to see that some would feel no remorse for an act like this. Legally I don’t think there is a way to directly prove that the defendant was the cause of the young ladies death. I do however believe the comments she wrote were libel and played a key role in her suicide but still cannot directly say it was the sole cause.” -MySpace Suicide Have At You Studio
It is very sad. Especially since the girl was so young and she had so much to live for. It’s a shame that she suffered the way she did, and it’s horrid that someone so much older than her, could act so immature, and create a fake MySpace page to begin with. I also agree that the crime fits a Libel crime.
“Had the creator been another teenage girl, the incident still would have been sickening but not quite has harsh as it seems due to the fact that the profile was created by another teenage girl's MOTHER. If you are the mother of a teenage girl, you should not still be interested in petty middle school bullshit. Not only did her actions cause a young girl to kill herself, they also set a horrible example for her own daughter.” -MySpace Hoax Love In the Sky Designs
I couldn’t agree more with this comment. She was an adult, who really should not have acted so childish. Because of this mother’s childish behavior, and concern about her young daughter’s brief struggle as a teenage girl, a young girl, about her daughter’s age took her own life. What would this mother have done if her daughter took her life due to a MySpace hoax?
“In all, I feel that Megan’s parents are to blame in this situation. If they did not allow Megan to start a MySpace account, this would have never happened. Secondly, if an apology is what they need, then the other mother involved should be the better person and do so. After all that’s happened, Mr. and Mrs. Meiers have filed for divorce. It’s sad that all of this could have been prevented. What we should learn from all this is basically the way we raise our children. In today’s society, we need to be more in tune with what our children do. We need to keep them close and grounded. I think we’ve lost sight of that.”-MySpace Hoax Gone Awry Flip Beats Productions
This is quite intriguing. I have to agree with this quote. When I was growing up, my parents were very strict. They kept an eye on me and my siblings, and we were not allowed such things as MySpace, or the internet, partly because it wasn’t around at the time. In any case, I think parenting plays a big role in the loss of Megan, however, not completely. This should have never happened, and maybe, Megan just needed more attention from her own parents, and maybe it was a cry for love. We will never truly know.
“Megan Meier could be described as ordinary. Based on readings, she was an emotional, bubbly, preteen girl addicted to MySpace - which reminds me of my little sister, who is at that funny stage of life. Regardless, this kid suffered from depression amongst other things; she was medicated, but even then, she was impressionable. What happened to her was the result of someone taking advantage of that impressionable nature.”-The MySpace Hoax Houndimation-Just a Touch of Magic
This is very true. A lot of younger generations are addicted to MySpace, which is very unhealthy. This reminds me of a story I had heard, similar to this, but not quite. A young girl had been talking bad about another on MySpace, and a group of girls beat her up over it. It’s ridiculous. It’s just MySpace. Now, because the girl was depressed, and “impressionable” as mentioned in the quote, it was easy to take advantage of her emotions. Unfortunately, it ended badly, and by the hands of a parent. It’s just so baffling that people let this online people connection take so much control of their lives.
It is very sad. Especially since the girl was so young and she had so much to live for. It’s a shame that she suffered the way she did, and it’s horrid that someone so much older than her, could act so immature, and create a fake MySpace page to begin with. I also agree that the crime fits a Libel crime.
“Had the creator been another teenage girl, the incident still would have been sickening but not quite has harsh as it seems due to the fact that the profile was created by another teenage girl's MOTHER. If you are the mother of a teenage girl, you should not still be interested in petty middle school bullshit. Not only did her actions cause a young girl to kill herself, they also set a horrible example for her own daughter.” -MySpace Hoax Love In the Sky Designs
I couldn’t agree more with this comment. She was an adult, who really should not have acted so childish. Because of this mother’s childish behavior, and concern about her young daughter’s brief struggle as a teenage girl, a young girl, about her daughter’s age took her own life. What would this mother have done if her daughter took her life due to a MySpace hoax?
“In all, I feel that Megan’s parents are to blame in this situation. If they did not allow Megan to start a MySpace account, this would have never happened. Secondly, if an apology is what they need, then the other mother involved should be the better person and do so. After all that’s happened, Mr. and Mrs. Meiers have filed for divorce. It’s sad that all of this could have been prevented. What we should learn from all this is basically the way we raise our children. In today’s society, we need to be more in tune with what our children do. We need to keep them close and grounded. I think we’ve lost sight of that.”-MySpace Hoax Gone Awry Flip Beats Productions
This is quite intriguing. I have to agree with this quote. When I was growing up, my parents were very strict. They kept an eye on me and my siblings, and we were not allowed such things as MySpace, or the internet, partly because it wasn’t around at the time. In any case, I think parenting plays a big role in the loss of Megan, however, not completely. This should have never happened, and maybe, Megan just needed more attention from her own parents, and maybe it was a cry for love. We will never truly know.
“Megan Meier could be described as ordinary. Based on readings, she was an emotional, bubbly, preteen girl addicted to MySpace - which reminds me of my little sister, who is at that funny stage of life. Regardless, this kid suffered from depression amongst other things; she was medicated, but even then, she was impressionable. What happened to her was the result of someone taking advantage of that impressionable nature.”-The MySpace Hoax Houndimation-Just a Touch of Magic
This is very true. A lot of younger generations are addicted to MySpace, which is very unhealthy. This reminds me of a story I had heard, similar to this, but not quite. A young girl had been talking bad about another on MySpace, and a group of girls beat her up over it. It’s ridiculous. It’s just MySpace. Now, because the girl was depressed, and “impressionable” as mentioned in the quote, it was easy to take advantage of her emotions. Unfortunately, it ended badly, and by the hands of a parent. It’s just so baffling that people let this online people connection take so much control of their lives.
"Used Cars" List of Crimes and Torts
Due to my absence on week 4, I was not here to completely understand the blog assignment. However, after looking at several of my fellow classmate’s blogs, it seems that they had to make a list of crimes and torts that were present in the movie called, “Used Cars”. This is a list of the torts and crimes that occurred in the movie:
1. Slander
2.Attempted Murder
3.Hit and Run
4. Perjure
5.Destruction of Property
6.Lying under Oath
7.Underage Driving
8.Driving without a License
9.Speeding
10.Sexual Harassment
11.Assault
12.Trespassing
13. Not wearing a seatbelt
14.Reckless Driving
15.Libel
16.False Advertisement
17.Child Endangerment
18.Bribery
19.Defamation
20.Conversion
1. Slander
2.Attempted Murder
3.Hit and Run
4. Perjure
5.Destruction of Property
6.Lying under Oath
7.Underage Driving
8.Driving without a License
9.Speeding
10.Sexual Harassment
11.Assault
12.Trespassing
13. Not wearing a seatbelt
14.Reckless Driving
15.Libel
16.False Advertisement
17.Child Endangerment
18.Bribery
19.Defamation
20.Conversion
Saturday, January 31, 2009
“Grand Theft Auto” Lawsuit
I just read an article about a grandmother who bought “Grand Theft Auto San Andreas” for her 14 year old Grandson. When she bought this game, it stated that it was “M” for mature, and for players 17 and older. She discovered, as her grandson was playing, that there were hidden sexual scenes in the game, and she was enraged by this. This is the cause of the lawsuit.
Now, “Grand Theft Auto” is a very popular game, and has always been known to be packed full of violence, and yes, even sex. I am surprised due to the graphic violent content, that this grandmother is more concerned over sexual content. What is worse, sex, or murder and war? Well, there is nothing wrong with sex, in fact, its normal. The violence is something I’d be more concerned about. I think this lawsuit is ridiculous for not just that reason.
The grandmother knew that the rating was M for mature, and for teens 17 and older, yet she buys the game anyway. If you read the small print on any video game, shown on the back of the casing, it will say the content that is in the game. For example, if you purchase, let’s say, a “Silent Hill” video game, its rated “M” for mature, and on the back it will say that the game contains extreme violence and gore, warning the consumer of the games contents. I have never played “Grand Theft Auto San Andreas” but I assume that this game had the same label on the back. I feel that this grandmother should have known better, and should have looked into it thoroughly before purchasing the game for her 14 year old grandson.
I believe that the makers of the game are never to blame in these matters. They have the rating, and yes, most games contain the back label warning as well. It is the parent, or guardian’s responsibility to make sure that the game, movie, or music they purchase for their children is suitable, because most companies provide that information from what I have seen. However, the companies that do NOT provide this information are at fault.
And there you have it folks, my opinion on the “Grand Theft Auto” grandmother vs. game maker’s lawsuit. If you do not want your children playing games like this, make sure you look into it well enough to know its content. Never purchase an “M” rated game because it will contain things you do not want your 14 year old grandchild to see.
Now, “Grand Theft Auto” is a very popular game, and has always been known to be packed full of violence, and yes, even sex. I am surprised due to the graphic violent content, that this grandmother is more concerned over sexual content. What is worse, sex, or murder and war? Well, there is nothing wrong with sex, in fact, its normal. The violence is something I’d be more concerned about. I think this lawsuit is ridiculous for not just that reason.
The grandmother knew that the rating was M for mature, and for teens 17 and older, yet she buys the game anyway. If you read the small print on any video game, shown on the back of the casing, it will say the content that is in the game. For example, if you purchase, let’s say, a “Silent Hill” video game, its rated “M” for mature, and on the back it will say that the game contains extreme violence and gore, warning the consumer of the games contents. I have never played “Grand Theft Auto San Andreas” but I assume that this game had the same label on the back. I feel that this grandmother should have known better, and should have looked into it thoroughly before purchasing the game for her 14 year old grandson.
I believe that the makers of the game are never to blame in these matters. They have the rating, and yes, most games contain the back label warning as well. It is the parent, or guardian’s responsibility to make sure that the game, movie, or music they purchase for their children is suitable, because most companies provide that information from what I have seen. However, the companies that do NOT provide this information are at fault.
And there you have it folks, my opinion on the “Grand Theft Auto” grandmother vs. game maker’s lawsuit. If you do not want your children playing games like this, make sure you look into it well enough to know its content. Never purchase an “M” rated game because it will contain things you do not want your 14 year old grandchild to see.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Blog Posts
Well, I have visited two of my classmates’ blogs on how they feel about lawyers. First, I visited RoVegas Design. Her blog was creative, and even mentioned the movie “Liar Liar” starring Jim Carey. After reading her blog, I had this to say, “After reading your post, I would have to agree. I have never gotten into any trouble with the law, but if I had, I would really want the help of a lawyer who was able to grant me a citation from a speeding ticket. I have a better view on things now by reading this.And yes, I remember that movie, and it was a long time ago when I saw it. Though ironic, that movie did show what it was like to be a lawyer, and what they do in their line of work, and what it would be like if they could not lie.So as much as I feel it’s deceitful, or wrong, I guess that its essential.Thank you. ”
Secondly, I visited Raw Impact Design. This student questioned wither lawyers were the villain, or the hero then explained how they could be both. After reading this blog, I had this to say, “That’s a good way to look at it. I think that a lawyer could be either both good and bad, depending on what they are being paid to do. They are there to help us get out of sticky situations, but they are doing it in their benefit. yes, its because its their job, and I agree. My opinion at first was kind of a hateful one, but I really don't know what to think of them as well.I mean, I can't say I hate them or that they are bad. If I ever needed a lawyer, I'd get one, and I would hope that they did their job for me to get me out of a bind. I guess now that I read this, I have a neutral feeling for Lawyers and their work, but like you said, that may change due to what a lawyer is standing up for.”
Gaining perspective on the issue from other people’s opinions really helped me open my mind to why lawyers do what they do, or how they do it. Though at first, I was a little narrow minded about the issue, I have learned to open my mind, and accept the fact that even though lawyers tend to lie to win a case, its what they have to do.
Secondly, I visited Raw Impact Design. This student questioned wither lawyers were the villain, or the hero then explained how they could be both. After reading this blog, I had this to say, “That’s a good way to look at it. I think that a lawyer could be either both good and bad, depending on what they are being paid to do. They are there to help us get out of sticky situations, but they are doing it in their benefit. yes, its because its their job, and I agree. My opinion at first was kind of a hateful one, but I really don't know what to think of them as well.I mean, I can't say I hate them or that they are bad. If I ever needed a lawyer, I'd get one, and I would hope that they did their job for me to get me out of a bind. I guess now that I read this, I have a neutral feeling for Lawyers and their work, but like you said, that may change due to what a lawyer is standing up for.”
Gaining perspective on the issue from other people’s opinions really helped me open my mind to why lawyers do what they do, or how they do it. Though at first, I was a little narrow minded about the issue, I have learned to open my mind, and accept the fact that even though lawyers tend to lie to win a case, its what they have to do.
A Myspace Hoax Leads to Death
I just finished reading an article about a teenage girl who committed suicide after she had her heart broken on MySpace. The twist is that the 'boy' who broke her heart was not real. The culprit behind the fake boy was an older woman. The parents of the teenage girl want justice for what this woman has done. They feel she is to blame for their daughter's death, and want some answers.
How do I feel about this? The internet is a very unreliable source for meeting people, and can be very dangerous. You never know who you are talking to, and you may never know. Its very unfortunate that this had to happen, and it is a very cruel prank. The woman behind the crime should feel guilty because she was messing with the emotions of a teenage girl, who was not yet mature enough to handle heartbreak, especially since she had already been going through depression. The damage was done, and the culprit does not feel any remorse. On the other hand, the girl went about it the wrong way. Suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem as they say, and in time she could have gotten over it, and laughed about it with her future friends, but instead, she took her own life. The hoax culprit was wrong for playing with a young girl's feelings, but the girl was wrong for taking her own life. If I were to choose a side however, I would take the side of the girl, simply because I do not agree with an older, mature woman hurting a teenager, a child, who did not know how to handle heartbreak.
Now, I believe that the woman should be punished because of what she did. I don't blame her one-hundred percent for this girl's death, but she did have part in it, and I believe that she should be punished. I would label this crime as either a Slander, or a False pretense. Why you ask? "False Pretenses describes a broad category of crimes that involve activities intended to deceive others by making false claims, or to obtain goods by using false pretenses" as quoted from Essentials Of Business Law written by Anthony L. Liuzzo, and Joseph G. Bonnice. Also, in the Essentials Of Business Law book, it states that "Slander is the spreading of damaging words or ideas about a person, directly or indirectly, in all other forms not considered libel". I feel that these two crimes are better suited for this situation, but I honestly feel slander would be the perfect match. Also, from reading the book, this crime seems to be a tort crime. I couldn't really decide a suitable punishment for this woman, because I really can't describe fully the matter at hand, and I was not there to witness what has happened, what has been said, and what lead the thirteen year old girl to kill herself. These are my feelings on this case.
How do I feel about this? The internet is a very unreliable source for meeting people, and can be very dangerous. You never know who you are talking to, and you may never know. Its very unfortunate that this had to happen, and it is a very cruel prank. The woman behind the crime should feel guilty because she was messing with the emotions of a teenage girl, who was not yet mature enough to handle heartbreak, especially since she had already been going through depression. The damage was done, and the culprit does not feel any remorse. On the other hand, the girl went about it the wrong way. Suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem as they say, and in time she could have gotten over it, and laughed about it with her future friends, but instead, she took her own life. The hoax culprit was wrong for playing with a young girl's feelings, but the girl was wrong for taking her own life. If I were to choose a side however, I would take the side of the girl, simply because I do not agree with an older, mature woman hurting a teenager, a child, who did not know how to handle heartbreak.
Now, I believe that the woman should be punished because of what she did. I don't blame her one-hundred percent for this girl's death, but she did have part in it, and I believe that she should be punished. I would label this crime as either a Slander, or a False pretense. Why you ask? "False Pretenses describes a broad category of crimes that involve activities intended to deceive others by making false claims, or to obtain goods by using false pretenses" as quoted from Essentials Of Business Law written by Anthony L. Liuzzo, and Joseph G. Bonnice. Also, in the Essentials Of Business Law book, it states that "Slander is the spreading of damaging words or ideas about a person, directly or indirectly, in all other forms not considered libel". I feel that these two crimes are better suited for this situation, but I honestly feel slander would be the perfect match. Also, from reading the book, this crime seems to be a tort crime. I couldn't really decide a suitable punishment for this woman, because I really can't describe fully the matter at hand, and I was not there to witness what has happened, what has been said, and what lead the thirteen year old girl to kill herself. These are my feelings on this case.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
My Oppinion on Lawyers
The definition of a lawyer: a person whose profession is to represent clients in a court of law or to advise or act for clients in other legal matters.
This is their job, wither the client is innocent or guilty. Sure, people hate the fact that lawyers are devious in some cases, but it’s their job to be. I honestly have never had personal experience with a lawyer, so I can't completely understand what they do. Seeing movies about lawyers does not count, since Hollywood has a habit of dramatizing everything. They may be lairs, but they have to be in order to have a chance at winning their case. There may be lawyers out there who will not take a case to defend a criminal, but those that do know their client is guilty, and will do everything in their power to prove that he/she is not.
Then you have those lawyers who know the bigwigs of the law system, and can do things for their client just because of that. Its lawyers like these that I really can't appreciate. I understand that you have to know good people to get the jobs you want, but sometimes I wish this was not true. I have respect for people who work hard the honest way, but it can't always happen that way.
So, all in all, my opinion on lawyers is a little indifferent, but at the same time, I have somewhat of an understanding to what they do, and why, versus my aggravation to their dishonesty, and dependability on the bigwigs. Since I have never dealt with a lawyer, I do not know one-hundred percent on how they work, but just what I have seen or heard.
This is how I feel about Lawyers.
This is their job, wither the client is innocent or guilty. Sure, people hate the fact that lawyers are devious in some cases, but it’s their job to be. I honestly have never had personal experience with a lawyer, so I can't completely understand what they do. Seeing movies about lawyers does not count, since Hollywood has a habit of dramatizing everything. They may be lairs, but they have to be in order to have a chance at winning their case. There may be lawyers out there who will not take a case to defend a criminal, but those that do know their client is guilty, and will do everything in their power to prove that he/she is not.
Then you have those lawyers who know the bigwigs of the law system, and can do things for their client just because of that. Its lawyers like these that I really can't appreciate. I understand that you have to know good people to get the jobs you want, but sometimes I wish this was not true. I have respect for people who work hard the honest way, but it can't always happen that way.
So, all in all, my opinion on lawyers is a little indifferent, but at the same time, I have somewhat of an understanding to what they do, and why, versus my aggravation to their dishonesty, and dependability on the bigwigs. Since I have never dealt with a lawyer, I do not know one-hundred percent on how they work, but just what I have seen or heard.
This is how I feel about Lawyers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)