Daniel Holtzclaw Not Guilt
Another miscarriage of justice
https://www.change.org/p/free-daniel-holtzclaw-an-innocent-man-wrongfully-convicted/u/24746488
https://www.facebook.com/groups/694057394129010/?multi_permalinks=1141364609398284%2C1141266019408143%2C1141067072761371¬if_id=1561520192529658¬if_t=group_activity
https://www.facebook.com/groups/694057394129010/
Wednesday, June 26, 2019
Friday, March 22, 2019
I just attempted to add Paula Biren's history of being taken by, what"?...MALPRACTICE, perhaps, of Patricia D Laub and her firm Frost Brown Todd.
In the site having my mother's clip from Four Sisters by Claude Lanzmann, 2018 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6908854/videoplayer/vi2935536153?ref_=vi_prev_btn
I just attempted to add Paula Biren's history of being taken by, what"?...MALPRACTICE, perhaps, of Patricia D Laub and her firm Frost Brown Todd. In the trivia section I tried to add this but I have to play around with the site to see if I was successful....thus is my severe PTSD from all that is within my blog and what my mother speaks about here. Laub and Frost Brown Todd took advantage of us for their self interest IMO.
In 2018 Magistrate R. Stargel told probate court that NOTHING having to do with anything going back 75 years will be considered in the evaluation of my mother's (Paula S. Biren) or my state of mind. In 2018 to 2019 it is likely or probable that Trust lawyer Patricia D Laub Esq FIXED Judge Winkler so that she could divert my money to a foundation that is an umbrella group for LGBTQ people who according to mainstream news, hate Jews, an organization which has awarded Laub for such money gifts before. Listen to my mother at 41 seconds here https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6908854/videoplayer/vi2935536153?ref_=vi_prev_btn talking about "FAMILY". IMO Patricia D Laub partner in Frost Brown Todd helped in a major way to alienate my 19 year old son from me...thus destroying the dreams of Paula S. Biren M.D. and mine, her son David. The family meant to supercede the family murdered in Auschwitz is now destroyed by Patricia D Laub IMO which is a very good opinion as Paula S Biren had me in Germany after the war....I was there for 69 years of my life. I am not alone in accusing Frost Brown Todd of alleged MALPRACTICE. What Frost Brownn Todd did to my holocaust surviving family is despicable and ugly beyond the pale. Where Hitler and Auschwitz failed, Patricia D Laub partner in Frost Brown Todd succeeded.
May Hell save a place for this woman!
What Patricia D. Laub did to the English Speaking SISTER in "THE Four SISTERS" film is UNSPEAKABLE; Paula S. Biren in "THE FOUR SISTERS" - BALUTY; 2018 by Claude Lanzmann
What Patricia D. Laub did to the one SISTER here who could speak
English...is UNSPEAKABLE; Paula S. Biren in "THE FOUR SISTERS" - BALUTY
2018 by Claude Lanzmann
The above is from
https://sales.arte.tv/fiche/6133/LES_QUATRE_SOEURS_-_Baluty____PAULA_RIBEN Misspelled last name BIREN; PAULA BIREN
My mother had dreams. She voiced them in a pre-birthday card I have ...before my son was born. One that has a slightly different signature than the paper which I claim to be forged by Patricia D Laub Esq., Yes the one Judge Winkler will not allow to be tested for forgery because ...well... for the same reason the judge in Franklin county was FIXED as described here http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/ by Jonothan Zell Esq. On the first page of this link and so much more in other pages of the links within the link I present here. You want to read about our LAW SYSTEM? Read this sad stuff here http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/
As my friend reminded me yesterday ;
My mother Paula S. Biren loses ALL HER FAMILY in AUSCHWITZ and Patricia D. Laub partner in the equally vicious lawfirm of Frost Brown Todd, destroys my mother's dreams!!! I need to get all of this down before I make Laub et al thrilled with a stroke...my stroke, my death. Damn them...if there is a goddess in heaven...damn them all!!!
Listen to my mother talk about LOST (read "dead, MURDERED") family here; https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6908854/videoplayer/vi2935536153?ref_=vi_prev_btn
41 seconds into this trailer.
This Frost Brown Todd and partner Patricia D Laub WANT SUPRESSED ! IMO. Just like the forged paper....SUPRESSED by Judge Winkler.
FAMILY was everything to my mother...always stuck in the DEAD family ....but looking forwards to the new family I started that at great cost to myself. Now my son 19, is alienated from me, my mother passed in 2016 but apparently trying to still save me by her testimony from the grave... Damn you Laub I hope you rot in hell for destroying my mother's dreams, the future she hoped I and my son would enjoy together.
You viciously harmed Jonothan Zell Esq and his mother EIleen Zell Esq and you were hot to do the same to me once my mother passed....damn you! The Zells likely can afford your damages...I cannot.
The Nazis did enough Patricia Laub....but you outshined their evil!
You completed the destruction of us!
Where are my family's photo albums Laub?
What did you do with the very expensive jewelry Laub? You wearing it now?
"55th NEW YORK FILM FESTIVAL Official Selection"
"There are still archives, diaries and even some photos of the Lodz
ghetto, but very few actual witness accounts from survivors. Paula Biren's
is all the more exceptional, with her having been part of the ghetto's
Jewish women police at the time. Her sharp eye for detail as well as her
dazzling intelligence underscores her incredible testimony.
Of the hundred ghettos that dotted the Polish countryside, the one
in Lodz had existed for the longest. It was ruled with an iron fist by
the president of the Jewish council of elders, Chaim Mordechai
Rumkowski, known as "King Chaim" – a man convinced he could save part of
the community by turning them into manpower to serve the Germans."The above is from
https://sales.arte.tv/fiche/6133/LES_QUATRE_SOEURS_-_Baluty____PAULA_
My mother had dreams. She voiced them in a pre-birthday card I have ...before my son was born. One that has a slightly different signature than the paper which I claim to be forged by Patricia D Laub Esq., Yes the one Judge Winkler will not allow to be tested for forgery because ...well... for the same reason the judge in Franklin county was FIXED as described here http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/ by Jonothan Zell Esq. On the first page of this link and so much more in other pages of the links within the link I present here. You want to read about our LAW SYSTEM? Read this sad stuff here http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/
As my friend reminded me yesterday ;
This is a court of law, not a court of justice. -Oliver
Wendell Holmes, Jr.
My mother Paula S. Biren loses ALL HER FAMILY in AUSCHWITZ and Patricia D. Laub partner in the equally vicious lawfirm of Frost Brown Todd, destroys my mother's dreams!!! I need to get all of this down before I make Laub et al thrilled with a stroke...my stroke, my death. Damn them...if there is a goddess in heaven...damn them all!!!
Listen to my mother talk about LOST (read "dead, MURDERED") family here; https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6908854/videoplayer/vi2935536153?ref_=vi_prev_btn
41 seconds into this trailer.
This Frost Brown Todd and partner Patricia D Laub WANT SUPRESSED ! IMO. Just like the forged paper....SUPRESSED by Judge Winkler.
FAMILY was everything to my mother...always stuck in the DEAD family ....but looking forwards to the new family I started that at great cost to myself. Now my son 19, is alienated from me, my mother passed in 2016 but apparently trying to still save me by her testimony from the grave... Damn you Laub I hope you rot in hell for destroying my mother's dreams, the future she hoped I and my son would enjoy together.
You viciously harmed Jonothan Zell Esq and his mother EIleen Zell Esq and you were hot to do the same to me once my mother passed....damn you! The Zells likely can afford your damages...I cannot.
The Nazis did enough Patricia Laub....but you outshined their evil!
You completed the destruction of us!
Where are my family's photo albums Laub?
What did you do with the very expensive jewelry Laub? You wearing it now?
Thursday, March 21, 2019
What Patricia D. Laub did to the one SISTER here who could speak English...is UNSPEAKABLE; Paula S. Biren in "THE FOUR SISTERS" - BALUTY 2018 by Claude Lanzmann
What Patricia D. Laub did to the one SISTER here who could speak English...is UNSPEAKABLE; Paula S. Biren in "THE FOUR SISTERS" - BALUTY 2018 by Claude Lanzmann
"55th NEW YORK FILM FESTIVAL Official Selection"
"There are still archives, diaries and even some photos of the Lodz
ghetto, but very few actual witness accounts from survivors. Paula Biren's
is all the more exceptional, with her having been part of the ghetto's
Jewish women police at the time. Her sharp eye for detail as well as her
dazzling intelligence underscores her incredible testimony.
Of the hundred ghettos that dotted the Polish countryside, the one
in Lodz had existed for the longest. It was ruled with an iron fist by
the president of the Jewish council of elders, Chaim Mordechai
Rumkowski, known as "King Chaim" – a man convinced he could save part of
the community by turning them into manpower to serve the Germans."The above is from
https://sales.arte.tv/fiche/6133/LES_QUATRE_SOEURS_-_Baluty____PAULA_
My mother had dreams. She voiced them in a pre-birthday card I have ...before my son was born. One that has a slightly different signature than the paper which I claim to be forged by Patricia D Laub Esq., Yes the one Judge Winkler will not allow to be tested for forgery because ...well... for the same reason the judge in Franklin county was FIXED as described here http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/ by Jonothan Zell Esq. On the first page of this link and so much more in other pages of the links within the link I present here. You want to read about our LAW SYSTEM? Read this sad stuff here http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/
As my friend reminded me yesterday ;
This is a court of law, not a court of justice. -Oliver
Wendell Holmes, Jr.
My mother Paula S. Biren loses ALL HER FAMILY in AUSCHWITZ and Patricia D. Laub partner in the equally vicious lawfirm of Frost Brown Todd, destroys my mother's dreams!!! I need to get all of this down before I make Laub et al thrilled with a stroke...my stroke, my death. Damn them...if there is a goddess in heaven...damn them all!!!
Listen to my mother talk about LOST (read "dead, MURDERED") family here; https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6908854/videoplayer/vi2935536153?ref_=vi_prev_btn
41 seconds into this trailer.
This Frost Brown Todd and partner Patricia D Laub WANT SUPRESSED ! IMO. Just like the forged paper....SUPRESSED by Judge Winkler.
FAMILY was everything to my mother...always stuck in the DEAD family ....but looking forwards to the new family I started at great cost to myself. Now my son 19, is alienated from me, my mother passed in 2016 but apparently trying to still save me by her testimony from the grave... Damn you Laub I hope you rot in hell for destroying my mother's dreams, the future she hoped I and my son would enjoy together.
You viciously harmed Jonothan Zell Esq and his mother EIleen Zell Esq and you were hot to do the same to me once my mother passed....damn you! The Zells likely can afford your damages...I cannot.
The Naszis did enough Patricia Laub....but you outshined their evil!
You completed the destruction of us!
Where are my family's photo albums Laub?
What did you do witht hee very expensive jewelry Laub? You wearing it now?
Wednesday, March 20, 2019
Patricia D. Laub, and her partners in Frost Brown Todd destroyed my mother's Holocaust Surviving Family in USA...Listen to my mother here.
Patricia D. Laub, and her partners in Frost Brown Todd destroyed my mother's Holocaust Surviving Family in USA...Listen to my mother here. My mother speaks at 41 seconds into this link. Please listed to her and understqnd just how malicious and evil are the people at Frost brown Todd, especially Patricia D. Laub...same folks as in this link http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/
______________________________________________________________
Released 2018. Director Claude Lanzmann who passed on the day this was released.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6908854/videoplayer/vi2935536153?ref_=tt_ov_vi
and here
https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn517852
https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn1003910
In the top link my mother talks about FAMILY....that she is alive....that she tried so hard to save her family but could not.
Damn Frost Brown Todd and partner P.D. Laub to hell for destroying the family my mother believed would survive in America...Damn Patricia D. Laub Esq.!
Thursday, October 11, 2018
Patricia D Laub ....Lawyers et al ...win $100,000 challenge by proving Laub DID NOT lie in these cases. See http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/
Patricia D Laub....PEOPLE win $100,000 challenge by proving Laub DID NOT lie in these cases. See http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/
http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com/
Attorney Jonathan Zell Esq is SERIOUS
$100,000.00 CHALLENGE OFFER
I will pay $100,000 to anyone who can convince any 3 full-time law professors from Ivy-League schools that no attorney or attorneys from the law firm of
FROST BROWN TODD, LLC
https://www.frostbrowntodd.com
COMMITTED PERJURY IN THE TRIAL OF
ZELL V. KLINGELHAFER, ET AL.
as that perjury was alleged in Zell's
PLEADINGS, BRIEFS, & PETITIONS
before the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
(Case No. 2:13-CV-458)
and the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
(Case No. 17-3534)
TERMS & CONDITIONS OF CHALLENGE OFFER
Read rest in Jonathan Zell Esq link.
http://occupythefranklincountycourts.com_________________________________________________
Yes Patricia D Laub lies IMO harmed my mother and my son below.
Tuesday, September 25, 2018
Patricia D. Laub Lawyer in Malpractice Diorama by Jonathan Zell Esq.
Patricia D. Laub Lawyer in Malpractice Diorama by Jonathan Zell Esq.
after photo of my mother and my son
https://lawyerist.com/lawyer-threatens-stupid-lawsuit-stupid-rules-interpretation-stupid-entry-stupid-contest/
From above link a copy and paste about how Patricia D. Laub seems to avoid malpractice suits while harming people like the one in this article...and my mother, a s
deceased Holocaust survivor....
~!!!~ critical to this updated version is this part; "In contrast to the hyperbole and/or blatant self-promotion contained in the captions to the above two dioramas (which were readily accepted into your contest), the caption to the diorama for Eileen Zell v. Frost Brown Todd was so fact-based that it even cited the page numbers from the court pleadings from which those facts were taken. In addition, it did not contain a single word of criticism (or flattery) of any of the persons involved. Instead, based on the pleadings, it objectively gave the background of a court case, quoted a novel legal argument raised in one of the parties’ pleadings, and explained the legal significance to all Ohio lawyers if the court accepts that argument. In short, what was written would have been suitable for a law-review article.
So, Mr. Rawles, let’s be honest with each other. The only reason that this diorama has not been accepted into the ABA’s contest (at least not yet) is that it illustrates a legal case involving the touchy subject (touchy for lawyers, that is) of legal malpractice. (And it also mentions a possible movement to extend the statute of limitations for legal malpractice.) Thus, if the ABA decides to ban this diorama — based on whatever pretext it chooses to invent — the ABA will be engaged in a blatant kind of self-interested political censorship"
Not a single word of criticism, in Zel'ls diorama unlike much criticism in own posts.
Zell is credible.
I am but a wounded victim of Laub and Frost Brown Todd who gives not a damn about being very critical to malfeasance and malpractice.
Res ipsa loquitur:
Here’s the 3-page “caption” (pdf) that went with the diorama. Keep going if you want to read those emails for some reason.
From above link a copy and paste about how Patricia D. Laub seems to avoid malpractice suits while harming people like the one in this article...and my mother, a s
deceased Holocaust survivor....
~!!!~ critical to this updated version is this part; "In contrast to the hyperbole and/or blatant self-promotion contained in the captions to the above two dioramas (which were readily accepted into your contest), the caption to the diorama for Eileen Zell v. Frost Brown Todd was so fact-based that it even cited the page numbers from the court pleadings from which those facts were taken. In addition, it did not contain a single word of criticism (or flattery) of any of the persons involved. Instead, based on the pleadings, it objectively gave the background of a court case, quoted a novel legal argument raised in one of the parties’ pleadings, and explained the legal significance to all Ohio lawyers if the court accepts that argument. In short, what was written would have been suitable for a law-review article.
So, Mr. Rawles, let’s be honest with each other. The only reason that this diorama has not been accepted into the ABA’s contest (at least not yet) is that it illustrates a legal case involving the touchy subject (touchy for lawyers, that is) of legal malpractice. (And it also mentions a possible movement to extend the statute of limitations for legal malpractice.) Thus, if the ABA decides to ban this diorama — based on whatever pretext it chooses to invent — the ABA will be engaged in a blatant kind of self-interested political censorship"
Not a single word of criticism, in Zel'ls diorama unlike much criticism in own posts.
Zell is credible.
I am but a wounded victim of Laub and Frost Brown Todd who gives not a damn about being very critical to malfeasance and malpractice.
Res ipsa loquitur:FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact Person:Jonathan R. Zell
Attorney-at-Law
5953 Rock Hill Road
Columbus, OH 43213-2127Tel. (614) 864-2292Lawyer threatens lawsuit over American Bar Association’s censorship of malpractice-themed Peeps® diorama
E-mail: jonathanrzell@gmail.com
Columbus, OH. Jonathan Zell simply wanted to illustrate a novel legal argument that his adversaries had made in a malpractice case Zell had filed on behalf of his mother against the Ohio-based law firm of Frost Brown Todd. (Eileen Zell v. Frost Brown Todd LLC, et al.. Case No. 2:13-cv-0458, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division.) So Zell entered the American Bar Assn’s (ABA’s) “Peeps in Law 2014” contest by submitting a miniature scene (called a “diorama”) made out of Peeps® (the animal-shaped marshmallow candies) depicting this argument.
In response, according to Zell, the national lawyers group “has banned my diorama simply because it involves the touchy subject (that is, touchy to lawyers) of legal malpractice.” So Zell now plans to sue the ABA, claiming that, “to avoid embarrassing lawyers,” the ABA is engaging in “a blatant kind of self-interested political censorship.”
In an e-mail to Zell, an ABA official claimed that Zell’s diorama was not accepted because it was submitted by someone “personally involved” in the legal case being depicted. But, because the contest deadline had already passed, it was now too late for anyone else to submit this diorama instead of Zell.
Zell wrote back to the ABA, pointing out that the contest rules say nothing about “involved persons.” Also, the ABA had already accepted and posted on its website similar dioramas from other “involved persons.” But Zell received no response.
Zell’s diorama showed six lawyers sitting in a law firm’s office, each of whom was holding up a sign stating “Not me.” This was intended to depict the six Frost Brown Todd lawyers whom Zell’s mother has sued for legal malpractice. As was explained in a caption accompanying the diorama, the statute of limitations on legal malpractice does not begin to run until after the client’s legal representation in the matter in question has ended. This is designed to give the malpracticing lawyer an opportunity to correct his or her mistake.
However, Frost Brown Todd recently filed a motion in court arguing that, because its six lawyers had worked on Zell’s mother’s case “successively,” the statute of limitations should be computed separately “for each particular attorney.” If so, then Ohio’s one-year statute of limitations on legal malpractice would have already expired on the first five lawyers’ mistakes. Since the alleged harm had already occurred before the sixth lawyer took over the case, Frost Brown Todd then claimed that none of its lawyers or even the firm itself has any liability.
Zell contends that, if Frost Brown Todd’s “novel legal argument” is accepted by the court, it would “provid[e] a roadmap for Ohio’s attorneys on how to defeat claims for legal malpractice committed during trial litigation.” Calling it the “Hot Potato” strategy, Zell described this roadmap as follows:
When one of the firm’s attorneys commits malpractice, reassign the case to another attorney. If the second attorney also commits malpractice, then reassign the case to a third attorney, and so on. Then have the final (non-malpracticing) attorney continue to represent the client on appeal in the same matter until the statutes of limitations on the previous attorneys’ legal malpractice expire.The caption to Zell’s diorama concluded that a court decision sanctioning the “Hot Potato” strategy would be so unfair to clients that it might “provide the necessary impetus to get Ohio’s legislature to extend what is now the shortest statute of limitations on legal malpractice in the nation.”
So, although illustrated by a piece of artwork composed of marshmallow candies, Zell’s mother’s case has the potential to be a landmark legal ruling. On the other hand, Zell’s planned lawsuit against the ABA seems like a lot of peeping about nothing.
The contest entries can be viewed at http://www.abajournal.com/gallery/peeps_2014. Viewers of the website can vote for their favorite diorama at http://www.abajournal.com/ news/article/vote_for_your_ favorite_2014_peeps_in_law_ diorama.
ATTACHMENTS:
Photo of Zell’s Diorama
Close-up Photo of a Portion of Zell’s Diorama
The Caption to Zell’s Diorama
The ABA’s e-mail to Zell of 4/7/2014
Zell’s e-mail Reply to the ABA of 4/7/2014
Here’s the 3-page “caption” (pdf) that went with the diorama. Keep going if you want to read those emails for some reason.
——— Forwarded message ———-
From: Jonathan Zell
Date: Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:27 PM
Subject: My next diorama will be to illustrate the upcoming case of “Jonathan Zell v. American Bar Association”
To: Lee Rawles
Dear Mr. Rawles,
Thank you for your e-mail pointing out that I had submitted a diorama to the ABA’s “Peeps in Law 2014” contest illustrating a legal case — Eileen Zell v. Frost Brown Todd — in which I was “personally involved.”
The notice on your website of the “Peeps in Law 2014” contest states in pertinent part: “Our rules are as follows: Create a law-related diorama with Peeps….” Thus, as you know, nowhere in the rules does it state that the person who submits the “law-related diorama” may not be personally involved with the law-related matter being illustrated.
Moreover, it would be a very strange rule indeed if it sought to prevent the very persons who were the most knowledgeable about a law-related subject from submitting a diorama about it. Lawyers and law professors often write books and law-review articles about cases in which they have been personally involved, especially as the attorney for one of the parties.
For example, among the submissions to “Peeps in Law 2014” that appear on your website are several dealing with famous U.S. Supreme Court cases. Do you expect me to believe that the ABA would try to prevent the attorneys who argued those cases before the high court (or even the parties themselves) from submitting a diorama about those cases? Of course not!
To give another example, consider “Peeps in Law 2014: The Signing of the Constitution of the United Peeps of America.” Leaving aside reality for the moment, if this diorama had been submitted by one of the original signers of the document being depicted (the U.S. Constitution), would the ABA have considered banning that diorama, too? The answer is as ridiculous as the question, and shows that there is no rationale reason to ban people from submitting dioramas concerning legal cases in which they were personally involved.
In any event, if the ABA had such a published rule for the “Peeps in Law 2014” contest, please be assured that the diorama about the case of Eileen Zell v. Frost Brown Todd would have been submitted by someone who was not personally involved with that case. Accordingly, if you do decide to create such a rule after-the-fact, then I respectfully request that you also provide an opportunity for an uninvolved person to re-submit this and any dioramas that would be excluded by the new rule.
This would include one or both of the following two other dioramas submitted to the “Peeps in Law 2014” contest, which are presently posted on your website:
TITLE: “Peeps in Law 2014: Uncomfortable Day In Court”
CAPTION: “Another Rendigs attorney’s deft legal skills put the
plaintiff in the hot seat.”
SUBMITTED BY: “Karen Eutsler and Cathy Everson of Rendigs, Fry, Kiely
& Dennis in Cincinnati”
Besides depicting their own law firm in their diorama, the submitters turned their diorama into what was essentially an advertisement for their firm.
Another submission to the “Peeps in Law 2014” contest (which also appears on your website) was an even more blatant advertisement for the submitter’s own law firm:
TITLE: “Committed couples before and after Windsor”
CAPTION: “The US Supreme Court Windsor decision and the
dominoes (states recognizing same-gender marriage)
that have fallen and will fall as a result, have permitted
many same-gender couples to be able to live as married
spouses…. I am a member of the American College of
Trust and Estate Counsel (ACTEC) who does estate
planning for many committed couples of all types….”
SUBMITTED BY: “Rhonda H. Brink of Austin, Texas.”
In contrast to the hyperbole and/or blatant self-promotion contained in the captions to the above two dioramas (which were readily accepted into your contest), the caption to the diorama for Eileen Zell v. Frost Brown Todd was so fact-based that it even cited the page numbers from the court pleadings from which those facts were taken. In addition, it did not contain a single word of criticism (or flattery) of any of the persons involved. Instead, based on the pleadings, it objectively gave the background of a court case, quoted a novel legal argument raised in one of the parties’ pleadings, and explained the legal significance to all Ohio lawyers if the court accepts that argument. In short, what was written would have been suitable for a law-review article.
So, Mr. Rawles, let’s be honest with each other. The only reason that this diorama has not been accepted into the ABA’s contest (at least not yet) is that it illustrates a legal case involving the touchy subject (touchy for lawyers, that is) of legal malpractice. (And it also mentions a possible movement to extend the statute of limitations for legal malpractice.) Thus, if the ABA decides to ban this diorama — based on whatever pretext it chooses to invent — the ABA will be engaged in a blatant kind of self-interested political censorship.
True, one of the many reasons that I submitted this diorama to your contest was to try to publicize the case of Eileen Zell v. Frost Brown Todd. Admittedly, that is my self-interest. However, unlike the ABA’s motive to avoid embarrassing lawyers, my motive is an entirely-proper one. Moreover, if the ABA does go ahead and ban this diorama, the case of Eileen Zell v. Frost Brown Todd will receive even greater publicity when I sue the ABA for (1) having changed the rules of its contest after the submission deadline had expired and (2) doing so in order to censor the embarrassing subject of legal malpractice.
So, if you must, go ahead and ban this diorama. But realize that, after I sue the ABA, countless newspaper reporters, cartoonists, and even some diorama artists are going to have a hay day with the story of the lawyer who sued the American Bar Association for trying to censor a Peeps diorama concerning the subject of legal malpractice. The irony is fantastic! So please make my day.
Equally ironic is the caption submitted for “Peeps in Law 2014: The Mod Knight Special” (also posted on your website), which names you in particular and anticipates our little dispute perfectly. It states:
Well, if you’re posting on this website,
You’d best be careful what you write,
And you better keep on topic,
And don’t be pickin’ any fight,
Or you may meet the Moderators,
That’s when you’ll understand,
How things they don’t approve of vanish,
And you could be banned.
Don’t make the Moderators,
Slap a ban on you,
Don’t make the friendly Moderators,
Slap an everlasting ban on you
Now when you’re tapping out a comment,
And you ain’t bein’ P.C.,
You better jolly well consider,
The Comment Policy,
And if you get a snippy e-mail,
No matter what befalls,
Don’t try to argue your opinion,
Or you’re in trouble with Lee Rawles
Don’t make the Moderators,
Slap a ban on you,
Don’t make the friendly Moderators,
Slap an everlasting ban on you
Well, if you ask ‘What’s Moderatin’?”
That’s really hard to say,
Arbitrary and subjective,
It’s different day to day,
But when they send an admonition,
You’d better say ‘Yes, Dear,”
Or you may still be posting,
But it won’t be here.
Don’t make the Moderators,
Slap a ban on you,
Don’t make the friendly Moderators,
Slap an everlasting ban on you.
Sincerely,
Jonathan
Comments
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)