@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

Teri_Kanefield

@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social

Former appellate defender and UC Berkeley Law graduate. My practice was limited to representing indigents on appeal.

I’ve written more than a dozen books and published more than 50 short pieces in The Washington Post, Cnn.com, and others. My book prizes include the Jane Addams Book Award.

Tfr

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

timothyjohnson, to random
@timothyjohnson@mastodon.sdf.org avatar

@Teri_Kanefield
If People v. Trump finds him guilty, what are his options for appeals?

Teri_Kanefield,
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

@timothyjohnson

I wouldn't know without reading the record.

When I received a case on appeal, the record would hundreds, or thousands, of pages in length. I would spend about a week reading, combing for possible issues, then research the issues and decide.

cherold, to random
@cherold@zirk.us avatar

@Teri_Kanefield says we don't need legal pundits, and at first I thought, of course we need someone who understands how the legal system works and can tell us what's what. But then she wrote

"...lawyers confuse people. Confused people then turn to lawyers for explanations."

And I realized that if pundits quit saying the legal system was corrupt, we wouldn't keep asking, "is this corrupt behavior?" We would just ... follow what happens and see how it turns out.

https://terikanefield.com/beware-the-lawyers-follow-up/

Teri_Kanefield,
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

@cherold

Someone wrote to me and asked, "Don't we need legal pundits to tell us what the facts mean?"

But when people want to know what something "means" they are usually asking for a scorecard assessment: Does it help our team?

This is the opposite of learning about the legal system. People start rooting for destructive policies if they think it will hurt Trump.

Teri_Kanefield, to random
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

When people show me hostility, they often speak in the first person plural.

(I blocked this person, so don't pile on him.)

It's group think. It's also mob-like to think that a group of citizens can change the pace or outcome of a criminal investigation.

Teri_Kanefield, to random
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

Hi, Fediverse:

Whew. I finished this week's blog post. Do your thing, Mastodon.

https://terikanefield.com/beware-the-lawyers-follow-up/

It's a follow up from last week, answering some of the questions and comments I got.

In response to people telling me that I am overestimating the ability of people to decode legal news, I attempt to prove this hypothesis:

If people stop listening to legal pundits speculating, they wouldn’t feel confused and they wouldn’t think they need help from lawyers decoding the news.

1/

Teri_Kanefield,
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

(I hope that made sense. I've been working on this since early morning 😂)

Teri_Kanefield,
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

@sswerdloff See. I can count on Mastodon. Thanks.

Teri_Kanefield,
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

@nadams I'm not seeing the error. (me tired)

Teri_Kanefield,
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

@nadams Right but I don't see what is wrong with it.

Teri_Kanefield,
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

@WearsHats Got it.

Sheesh I told you I'm tired.

Teri_Kanefield,
@Teri_Kanefield@mastodon.social avatar

@smurthys

Facepalm. What a clown.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • JUstTest
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • InstantRegret
  • GTA5RPClips
  • Youngstown
  • everett
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • osvaldo12
  • mdbf
  • ngwrru68w68
  • megavids
  • cubers
  • modclub
  • normalnudes
  • tester
  • khanakhh
  • Durango
  • ethstaker
  • tacticalgear
  • Leos
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • cisconetworking
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •