Legal Eagle

Devin reacts to Ace Attorney (The anime), with the help of a Japanese Attorney. Longer version on Nebula.

Edited by Ghilz on Apr 15th 2024 at 4:23:32 AM

Really disappointed to see he's using AI art.

I swear he already did an Ace Attorney video.

He did five years ago. Difference is, this one has a Japanese lawyer to help out versed in Japanese law.

Yeah, I always thought that was a problem with his first video. He's an American lawyer and Ace Attorney has all sorts of values dissonance and differences from the American courts because they are based on the Japanese system.

Needing to kill three people to get the Death Penalty in Japan would explain the one example of someone being executed we see in those games.

Also to be fair Ace Attorney has some... punny names that you could probably guess a person's involvement.

In which Devin discuss the whole spiral that is OJ Simpson and everything happened to him up to his death earlier this year.

Edited by terumokou on Apr 22nd 2024 at 12:31:22 PM

The main salient is if OJ's estate, who spent the last 30 years dodging paying the civil lawsuit he lost by moving to lands where laws are harder to enforce like ex soviet republics mexico Florida, will now have to settle and pay for his lost civil lawsuit now that the man himself is dead.

The TL:DR is OJ set up a trust as part of his will in Nevada which allows for non taxable, non public trusts so no one knows their beneficiary or allows creditors to look at the trust. In the end it's possible they wont see a penny but it'll likely be settled by courts as there's stuff in the type of trust he set that might make it not immune to creditors.

Honestly, the main takeaway I have from this is that our country's system for recovering legal judgments from debtors is fucked up.

OJ's case itself is old news, and I'm more than a little disturbed by how these "trials of the century" serve to distract from the fact that spousal murder is a thing that happens practically every day, as is debtors welching on their legal obligations.

But no, we only care when it's a famous dude.

What made the case notable was how the racist practices of the L.A. police were brought into the spotlight. It was so blatant that it actually resulted in a black man being found not guilty for murdering white people.

I mean a rich black man with three of the country's greatest criminal lawyers and a generally botched/weak prosecution who didnt bother to object to very obvious things.

Like, sure the whole Rodney King thing was there and a factor but nowhere near the primary one.

Edited by Ghilz on Apr 23rd 2024 at 9:40:03 AM

I've served on jury duty with a botched prosecution. It's hardly newsworthy. At the time, the OJ case seemed more to me about high-profile defense attorneys Chewbacca-ing their client out of a criminal conviction. Literally the only thing that made "black dude kills white people in spousal rage" a big deal was the fact that the black dude in question was famous.

Again, the point is that sensational trials make for poor legal precedents. The whole business was a clusterfuck from end to end, and the nation sat around popcorning it and using it to support their slogans.

No "justice" was done, racial or otherwise.

Edited by Fighteer on Apr 23rd 2024 at 9:56:49 AM

It kind of felt like the police were on trial instead of OJ.

With how they handled that case, they might as well have held the door open for Simpson.

Multiple things can be true at once. The Los Angeles police were racist, the Los Angeles District Attorney's office was incompetent, and OJ Simpson did commit murder. Our legal justice system provides the benefit of the doubt to the defendant for a very good reason. If the prosecution cannot adequately prove its case, then acquittal is the only fair choice.

How Did They Choose a Jury for A President?

Devin and friends go over the jury selection process in the Trump case and remind us that he's hardly the first person to fall asleep in a courtroom.

Most importantly, they talk about the strategy that Trump's lawyers [probably] used in selecting jurors. Basically, they're targeting one of two outcomes:

• a mistrial caused by a single holdout
• conviction on misdemeanor instead of felony charges

Basically, they want one or more jurors who think of themselves as smarter than "the system" and are willing to entertain wild theories about what is actually going on here. Conspiracy-minded folks who might be persuaded to see ulterior motives in the prosecution.

Their goal during the trial is not going to be to contest facts per se but to question the very foundation of truth upon which the case rests, hoping that at least one juror will be swayed and dig in their heels. A mistrial would of course be retried, but this would massively delay proceedings. A conviction on misdemeanor counts might even play in Trump's favor during the election.

Edited by Fighteer on Apr 23rd 2024 at 12:12:46 PM

,

Definitely didn't help that the jury also failed in their duty - at least one juror later admitted that they didn't actually believe Simpson was innocent, but they wanted "revenge for Rodney King".

Clusterfuck of the century.

At least when it comes to murder trials. I can think of worse clusterfucks in other fields in this century and the past century.

Edited by M84 on Apr 24th 2024 at 12:11:50 AM

Yeah, the Nuremberg trials for one.

Too many light sentences for people who did the unthinkable.

Edited by AngelusNox on Apr 23rd 2024 at 1:45:00 PM

This whole Trump trial is becoming such a circus. The liberal media are covering it like it's a royal event or something, with breathless coverage of... Trump's commute to the courtroom, just for starters.

Trump must be chuffed he's being treated like royalty by the media like this...

It is also missing the deals the Democrats did with student loads, auto-unions and the aid for people earning less than 58K a year that happened this month.

For one I am also waiting for The Legal Eagle take on the Pecker screws Trump statements that happened recently. For more context, David Pecker from the National Enquirer tabloid was helping Trump to keep damaging news from going out.

Edited by AngelusNox on Apr 23rd 2024 at 1:53:09 PM

The video doesn't get close to doxxing any of the prospective jurors, does it? Since the news media has been doing so.

It' not "liberal" media. Unless one thinks any media left of FOX News counts as liberal.

The real issue is that for-profit media is all about chasing drama.

Edited by M84 on Apr 24th 2024 at 2:16:17 AM

CNN and MSNBC are liberal, right?