Like this blog?Bookmark it and inflict it on others!
Judge Wool says
“Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own facts.” Senator Daniel Moynihan
- Queens judges say the darndest things
- Granny stun-gunned for gathering dandelions
- Albany prosecutor fired for secretly writing defense briefs
- Masterpiece Cakeshop refuses birthday cake for Satan
- How to get judges to read your brief
- Linda Fairstein: Central Park Five guilty as charged
- Sentencing Sheldon Silver
- The ban on “sex offender” art
- Criminal defense vs. “social justice”
- Courts should take a tip from the Dept. of Agriculture
- The ACLU uncompromisingly defends free speech — unless it’s offensive.
- Judge Bludgeon rules on cyberbullying
- Cake, religion and Summa [obscenity deleted] Laude
- Stalkers of Lady Justice
- Quality clobbering at Rikers
- “The Constitution does not require Florida to join New York in la-la-land.”
- OMG!! What’s so reliable about excited utterance?
- Exiled statues find asylum in Green-Wood Cemetery
- The Court of Appeals believes the victim (even when the jury doesn’t)
- “Thrusting counsel upon the accused against his considered wish”
- Bronx judge finds solution to trial delays: eliminate attorneys
- Appellate Squawk celebrates National Poetry Month
- The ultimate bail reform: shoot the client
- Relax, baby, I’m gay.
- Deadly meteor expected to demolish Earth any minute
- Appellate Squawk’s Radiant Institute of Continuing Legal Education
- ICE, ICE, baby!*
- Punch & Judy’s easy answers to everything
- Trigger warnings for courtrooms
- Guv to judges: want a raise? get to work on time.
- Seven words to be banned in court
- The Case of Masterpiece Cakeshop
- “Appearing in court isn’t supposed to be fun.”
- Maestro James Levine
- “What cross-race charge? What are you talking about?”
- Court admits expert water-dunking testimony as relevant, helpful to jury.
- Chief Judge orders prosecutors not to be crooked and defense lawyers not to be incompetent
- “Hands up, motherf*cker! This is a request for information!”
- “Give me a lawyer, dawg.”
- President Trump takes to the street
- Squawk is interrogated
- Privacy for me but not for thee
- Let’s remove offensive statues from Central Park
- When is parody a crime? When nobody gets it.
- Thoughtfully prosecuting your client
- Law vs. Science
- Searching for the right court for your appeal? View these 521 customer reviews.
- Is a lawyer a “significant individual”? Court says nix.
- Squawk has been ungood
- Police Commissioner announces new anti-spitting technology
- Follow Appellate Squawk on WordPress.com
Category Archives: Forensic “science”
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting expert testimony concerning defendant’s failure to pass the water-dunking test. Dr. Brimstone, who has testified in over 200 witch trials, was plainly qualified to explain to the jury that immersing … Continue reading
Exclusive Interview with the Hon. Judge Wool: Appellate Squawk: Judge, I understand you were a prominent member of the National Commission on Forensic Science asking some tough questions about the validity of these cop-created sciences. Judge Wool: I was, but … Continue reading
Police Commissioner Hannibal Mugfur announced a monumental new technology today guaranteed to solve thousands of crimes, bring deviants to justice and make the City’s sidewalks cleaner. Unveiling a demonstration model of the SPITSUCKER-100™ before a delighted audience at Daffy Duck … Continue reading
A photo from the L.A. Times illustrating how a San Diego lab swabs DNA from cell phones. We fear this lab isn’t going to stay in business for long.
A mysterious Deep Throat, known only as Dr4ensic, has leaked a draft report from a Presidential commission warning that courts are falling down on their job of keeping out junk science offered by the prosecution. That’s mighty public-spirited of Dr4ensic, … Continue reading
New York judges are arming themselves with science, the better to be “gatekeepers” of expert testimony in the courtroom, according to the NY Law Journal. The notion that judges are qualified to resolve scientific disputes comes from the famous Supreme Court … Continue reading