Monday, November 30, 2009

TV is an essential good

We’ve been highlighting the ridiculous over here at ThinkLegal, and this is no exception.  A judge in Brazi has ruled that television is an essential good.

A man in Sao Paulo brought an action against a store for not replacing his broken TV.  The judge awarded $2,600 in “moral damages”, that is damages suffered because this man couldn’t watch TV.

"Without it, how can the owner watch the beautiful women on 'Big Brother,' the national news broadcast or a football game," the judge quipped.

It’s an absurd decision.  While I understand some of the point of view here, in that TVs are indeed extremely common, there is absolutely no way it can be considered an essential good.  Food, shelter, heat, those sort of things all make sense.  I would even argue education and water should count.  But TV?  Hell no.

[Source: Reuters]

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Rumsfeld is a war criminal?

This is a hyperbolic headline, but it’s totally worth looking at.  A while ago, a United Nations official was quoted as saying that good old former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld was a war criminal because he knowingly authorized torture.

Now, since this has clearly not proceeded at all it seems like this was a bit grandiose, but I want to bring this to your attention:

"We have clear evidence," he said. "In our report that we sent to the United Nations, we made it clear that former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld clearly authorized torture methods and he was told at that time by Alberto Mora, the legal council of the Navy, 'Mr. Secretary, what you are actual ordering here amounts to torture.' So, there we have the clear evidence that Mr. Rumsfeld knew what he was doing but, nevertheless, he ordered torture."

Those are the words of United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak, and they are rather striking.  It makes me wonder what this information is that they have and why it has not been acted upon.

The evidence is apparently based on documents signed by President Bush and reports from other Department of Justice lawyers.  But clearly this will not at all proceed.  The likelihood of a senior US government official being put on trial is precisely nil. 

But it would make for an interesting trial.

[Source: Raw Story]

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Update: Justice of the Peace Quits

A quick update to this post: Justice of the Peace may be racist.

Bardwell has finally resigned his office.  According to CNBC:

Keith Bardwell quit with a one-sentence statement to Louisiana Secretary of State Jay Dardenne: "I do hereby resign the office of Justice of the Peace for the Eighth Ward of Tangipahoa Parish, Louisiana, effective November 3, 2009."

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal said that this was long overdue, and I must say that I kind of agree with him.  Bardwell’s refusal to apologize and refusal to step down has been a travesty for the administration of justice. 

I don’t think you can have someone in office as a Justice of the Peace who openly discriminates against those of other races.  It simply does not allow for faith in the justice system.  And yes, I obviously understand the role JoP’s play, but being part of the greater legal establishment does impose a certain obligation upon them.

Now, the couple in question has filed a federal lawsuit against Bardwell.  Now I don’t think that’s necessary in a case like this, when the ‘justice’ has already been served by his removal from office.  The damage was minimal, as the couple was referred to someone who would perform the ceremony and not rejected outright.  But we will see how it goes.

[Source: MSNBC]