I am certain some lawyer will challenge this insanity.
They simply note that some comments will be viewed as “cross[ing] the line from criticism to dangerous rhetoric.”
related posts
156 sats \ 2 replies \ @grayruby 15 Jun
Wow. Legal opinions no longer allowed.
reply
181 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 16 Jun
It's quite reminiscent of doctors not being allowed to speak out about Covid.
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 16 Jun
They have a lot to lose because they pushed the vaccine.
reply
54 sats \ 1 reply \ @jgbtc 16 Jun
The key takeaways here are that the trial was definitely a sham, a hoax, and rigged; our justice system is corrupt and rigged; the judge was corrupt and highly unethical; and, that the jury was partisan and precooked. Many have observed that the trial was America’s first communist show trial.
Very nice of the Connecticut Bar to lay it all out so succinctly.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @wingalt 16 Jun
Sadly not the first show trial and definitely not the last. Trump's is certainly more mainstream but the Ross Ulbricht's trial also comes to mind, total mockery of justice, fraud and insane verdict. For better or worse sooner or later it will backfire and there will be call for revenge, America is up for a very wild ride
reply
64 sats \ 1 reply \ @JesseJames 16 Jun
Let me get this straight, "some comments" are "reckless and unprofessional" but actions and behavior of a Judge are perfectly fine.
The entire Bar Association in my humble opinion is acting like a backyard mob where you have to toe the line or we will think you are not fit to be lawyer , what a farce!
Personally, I can't wait for the day when AI will take their jobs, it will do 100 times better service to humanity. AI can reference every case ever tried in the US history of court cases in 15 seconds flat, there will be no bias, no political affiliations, just facts.
"...the first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers..." WS - King Henry VI
reply
31 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 16 Jun
Totally agree, but please wait until my license expires before that last part.
reply
64 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 15 Jun
I hope you're not putting yourself at risk of being accused of "dangerous rhetoric".
reply
69 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 16 Jun
We are along a road that started the first time a "hate speech" statute was declared constitutional. When I went to law school, a long time ago, the only speech that could be deemed a crime would be yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theatre. Things have changed.
reply
54 sats \ 1 reply \ @Coinsreporter 16 Jun
So, that's what they call 'freedom of Speech' in the US? Don't understand how 'rhetoric' can raise violence?
reply
11 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 16 Jun
We are living in strange times.
reply
54 sats \ 0 replies \ @Athena 16 Jun
The criticism for the decision against Trump isn't wrong at all.
reply
54 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 16 Jun
They are covering their own asses.
They all know it is wrong, they just dont want to jeopardize their careers.
reply