Durham and the Little Man of Reason: Insanity as a Defense, Part 2

Welcome back to Lawyers & Liquor and oh my god has this series become somewhat in bad taste since I started writing it last week. Over the recent weekend there were two mass shootings in the United States, killing in excess of thirty people and wounding many others, and the national conversation has gone to the most reasonable place ever since then: mental health care. Because, of course, no matter what happens it can’t be the availability of firearms that can empty out thirty shots in less time than it takes to read this post, reload, and empty out thirty more. No, the real problem is that all of the people who engage in mass shootings are obviously mentally unsound…which is a no shit statement because generally mentally sound people don’t consider “shooting a bunch of people in a retail store is the perfect way to express myself” to be a reasonable conclusion to reach.

However, as we talked about last time, merely being mentally unsound isn’t enough to properly defend the actions of an accused party in court. And nothing we’re going to talk about today is going to change that shit, because while M’Naghten, in some form, is still the majority rule throughout the United States, even under the tests used by the minority of states to make a determination of whether insanity relieves a party of criminal liability the standard still wouldn’t be met simply be means of mental defect. That’s right, today we’re going to examine the three other tests used to determine whether or not a defendant’s insistence that they shouldn’t be punished because of their mental state is,unlike their alleged mentality, sound.

But first, a disclaimer.

Continue reading “Durham and the Little Man of Reason: Insanity as a Defense, Part 2”

M’Nope-in: Insanity as a Defense, Part 1.

Hey, welcome back to Lawyers & Liquor as we start the week off with a banging of a gavel and the popping of a cold, delicious morning beer (what, that’s not a thing?) with an examination of law, law practice, and the various other sundries of legal minutia and misfeasance that has a bad habit of creeping into the day.

I’m the Boozy Barrister, and today we’re going to talk about a light subject, just a little bit of levity before you charge headlong into the hellish week that is the beginning of August. That’s right, today we’re going to talk about – and break down in terms that laymen, baby lawyers, the legal fetal collection of cells that is a law student, and even the old hands that may never have cracked a criminal guide since the bar – the many vagaries surrounding the defense of “insanity” in the American justice system…and how it differs from other mentally-based determinations you may run into in a criminal court matter.

But first, a word from our “Please Don’t Do This” Department.

Continue reading “M’Nope-in: Insanity as a Defense, Part 1.”

Freaky Friday: Of High Seas Murder and Cannibalism

Welcome back to Lawyers & Liquor, as we strive to stay on schedule from here on out and fling open the doors to the afterlife with another edition of Freaky Friday, the monthly macabre legal review of cases, precedents, and stuff that’s just downright creepy in the law!  I’m your ghost host, the BOO-zy Barrister, and do we have a ghoulish set of morning reading for you today, all regarding the legal principles of two countries that state while a seaman may go down with the ship, they can’t kill or eat passengers and get away with it at law!

That’s right.

Maritime Murder is today’s topic, so break out those gold-fringed admiralty flags and start denying the authority of the court as we explore the macabre principles and precedents of U.S. v. Holmes and Regina v. Dudley this month on Freaky Friday.

Continue reading “Freaky Friday: Of High Seas Murder and Cannibalism”

Legal News Roundup: May 8, 2019

This is filler. This is unabashedly filler, because I’m having an amazingly busy week and have to get the themed Friday post together still, and Boozy just doesn’t have time to sit down and write something new and glorious every Wednesday. However, I made a promise to myself, and to you fine folks, that I would keep the site updated at least twice a week as we head back to the three times a week posting schedule. So, in the furtherance of that, let’s bring back an oldie but goody and do a legal news roundup here on Lawyers & Liquor, with some light commentary by the bastardly Boozy Barrister on all of the weirdest or, in my opinion, most worthy news that has slammed into the legal world!

I swear, if I could make this a real job I’d never open a Federal Reporter again.

Continue reading “Legal News Roundup: May 8, 2019”

Fetish Friday: “Hypoxia and Euphoria” – Recent Developments In the Law of Autoerotic Asphyxiation

Welcome back to Fetish Friday here on Lawyers & Liquor and I’m just going to be honest and say I’ve completely lost track of my sponsors. So this one, folks, this one is for me, the Boozy Barrister, as we sit back and talk about a legal issue related to the after dark portions of the law. That’s right, some legal matter, precedent, or rule of law that related to when you’ve been a naughty boy, girl, or other is the purpose of our deep dives into the laws of kink and sex similar to what you might have previously seen on a websites such as twinkmovies.xxx (https://www.twinkmovies.xxx/). And this week, well, I mean, this week has just left me breathless!

So join me as we talk about the law of Autoerotic Asphyxiation here on Lawyers & Liquor!

Continue reading “Fetish Friday: “Hypoxia and Euphoria” – Recent Developments In the Law of Autoerotic Asphyxiation”