BC COURT
Saved by @Alex1Powell

Some initial observations about this case, and in particular what the Court of Appeal made of the Attorney General’s application to refer these sentences as “unduly lenient”.

Spoiler: it makes uncomfortable reading for the Attorney General.

 First, by way of background. I was one of several commentators astonished that the Attorney General, who has no known experience of practising criminal law, decided to personally present this serious case at the Court of Appeal.

It appeared an overtly political decision. https://t.co/Q5idP3FyZp
Comments leaked to the press confirmed this was a political decision, to capitalise on a tragic case in the headlines.

A “friend” of the Attorney General told the Express that she was pursuing the case *against* legal advice. She also took a preemptive pop at the judges. https://t.co/vwvJ5yHIj8
On the day of the hearing, it appeared from selected reports that the AG was out of her depth. She appeared to be making political submissions to the Court of Appeal that have no place in a case of this type. https://t.co/PJH1UCn0aQ
The Court of Appeal judgment helps understand what happened.

The AG played a limited role. She “rehearsed some of the facts and said that the sentences had caused widespread public concern”

Her contribution was seemingly not considered by the Court to be legal submissions. Oof.
Instead, legal submissions were advanced by the experienced criminal QC being “led” by the Attorney General. It was left to him to advance the argument that the AG was herself apparently unable or unwilling to.
An important paragraph. One detects that the intended audience is not just the public.
The Court of Appeal turns to the Attorney General’s legal argument.

These are words that you don’t want to hear from a judge.

“Striking.” “Unusual.”

“Regrettable” that a key point - the structure and ambit of the relevant Sentencing Guideline - was “not addressed”.
The AG could not complain that the sentencing judge had not followed the Guideline - because he clearly had. So instead, she argued he was under a duty *not* to follow it.

Striking and unusual indeed.

Court of Appeal: No “sufficient explanation [was] given” for this contention.
The Attorney General also claimed that the judge made too great a reduction in sentence to reflect the defendants’ age and learning difficulties. The Court of Appeal said she had shown “no basis” for this argument.
The conclusion? “There is no basis on which it can be said that...the custodial terms imposed on the offenders were unduly lenient.”

A resounding rejection of the Attorney General’s efforts.
The Court of Appeal also had little time (4 paragraphs!) for the defence argument that the sentences were manifestly excessive or wrong in principle. They quickly approved the sentencing judge’s approach and said that the defence grounds of appeal were “unarguable”.
One final thing. Neither the Attorney General, nor indeed the defence, spotted that the sentence was technically unlawful for other reasons. Court of Appeal in-house lawyers had to point it out.

Happens to us all, but still not great for the government’s most senior law officer.
So a resounding defeat all round.

Exactly as the AG was apparently advised by her own lawyers.

It is one thing to lose a case, even heavily, that you genuinely believe to be arguable.

But to pursue a case against legal advice at public expense for political gain? Not good.
So the headline:

The Attorney General was advised by experienced government lawyers that this application had no legal merit.

She pursued it anyway, briefed the tabloids that any judge who found against her was a “wet liberal”, insisted on presenting it herself, and lost.
I’m aware that my criticism of the AG is not universally popular.

If she stops exonerating political advisors, approving government law-breaking, sitting silent as lawyers are attacked by her colleagues and intervening in criminal cases for political gain, I’ll happily stop too.

More from Court

Arieh Kovler
Arieh Kovler
@ariehkovler
There won't be a rerun of Jan 6. The riot at the Capitol was unique in many ways: Trump called for it; it was the last chance to "overturn" the election; it was huge in scale.


The coming Trumpist events on Jan 17 and Jan 20 will probably be much smaller in scale, especially in DC. The MAGA crew can't buy another flight and take more days off work so soon after Jan 6.

Some of the Trumpist forums are actively suspicious of these events, claiming they're FBI or Antifa traps. A lot of people at TDW felt that the *design* of this flyer was too lefty to be real!


Unfortunately, that doesn't mean everything will be OK. The statehouse events on Jan 17 have the potential to turn violent, where a few hundred people could be enough to overwhelm local authorities.

MAGA anger at a lot of the GOP is high, as well as against Dems. Even red states could see problems, so I hope authorities are prepared.
COURT , POLITICS
Live Law
Live Law
@LiveLawIndia
TATA Sons v Cyrus Mistry

Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice of India assembles to hear the appeals filed by Tata Sons Pvt Ltd against the NCLAT direction to reinstate Cyrus Mistry as Company Chairman.


Senior Advocate Harish Salve starts submissions for Tata Sons.

@RNTata2000 @TataCompanies

Salve : This(Chairmanship) is not a post as understood in service law. In Company Law, this is designation.

#TatasCyrusMistryDispute

Salve : Tata Sons Ltd is a company of considerable vintage. It was created in 1917.

CJI : Was it a public limited company?

Salve : Never. It has always been a private company.

#TataSons
#CyrusMistry

Salve : The curious thing which has happened in the case is that there is a provision in Tata Son's Articles which restricts the transfer of shares. It also has a remarkable feature that the Board could direct a shareholder to sell shares.

#TataSons
#CyrusMistry
COURT
Advertisement
braingarbage
braingarbage
@braingarbage
In the MATTER OF Jones David HOLLISTER
A171609.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
July 8, 2020.
https://t.co/qB3G8IAtxS we must correctly interpret the statute.
Stull v. Hoke, 326 Or. 72, 77, 948 P.2d 722 (1997).
legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary

Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and Mooney, Judge, and Hadlock, Judge pro tempore.

https://t.co/oJuecwvEKc


Bruce L. Campbell, John C. Clarke, and Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP filed the brief amicus curiae for Transgender Law Center, interACT, and Beyond Binary Legal.

Does ORS 33.460 permit the circuit court to grant a legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary? The circuit court concluded that the statute does not permit such a change, and it denied petitioner's application under ORS 33.460
COURT
Mike Dunford
Mike Dunford
@questauthority
Texas - WTF is this even - a very short reassurance thread:

1: The Texas "lawusit" against four other "battleground" states in the United States Supreme Court is legally stupid.* It is so legally stupid that I was reluctant to believe that even Ken Paxton would file it.

*My patience level is not ginormous today. Please don't try to explain to me why you think it isn't stupid for whatever other reasons because I'll be making liberal use of the airlock. Thx.

2: Yes, one state can sue another at the US Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court gets to decide whether to take the case. One factor that they will **undoubtedly** look at is the factor of "injury."

Texas is claiming two things. First, that the states have a special interest in who becomes Vice President because of the tiebreaker. Second, that their electors are injured if their votes are "diluted" by electors from states that, in Texas's view, didn't obey their own law.


There is very little argument presented for "injury." Even less - barely a paragraph - was presented for how the defendant states caused that injury.

For lawyers, this is a signal that this is a performance of politics by "litigation" and not a serious effort.
COURT
braingarbage
braingarbage
@braingarbage
so @tedwheeler did you hear? today we are discussing "public whippings" thanks to @JamesBuchal

its a great chance to study the history of public beatings.
understandably, women feel threatened. https://t.co/jck05JGM4B
#PDX #tourism


FIRST OREGON WIFE-BEATER TO RECEIVE WHIPPING POST PUNISHMENT
https://t.co/3SJOODbuLf
PORTLAND. Or., June 7—The whipping post law passed at the last session of the Legislature was Into execution for the first time today, the victim being Charles Mcdlnty, convicted of wlfe-beatlng

whip was a braided blacksnake, made of rawhide, with four lashes. ..hustled to jail, stripped to the

waist, manacled, and his hands tied to the door high above his head. The whipping was as severe as the powerful deputy was capable of administering. Blood drawn on the 4th blow.
COURT

You May Also Like

The '60s at 60
The '60s at 60
@the_60s_at_60
"The MAD Primer of Bigots, Extremists and Other Loose Ends," from September 1969.

Seen a couple of these panels make the rounds from time to time, so here's the complete set of 10 (something to amuse and/or offend almost everyone).


Chapter 1: The Super Patriot


Chapter 2: The Ku Klux Klansman


Chapter 3: The American Student


Chapter 4: The Right-Wing Extremist
FUN
Jaya_Upadhyaya
Jaya_Upadhyaya
@Jayalko1
ARULMIGU SRI PARTHASARATHY SWAMY KSHETRAM, CHENNAI (TN)

Divya Desha where Perumal appears with moustache of a Sarathi (charioteer) to conduct Arjun’s Rath in Kurukshetra war.
Here, Venkatkrishna-Parthasarthy is present with his entire family.


He is flanked by Sri Rukmini, Sri Balarama, Satyaki, son Pradyumn and grandson Anirudha.
It is said that on the request of Raja Sumathirajan, Sri Perumal appeared and stayed here as Arjun’s charioteer (Partha-sarathi).


He is without chakra as he had promised not to wield weapons in Mahabharata war.
The face has scars caused by Bhishma’s arrows on Arjun. Prabhu took the arrows on himself to protect Arjun.


The Naivedyam offered here does not have spices. Ghee is used in it to cure Prabhu’s wounds. Sarkarai Pongal is famous here.

It is said that Rishi Bhrigu found Devi Lakshmi (as Vedvalli) in Alli flower in the mandir pushkarini. Later, Sri Ranganatha came here to marry her.
ALL
Advertisement
Hector Navarro
Hector Navarro
@Hectorisfunny
I'm going to attempt to chronologically list all of the Marvel characters Stan Lee had a hand in creating. Working with his genius collaborators, Stan and his team produced an insane amount of iconic characters in a roughy ten year period. (Thread)


With his younger brother, writer Larry Lieber, and Jack "the King" Kirby:

Groot

Tales to Astonish #13 (November, 1960)


With writer Lieber, and artist Kirby:

Fin Fang Foom

Strange Tales #89 (October, 1961)


With the King, Stan gives birth to the Marvel Universe:

The Fantastic Four

Fantastic Four #1 (November, 1961)


With Jack Kirby:

Mister Fantastic

Fantastic Four #1 (November, 1961)
CULTURE
Erik Torenberg
Erik Torenberg
@eriktorenberg
1/ Some initial thoughts on personal moats:

Like company moats, your personal moat should be a competitive advantage that is not only durable—it should also compound over time.

Characteristics of a personal moat below:


2/ Like a company moat, you want to build career capital while you sleep.

As Andrew Chen noted:


3/ You don’t want to build a competitive advantage that is fleeting or that will get commoditized

Things that might get commoditized over time (some longer than


4/ Before the arrival of recorded music, what used to be scarce was the actual music itself — required an in-person artist.

After recorded music, the music itself became abundant and what became scarce was curation, distribution, and self space.

5/ Similarly, in careers, what used to be (more) scarce were things like ideas, money, and exclusive relationships.

In the internet economy, what has become scarce are things like specific knowledge, rare & valuable skills, and great reputations.
LIFE
Ramsay Rippers \U0001f354
Ramsay Rippers 🍔...
@RamsayRippers
🧵EMA + VWAP STRATEGY

Every trader has a go-to strategy that works best for them. My trading is all about keeping it simple stupid and revolves around two indicators - Exponential moving averages and vwap.

Here's the strategy that I utilize on nearly 80% of my trades.

👇

What are Exponential Moving Averages?

EMA's are a type of moving average that places a greater weight on more recent data points.

8EMA = Exponential Moving Averages of the last 8 candle closing prices.

EMA's adjust with respect to chart time frame.

What is VWAP?

Volume Weighted Average Price - A key intraday indicator in my trading that offers the true average price based on price & volume.

Calculation: (Price x # of shares traded) / total shares traded

EMA's I use

- 8
- 21
- 50

While I do utilize the 50EMA, the 8 & 21 EMA are most important for this strategy. Some people use the 9 and 20 which are essentially the same thing. REMEMBER: EMA'S adjust with respect to time frames.

A+ Set Up Criteria - (What I look for)
STRATEGY