#Best Criminal Lawyer in Supreme Court

[monukumarefr]

Legal Advice on Anticipatory Bail on the Ground of Relevancy of Evidences Available | Criminal Law Attorney in Delhi NCR | Criminal Lawyer in Delhi NCR |

“An application for anticipatory bail can be filed before the Sessions Court and appeal to the High Court. In a criminal case or criminal trial it is the evidences i.e. direct evidence or indirect evidences and the testimonies of the witnesses which plays a key role both for the prosecution and for the criminal defense. The appreciation of the evidence is done by the Courts and the same acts as the deciding factor for the grant of anticipatory bail and eregular bail in criminal proceedings”

https://mylawyersadvice.com/uncategorized/legal-advice-on-anticipatory-bail-on-the-ground-of-relevancy-of-evidences-available-criminal-law-attorney-in-delhi-ncr-criminal-lawyer-in-delhi-ncr/

[criminal-lawyer-in-delhi]

Accused of a Crime in Delhi? Why Choose Sidhant Dhingra for Your Legal Defense?

When dealing with criminal charges, having the right legal representation is crucial. Sidhant Dhingra & Associates is a renowned Criminal law firm in Delhi, known for its unparalleled expertise, client-focused approach, and exceptional track record in handling complex and high-stakes cases. With years of experience across various facets of Criminal law , the firm has established itself as a trusted name in the legal community.

Why Choose Sidhant Dhingra & Associates?

1. Extensive Practice in Criminal Law

Sidhant Dhingra & Associates boasts years of hands-on experience in handling a wide array of criminal cases, ranging from white-collar crimes to heinous offenses. The firm has successfully represented clients in cases involving:

Economic offenses (fraud, embezzlement, money laundering).

Cybercrimes (hacking, data theft, online defamation).

Narcotics and drugs-related offenses.

Sexual harassment, assault, and POCSO cases.

Bail applications and anticipatory bail.

Trials under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Defamation and criminal conspiracy.

Bail and Anticipatory Bail

2. High-Profile Case Experience

The firm has a proven history of managing high-profile cases, providing discreet and professional legal representation. Their ability to navigate media scrutiny and complex legal frameworks has earned them the trust of business leaders, public figures, and individuals facing challenging legal battles.

3. Strategic Approach and Expertise

Every case handled by Sidhant Dhingra & Associates is meticulously analyzed to develop a customized legal strategy. Their deep understanding of procedural and substantive criminal laws, combined with a proactive approach, ensures the best possible outcomes for their clients.

3. Robust Courtroom Advocacy

The firm’s team of seasoned advocates, led by Sidhant Dhingra, is known for its persuasive arguments, thorough cross-examinations, and ability to handle even the most challenging cases with confidence.

Key Practice Areas

1. Pre-Litigation Advisory

Early legal advice can make a significant difference in criminal cases. Sidhant Dhingra & Associates offers pre-litigation consultations to help clients understand their legal options, assess risks, and decide the best course of action.

2. Bail and Anticipatory Bail

The firm has a strong track record of securing bail and anticipatory bail for clients across various criminal charges. Their expertise in navigating procedural hurdles ensures swift and effective relief.

3. Trial Representation

Representing clients in trial courts is a cornerstone of the firm’s practice. From gathering evidence to cross-examining witnesses, their trial advocacy is thorough, strategic, and aimed at achieving acquittals or favorable judgments.

4. Appeals and Revisions

The team has significant experience in representing clients in appellate courts, including the High Court and Supreme Court. Their ability to identify errors in lower court proceedings and craft compelling appeals ensures strong representation at every judicial level.

5. Specialized Criminal Cases

Economic Offenses: Expertise in representing individuals and corporations in cases of financial fraud, forgery, and embezzlement.

Cybercrime Cases: Tackling the nuances of rapidly evolving cyber laws to defend clients accused of hacking, phishing, or data breaches.

Domestic Violence and Sexual Offenses: Skilled representation in sensitive cases involving allegations under IPC and POCSO.

The Approach of Sidhant Dhingra & Associates

1. Meticulous Case Preparation

The firm believes in leaving no stone unturned. Their team conducts detailed investigations, engages expert witnesses, and prepares airtight defenses based on facts, evidence, and legal precedents.

2. Client-Centric Focus

Understanding the stress that criminal charges can cause, the firm emphasizes clear communication and transparency. Clients are kept informed at every stage of their case and provided with practical advice tailored to their unique circumstances.

3. Commitment to Ethical Advocacy

Integrity and professionalism are at the core of Sidhant Dhingra & Associates. They are committed to upholding the principles of justice while zealously advocating for their clients’ rights.

4. Leveraging Legal Technology

Staying ahead in a digital world, the firm incorporates cutting-edge legal research tools and technology to strengthen their cases and provide innovative solutions to complex legal problems.

Criminal Law in Delhi: The Importance of Expert Representation

Delhi, being the legal hub of India, witnesses a high volume of criminal cases. The city’s courts are known for their intricate legal processes and fast-paced proceedings. Navigating these complexities requires the expertise of a seasoned criminal lawyer. Sidhant Dhingra & Associates is well-versed in the local legal environment, including the practices of district courts, the Delhi High Court, and the Supreme Court.

The firm’s deep understanding of procedural requirements, from filing FIRs to arguing in court, ensures that clients receive efficient and effective representation.

Client Testimonials

“Sidhant Dhingra & Associates turned the tide in my favor when I thought all hope was lost. Their team’s dedication and strategic approach helped me secure an acquittal in a complex fraud case.”

“I was facing serious charges and didn’t know where to turn. The professionalism and expertise of Sidhant Dhingra & Associates gave me the confidence I needed. They fought for me like no one else could.”

Contact Sidhant Dhingra & Associates

Facing criminal charges is one of the most daunting experiences a person can endure. With Sidhant Dhingra & Associates on your side, you gain a team of highly skilled advocates committed to safeguarding your rights and providing unparalleled legal support.

Get in touch today to schedule a consultation and take the first step toward resolving your legal concerns with one of Delhi’s most trusted criminal law firms.

[lawandlegal]

Advocate Narender Singh: Redefining Criminal Lawyer for Supreme Court of India Excellence

Setting New Standards in Supreme Court Advocacy

Advocate Narender Singh is a trailblazer in the field of criminal law. Known for his expertise, he consistently sets benchmarks in Criminal Lawyer for Supreme Court of India litigation. His practice revolves around precision, innovation, and relentless pursuit of justice.

A Stellar Career in Criminal Law

Narender Singh has handled a vast spectrum of criminal cases, from complex constitutional issues to landmark judgments. His unparalleled grasp of the Indian Penal Code and procedural law positions him among the top criminal lawyers in India.

Mastering Supreme Court Dynamics

Best Criminal Lawyer for Supreme Court of India proceedings require in-depth knowledge and strategic planning. Advocate Singh has mastered these dynamics, ensuring his clients receive strong and effective representation. His ability to navigate the intricate procedures of the apex court is a hallmark of his practice.

Expert in High-Stakes Litigation

Advocate Narender Singh has a proven track record in high-stakes cases. He excels in defending clients facing serious charges, crafting strategies that lead to favorable outcomes. His experience includes:

Handling criminal appeals and revisions.

Filing and defending Special Leave Petitions (SLPs).

Securing bail and anticipatory bail in critical situations.

Why Advocate Narender Singh Is a Trusted Name

Legal Expertise: Deep understanding of criminal jurisprudence and court procedures.

Strategic Thinking: Ability to anticipate and counter opposing arguments.

Client-Centric Approach: Prioritizes clients’ needs with clear communication and personalized strategies.

Results-Oriented Practice: Delivers success through meticulous planning and flawless execution.

Redefining Advocacy Through Innovation

Narender Singh’s legal practice stands out due to his innovative approach. He combines traditional legal knowledge with modern techniques to address today’s challenges. His adaptability ensures success in even the most unprecedented situations.

Commitment to Justice and Fairness

Advocate Singh’s unwavering commitment to justice forms the foundation of his career. He believes in equal representation for all and works tirelessly to uphold the principles of fairness in every case he handles.

Navigating Complex Legal Issues with Confidence

Narender Singh specializes in resolving intricate legal matters, including:

Constitutional challenges and interpretations.

Cases involving national importance.

High-profile criminal defenses with significant legal implications.

Choosing Advocate Narender Singh for Supreme Court Matters

When facing a legal challenge in the Advocate for Supreme Court of India, you need an advocate with exceptional skills and experience. Narender Singh’s dedication, knowledge, and results-driven approach make him the ideal choice for criminal litigation.

Contact Advocate Narender Singh Today

For expert guidance and representation in Supreme Court criminal matters, Advocate Narender Singh is ready to assist. Reach out today and secure the legal expertise you deserve.

Conclusion

Advocate Narender Singh is redefining excellence in criminal law for the Lawyer for Supreme Court of India. His unparalleled expertise, innovative strategies, and client-focused approach have made him a standout figure in the legal community. Trust him to deliver justice with unmatched professionalism and integrity.

[sattvalegal]

One of the best corporate law firms in Kolkata is Sattva Legal, which provides knowledgeable legal advice on business and intellectual property issues. Our team, which consists of seasoned criminal divorce advocates in the Kolkata High Court and top IPR lawyers in Calcutta, offers expert representation for challenging matters. Sattva Legal is a reputable law practice that provides customized solutions to satisfy clients' needs in the areas of divorce, intellectual property, and corporate law. Select Sattva Legal for trustworthy legal assistance in Kolkata; they are committed to obtaining positive results in a variety of legal matters.

[advabhisheksinha]

A bit late post where Lawonesty Legal Consultants was invited by a Law College. So I, along with one of my colleagues AOR Pramit Saxena, had a wonderful time visiting the College and interviewing talented law students for placements and internships. It was a pleasure to guide these bright minds on navigating a career in law and the importance of generating their own work in this competitive field.

Since I started my legal career, unfortunately I never got any guidance from anyone on how to generate work in the legal field. In the initial years, because of entering litigation a bit late at age with lack of practical experience of the Court processes, I didn't try for any mentorship also. Yes, gradually moving forward I got associations of experienced advocates as I could generate my own work because of my previous experience and networking.

The knowledge gained by me while working with corporates in different industries, by serving the society, by being actively involved with NGOs, local politicians etc were of great help theoritically, though as a first generation lawyer, I passionately kept moving forward, struggled with clerks, procedures, bare acts and learnt the practical court processes by myself from the basics with my own generated work.

But with time, I have realised that my transition from the Corporate world to pure litigation was still smooth because of my past experience and networking but it would be very difficult for the freshers and the first generation lawyers to learn the basics of the Court processes without having their own work and proper mentorship.

I therefore personally feel that it is extremely important for experienced settled advocates to genuinely guide the young law aspirants and help them come up to achieve their dreams in this noble profession.

[mylawyeradvise]

“Investments in real estate in India or properties in India is one of the most complex process even for the residents of India and the same has also posed a big challenge especially for the NRI’s respectively. In the recent years NRI’s have lost their faith in the real estate sector of India as many of their investments in the real estate projects have been struck. Further, before the RERA things were more in the grey area, however, after the introduction of RERA things have become more clear. The best solution to the real estate woos of NRI’s or the investment woos is to conduct a proper due diligence before making any investment in the properties in India. Further, there are many internal and external factors which further determine the investment criteria in any real estate project in India.”

[the-scarlet-witch-22]

Love and Liabilities (Agatha Harkness x FemReader): Chapter One

Summary: While you attend a pretrial conference for your current case, you’re stunned to learn your opposing council is your former ex…and law school professor, Agatha Harkness

Word Count: 4.7k

Tags: 18+ Minors Do Not Engage!! Smut, Light Choking, Light Degradation Kink, Mommy Kink, Hate Sex

A/N: Hi :) This idea has been bouncing around my brain since the promo pics came out. Lawyer Agatha, the gift we all need for the new year. This is my first real attempt at writing smut, but I hope y’all enjoy. Updates will be around every 2 weeks. If you’d like to be added to a tag list, please let me know. Feel free to let me know what you think! 💜 Also a special shout-out to my sweet girlfriend, Sarah, thank you for always listening to my crazy ideas.

Smoothing out a wrinkle from your pantsuit, you looked over your case materials from outside the courtroom. It had been almost a decade since you graduated law school, and you’d spent the time since working in corporate law as a junior attorney, before leaving the firm and working your way up as a top prosecutor. To say you were married to your job would be an understatement. It wasn’t enough to be good, you simply had to be the best. You’d always pride yourself on your ability to dig deep in a case and pull out missing details, or find a crack in a seemingly perfect alibi. You were ruthless, but you knew you had to be. The defense attorneys you found yourself battling in court were absolute sharks, and if they sensed an ounce of hesitation on your end it would be a total bloodbath.

Dealing with criminal defense cases was as interesting as it sounded, although it wasn’t what you envisioned you’d be doing after law school. You had different dreams back then, more altruistic visions of helping those who needed it. Closing your eyes, you saw a brief flash of the strikingly blue eyes and dark hair that caused you to change your choice of career, before you quickly shook those thoughts aside. It had been almost ten years since you’d allowed yourself to think about her- about any of it, and it wouldn’t benefit you to take a stroll down memory lane before the biggest case of your career.

A law clerk eventually came by to inform you the judge was ready for you. This was it. Gathering your materials, you walked through the details again in your mind. Pre-trial conferences were relatively helpful when trying to reach a plea bargain, review evidence, as well as decide what to present to the jury. There was no doubt in your mind that this case would go to trial. After all, a woman who kidnaps two children and takes them to a small town in New Jersey didn’t leave much to plead innocent from. What was the name of it, Westchester? Westmont? No, no, you mentally crossed those out, until the name finally came to mind…Westview. Westview, New Jersey.

The room was relatively empty, and you recognized the judge, Carol Danvers. She had a reputation for being rather uptight, but was typically fair in her rulings. She’d moved up through various circuit courts throughout her career, and you’d heard rumblings she was being eyed for a potential Supreme Court nomination. Setting your briefcase on the empty chair next to you, you thought of any possible hiccups from the defense. Supposedly a brief psych evaluation had been done after the incident to rule anything out, so they wouldn’t try and plead insanity, right? You couldn’t see Carol ruling in favor of that. There was the small problem of genetics; the woman was the boys’ birth mother. But, you’d looked over the adoption contracts, as had your colleagues, and they were airtight. It had been a closed adoption, and from what you could tell there had been no contact for over a decade. Plus, with solid testimonies from both families and multiple eyewitnesses you weren’t worried of whatever argument the defense would make in her favor.

Speaking of the defense, you quickly realized the defense attorney hadn’t arrived yet, which was a bit unusual. Racking your brain, you tried to remember the name of the attorney Yelena said was leading the case, but no one came to mind. Pepper Potts perhaps? Carol also appeared to notice the lack of the second attorney, as she whispered with one of the law clerks. You could barely make out what they were saying, but she sounded annoyed. But, no matter, you knew this had absolutely no impact on you.

Carol finally sighed in defeat at whatever the law clerk told her, something about hitting a fire hydrant? “Well, as we’re waiting on the defense to resolve their…tardiness, will the prosecution step forward?”

Standing up, you grabbed a copy of your materials, evidence, testimonies, anything the judge would need, before taking a step towards the judge. “Your honor, the state of New York is ready to move forward with our case. You’ll find sufficient evidence to dismiss any plea deal, as well as ensure we can schedule a trial date.”

Handing the papers to the judge, you watched as she flipped through them, an unreadable expression on her face. Minutes passed before she looked up at you. “The prosecution is dismissing the plea deal being proposed by the defense?”

Nodding, you recalled the deal that had been sent over to your office. It was preposterous, and was heavily dependent on the mental state of the defendant, or rather the lack of mental state of the defendant. “Yes, your honor. The state has inculpatory evidence to convict the defendant, as well as a number of witnesses willing to testify.”

A voice you’d only heard in your dreams for the past decade spoke up, and you nearly froze in place. “Inculpatory evidence? That’s a rather bold claim, I’d call it circumstantial at best.”

It couldn’t be. Paralyzed, you forced yourself to ignore it, to ignore her and keep your eyes locked forward. It couldn’t possibly be her, you would have remembered hearing her name as the defense attorney. Clearing your throat, you continued, trying to keep yourself calm. “With all due respect, your honor, the typical procedure for a case involving the abduction of a minor is what we’re basing this precedent on-”

An obnoxiously loud cackle cut you off, and nearly made you whip your head around in annoyance. The slow clacking of heels echoed throughout the room, followed by the faint scent of Burberry that invaded your senses. Brief flashes of lecture halls and late night office hour visits intertwined with the smell of cigars and expensive whiskey. Lengthy, heated arguments over the moral justification of various Supreme Court rulings whilst being undressed and pressed against the door. Diamond jewelry and lavish bouquets being delivered to your modest law school apartment as you sheepishly explained to your roommates you were seeing an older woman. Secret rendezvous in dimly lit piano bars in Manhattan which would end in a king size bed in a penthouse you could never dream of affording.

It all led back to the same thought, the same woman you’d done your best to let go of. The very same woman you currently found yourself standing face to face with. Agatha Harkness. Clever blue eyes met yours, and a slow smirk painted her perfect red lips. She hadn’t changed much over the past decade. Her dark hair, now peppered with some gray, was pinned back with a few loose strands framing her face, and you briefly thought of how well it suited her. The fitted black pantsuit which accentuated her features, and black heels that made her look deceptively tall as she towered over you.

For a moment it was as if no time had passed at all, and you were back in her lecture hall. But as quickly as that oddly nostalgic feeling overcame you like a tidal wave, it swept away, leaving you with the reality of the situation. Clearing your throat, you looked past Agatha, keeping your focus on Judge Danvers. “As I was saying. While looking at prior cases involving the abduction of a minor we were able to set a precedent that-”

Agatha let out another cackle, and it took everything in you to not roll your eyes. However it appeared Carol was at the end of her rope with patience, as she banged her gavel twice. “Does the defense have something they wish to share with the rest of us?”

“Your honor,” Agatha drawled out, her voice sweet like honey, “The prosecution is making bold assumptions on precedents that do not directly follow the evidence of this particular case. To rule anything otherwise would be direct defamation to my client.”

“Defamation?” You all but hissed, momentarily forgetting you were in the middle of a courtroom. The answering smirk Agatha gave you only fuelled your fire. “Your honor, the defense is all but negating the direct evidence of the defendant’s guilt. We would like to proceed to trial while throwing out the plea deal.”

Agatha’s shark tooth grin widened, and you had a sneaking suspicion she was baiting you to get a reaction. Typical, as she always prided herself on being ten steps ahead of her opponent. Taking a deep breath, you regained your calm composure. It would do you no good to allow your emotions to take over. That would merely ensure Agatha to have one more victory over you, one more thing she would take away from you. But things were different this time, you weren’t some feeble, naive law student fawning over her professor. The playing field was finally leveled, and it was about time she realized that.

Unfortunately, you forgot Agatha never played fair. You curiously watched her grab two folders from her briefcase, all but tossing one at you whilst handing Carol the other. “While we’re discussing the plea deal your honor, I’ve included additional information regarding my client’s psychiatric evaluation.”

Practically tearing the folder open, your eyes scanned the lengthy documents before landing on something that nearly made you fall over. Before you could get a word in, Agatha continued on. “Due to our country’s ever failing healthcare and medical practices, my client has been unable to receive a proper psychiatric evaluation. Your honor, I am requesting a continuance to this trial until my client can get the help she needs.”

Carol’s focus remained on the papers, an inscrutable expression coloring her features. “I’m granting a one month continuance for the defendant, Wanda Maximoff, to be given a psychiatric evaluation. As long as Miss Maximoff follows the terms of her probation and doesn’t leave the state of New York, we’ll resume this conference one month from today. Thank you to the prosecution and defense, you’re dismissed.”

Not wanting to see the smug smirk on Agatha’s face, you packed up your materials, including the folder Agatha gave you, and did your best to hurry out of the courtroom. It was foolish to think you’d beat Agatha at the game she taught you to play. That’s what it always was to Agatha, a game. It was like everyone around her was playing checkers while she was constructing the most elaborate game of chess known to man. All while she moved you around as whatever piece she desired; because that’s how she viewed you, as an object she could twist and mold to her liking until you outlived your usefulness.

Ignoring the familiar sound of her heels approaching, you drafted a quick email to one of your colleagues with the news of the trial being halted before going to order your Uber. You didn’t have to look up to know Agatha was standing in front of you, because that was just part of her intricate plan. She surely knew you were furious, because of course she did. Hadn’t she once told you she knew everything? At the time you thought it was a cheeky remark to make you laugh, but looking back you came to terms with the fact that the only person Agatha Harkness could ever care for was herself.

You were growing weary of the rising tension, so you finally broke the silence, keeping your eyes locked on your phone. “Can I help you with something?”

“I’m not sure,” Agatha replied, and although you weren’t looking at her you could practically feel her gaze burning into you. “I never took you for a sore loser, dear.”

There it was, she was trying to get her claws back in you. Keeping your tone even, you checked on the status of your Uber. “I’m not sure I know what you’re referring to. I’m just doing my job.”

Before you could comprehend what was happening, your phone was ripped from your hands. “Hey!” You exclaimed, angrily whipping your head up and your eyes narrowed, meeting the deep blue eyes you used to get lost in. “Give me back my phone.”

“Checking for your ride?” Agatha mocked, arching an eyebrow up at you. “Is that more interesting than talking to me?”

“Watching paint dry would be more interesting than speaking with you,” You retorted, your discomfort quickly growing.

“Now darling, is that any way to speak to me?” Agatha teased, her voice gradually dropping in volume. “It’s been so long.”

Glaring at her, you tried to pry your phone from her hands, but she put it in her back pocket. “And whose fault is that again?” Your voice was laced with venom, you subconsciously wanted to make her feel as badly as you had. “Should we take a stroll down memory lane and recall what caused this?”

Agatha’s gaze hardened at that jab, and you momentarily wondered if you pushed too hard. “I’m surprised you’re leading this case. I thought you wanted to,” she paused and used air quotes, “‘help the voiceless’, not strangle them.”

“How dare you,” You seethed, not caring that your voice was growing in volume. “I’m just doing my job, Agatha. Besides, isn’t strangling the helpless what you do best?”

Agatha tilted her head back, and let out another cackle. “Doing your job? You’re trying to imprison an innocent mother.”

“Your innocent mother kidnapped two minors and took them over state lines,” You fired back, vaguely aware that Agatha was taking small, slow steps towards you.

“She’s still their mother,” Agatha pointed out and you felt your face grow red from rage.

“Regardless of DNA, it was a closed adoption. She waived her parental rights,” You argued, unaware of anything but the infuriating woman standing in front of you. “Surely you’ve been practicing long enough to know how to read a contract.”

“And I thought I taught you to read between the lines of said contracts,” Agatha countered, and you knew she was testing your argument, it’s what she always did. “Things aren’t always black and white, dear.”

No they weren’t, you silently agreed. By this point your back was to the wall of the deserted corridor, Agatha still towering over you. Your faces were practically touching, and you could practically taste her lips. Both of you were panting from the exertion of bickering, and it wouldn’t take much to close the distance. She was so close, closer than she had been to you in so long. Having her back in your orbit, taking over all of your senses, made you forget the reasons you were so angry with her. Instead, it made you remember how many other times you had found yourself in this exact same position.

You could feel your ironclad restraint begin to slip away, and Agatha appeared to notice it as well. She let out a low chuckle as she turned her face to the side, her breath now hot against your ear, and allowing her to whisper, “Looks like it still doesn’t take much to get you riled up, does it?”

Shuddering, you struggled to get your breathing even, thinking of the many reasons why this was a horrible idea. Your history aside, you were on opposing sides of what would most likely be a very public case. It wasn’t just unprofessional to be doing this, it could potentially jeopardize your whole career. But it was hard to think about any of that when you locked eyes with the woman you had spent so much time trying to forget. Her right hand left your waist to push back the loose strands of your hair, tucking them behind your ear.

Each movement was slow, and delicate, and as her fingers slowly trailed down your neck, she gently squeezed, before gradually applying more pressure, and you had to physically restrain yourself from moaning. You could feel the heat pooling between your legs and had to close your eyes from the overwhelming sensation. Agatha’s lips moved to your neck, pressing hot, open kisses on your flesh while her fingers began to move lower, cupping your left breast before slowly pinching your nipple. This time you couldn’t stop the quiet moan that left your lips, and Agatha quickly used her free hand to silence you, covering your mouth.

“You always had a problem being quiet,” Agatha murmured, lips still on your skin. “Let’s find somewhere more…secluded to continue this, hm?”

Feeling yourself nod, you opened your eyes and let out a pathetic whine as she let go of you. It didn’t take long to find an empty storage closet, and Agatha practically shoved you inside before slamming the door behind her.

Pressing you against the bare wall, her eyes scanned yours before asking, “Are you sure?”

Being with Agatha like this was the greatest euphoric high, and it always left you wanting more and more. It didn’t have to mean anything, and you certainly didn’t want it to. It was just two people working out their frustrations, right? You nodded again, grabbing her right hand and placing it back around your throat. “Are you going to choke me again or are you too much of a coward?”

She nearly growled at that, and squeezed, a little rougher this time. You pressed your face into her shoulder, trying to silence the noises you always made when she touched you. She had barely started but it was so good, and you didn’t hesitate when she used her free hand to try and remove your blazer. Taking a step back to take off your blouse and bra, you nearly tripped over some boxes, and her hands steadied you.

“Careful,” She lightly teased, eyes still dark from arousal. “I’m not nearly finished with you.”

Her hands skillfully unhooked your bra, carelessly tossing it to the side, before lowering her mouth to your breast, and lewdly sucked. As if she anticipated the noises you’d inevitably make, she roughly pressed two fingers in your open mouth for you to suck. Moaning around them, you eagerly sucked and sucked, thinking of where you wanted her fingers to go next. Agatha’s tongue swirled around your nipple, teasing it enough to make it go erect before using her teeth to pull. You felt your eyes roll to the back of your head, your last functioning brain cells wondering how she could still have this strong of an effect on you.

She let out a low hum, clearly enjoying this as much as you were before moving to your other breast, only this time she bit down, and the rush of pain and pleasure flooded you. Unable to cry out as she fucked her fingers further down your throat before adding a third, causing you to gag around them. Releasing your breast, Agatha panted out, “Look at how pathetic you are, sucking on my fingers like a good little slut. What a good girl.”

Whimpering around her fingers, you clenched at the filth spewing from her lips. You hated this, how easily she could flip the switch and have you dripping and wanting her to fuck you through the floorboards. Agatha cooed, using her free hand to gently stroke your face, and roughly pulled her fingers out of your mouth. She was face level again, and you watched the gears turn in her head as she weighed out what to do with you. That same free hand cupped your jaw, and she was so close, your brain buzzing from the endorphins. It was so good, you hated how good it was.

Her normally perfectly red lips were stained and parted slightly as she looked at you with an indecipherable stare, and you were still breathless from her earlier ministrations. Before you could fully comprehend what you were doing, you grabbed her hair and smashed your lips together. You swore you heard her groan, but it was gone as quickly as it came, and you had no time to contemplate it as you felt her tongue teasing the entrance of your mouth. It has been so long, so very long, but you fell back into the familiar dance you could never forget.

Everything Agatha did she dominated, for she had such a strong presence that was impossible to ignore. Just kissing her was enough to get you off, as her tongue expertly swirled around yours, sending you further and further from the edge of reality. You were so far gone you barely noticed her hands moving lower, and lower, until they were pawing at your ass. Groping and grabbing, she was insatiable as she conquered your mouth. You broke apart for merely a second and without speaking, you helped get rid of your pants, slightly stunned you were still this in sync after all this time.

But again, you had no time to ponder that thought as Agatha quickly slammed you against the wall, and you couldn’t help but moan at the pain. The same fingers you eagerly sucked on were now teasing your entrance, rubbing gentle, slow circles. Agatha’s breath was hot in your ear, and you whined, trying to thrust your hips up for more friction. You needed more, you needed her more than ever before. Going without for so long was fine, you’d nearly forgotten what it felt like, what she felt like; but the second you remembered you couldn’t bear a second without it.

“Someone’s awfully worked up,” Agatha taunted, her voice softly whispering in your ear. “Did you want something?”

“Agatha…” You breathed out, your voice nearly cracking. “Please…”

Her fingers teased your clit, and the sensation made you cry out, causing Agatha to silence you with yet another kiss. “Behave,” she murmured against your lips, “Do you want me inside you? Do you want me to fill that sweet little cunt?”

Mewling, you again tried to tilt your hips up, desperate to feel her inside you, but her other hand kept you in place. “Agatha, please, I…I need it, please fuck me.”

Agatha arched an eyebrow, “I know your brain just melts when that pussy gets wet, but we both know that’s not what you want to call me, is it?” Blushing, you tried to avert your eyes but it was impossible. She nipped at your lips before continuing. “Be a good girl and beg for it.”

“Mommy,” The words slipped past your lips and you felt another rush of heat between your legs while Agatha moaned.

“Good girl,” Agatha praised you, and before you could prepare yourself she roughly entered you with two fingers, filling you completely.

Her fingers were so long and so good, hitting the spots you had trouble reaching. You couldn’t help but clench around them, and she groaned in your ear. Wasting no time, she set a fast and hard rhythm, skillfully fucking you better than anyone else since her had been able to.

“I almost forgot how good your cunt feels around my fingers,” Agatha hissed, nibbling on your ear, “Suck me in, slut.”

Your hips met her fingers, and you desperately chased your orgasm. “Harder, please mommy fuck me harder.”

Putting all of her weight on you, Agatha swiftly added a third finger and you nearly squealed at how full you felt. Her fingers were so deep, and you were so close, so very close to the edge.

“Such a good whore for mommy,” Agatha cooed, and her voice was strained, you could tell she was close too. “Do you want to come on my fingers?”

“Mommy please,” You cried out, unable to focus on anything but wanting to feel her fingers make you come harder than you could ever remember.

Agatha’s hips rested against your knee, and she began riding your leg, chasing her own high. “Come for mommy, baby. Soak my fingers.”

Twisting her fingers and hitting your G-spot again, and again causing you to quickly unravel. Feeling your orgasm coming, you clenched around her fingers, needing her to stay inside you. Your knees buckled and you swore you saw stars, unable to speak as you silently cried out. Agatha came right as you did, grunting in your ear and roughly thrusting against your leg as she came undone.

“Fuck,” She panted, keeping her fingers inside you as you continued to twitched around them. “Good girl, such a good girl for mommy.”

Breathing heavily, you gradually felt yourself come back to Earth. You were drenched with sweat, and you were sure you looked positively debauched. Agatha was staring at you with yet another inscrutable expression on her face, and you felt yourself relaxing around her fingers as she slowly pulled out. You grabbed her hand, and lewdly cleaned her fingers off, watching her eyes darken once more as you made a point to swirl your tongue around them until they were clean.

As your brain fog cleared, you were all too aware of the uncomfortable silence growing around you. With every high that came with being with Agatha, it was almost always followed by an indescribable low. There were so many things you wanted to ask her, so many things you needed to know. Brief flashes of arguments and slamming doors. Dozens of unanswered calls, and late nights spent wondering what you had done wrong to deserve her random outbursts of anger. But with every argument, every heated fight, it would always end the same way; with Agatha pressing you against some surface and having her way with you.

There had been so much more going on at that point than you were aware of, and as the pieces slowly came together, she was too far gone for you to be able to help. You’d begged and pleaded with her, but it never mattered. What was it your therapist had said to you? You couldn’t help someone who didn’t want to help themselves. Letting go of her nearly killed you, and now you made the mistake of opening that door again, knowing how much more complicated it would be. You weren’t just her law student anymore, you were on opposing sides of a trial.

It appeared Agatha was having the same train of thought as you, for she wordlessly helped you find your clothes. In spite of her just being inside you, you made a point of turning around as you got dressed, as the air in the room seemed to drop and any of the warmth that had been there prior had disappeared. There was so much you wanted to say, yet simultaneously wanted to get as far away from her as you could.

Agatha finally broke the silence as she fixed her hair, and she was back to her usual condescending self. “You know you’re wrong pursuing this case, right? It’s not too late to back out.”

Rolling your eyes, you finally grabbed your phone from her back pocket and saw your Uber driver understandably canceled your ride. That would certainly tank your rating. You quickly ordered another before replying with, “You know this meant absolutely nothing to me, right?”

Pushing past her to exit the room, she let out another cackle, the sound like grating nails on a chalkboard in your ears. You knew she wouldn’t follow you, and you were thankful for that. This was an indiscretion, a momentary lapse of judgment. You’ve been on edge with all the extra hours you’ve been working; you weren’t thinking clearly. The courthouse was still relatively empty, and you left the building, trying to get the thought of Agatha out of your mind. Why did she have to be so infuriating?

Your Uber eventually rolled up and as you got in you went to check your work email. It never failed to amaze you how quickly your inbox would fill up when you didn’t check it for more than five minutes. Scrolling through, you vaguely listened to the music your driver had in in the background, until a familiar song started playing. Frank Sinatra, a favorite artist of a certain attorney. The Way You Look Tonight had always been one of her favorites, and you could remember the last time you listened to it together.

Your mind absentmindedly drifted, the memories you’d tried to lock away slowly creeping back up to the surface. It seemed no matter how hard you tried to forget, she didn’t want you to. Settling into your seat, listening to Frank Sinatra, you thought back to the first time you met Agatha, or rather, how you met Professor Harkness.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

The Sacklers woulda gotten away with it if it wasn't for those darned meddling feds

The saga of the Sacklers, a multigenerational billionaire crime family of mass-murdering dope-peddlers, is an enraging parable about how the wealthy, the courts, and sadistic high-powered lawyers collude to destroy the lives of millions, profit handsomely, and evade justice.

But there's an unexpected twist to this tale. After the Sacklers procured a sham bankruptcy that denied their victims the right to sue while leaving their fortune largely intact, the Supreme Court – yes, this Supreme Court – saw through the scam and froze the process, pending a full hearing:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/10/us/supreme-court-purdue-pharma-opioid-settlement.html

The Sacklers basically invented modern, legal dope peddling. Arthur Sackler, the family's original crime-boss, revived the practice of direct-to-consumer drug marketing, dormant since the death of the medicine show, to peddle Valium. An aggressive and shrewd lobbyist, Arthur built the family fortune and, more importantly, its connections:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/how-the-sackler-family-built-a-pharma-dynasty-and-fueled-an-american-calamity/

A generation later, the family's business company created Oxycontin, and procured misleading and false research about the drug's safety kickstarting the opioid epidemic, whose American body-count is closing in on a million dead. Armed with inflated claims about opioid safety, the Sacklers' pharma reps bribed, cajoled and tricked doctors into writing millions of prescriptions for oxy.

This scam had a natural best-before date. As ODs flooded America's ERs and bodies piled up in America's morgues, it became increasingly clear that something was rotten. The Sacklers pursued a multipronged campaign to keep the truth from coming to light, and to keep the billions flowing.

On the one hand, they hired McKinsey to find novel ways to encourage doctors to keep writing prescriptions and to convince pharmacists to turn a blind eye to abuse. McKinsey had all kinds of great ideas here, including paying pharma distributors cash bonuses for every overdose death in their territory:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/business/mckinsey-opioids-settlement.html

When the issue of these deaths came up in public, the Sacklers blamed "criminal addicts" for their own misery, stigmatizing both people who desperately needed pain relief and the people who'd been deliberately hooked on the Sacklers' products. The legacy of this smear campaign is still with us, both in the contempt for people struggling with addiction and in the cruel barriers placed between people in unbearable agony and medical relief.

But mostly, the Sacklers kept their names out of it. They laundered their reputations by donating a homeopathic fraction of their vast drug fortune to art galleries and museums in a bid to make their names synonymous with good deeds.

The Sacklers didn't invent this trick. Think of the way that history's great monsters – Carnegie, Mellon, Rockefeller, Ford – are remembered today for the foundations and charities that bear their names, not for the untold misery they inflicted on their workers, their crimes against their customers, and the corruption of governments.

But the Sacklers made those Gilded Age barons seem like amateurs. They invented a modern elite philanthropy playbook that Anand Giridharadas documents in his must-read Winners Take All, about the charity-industrial complex that washes away an ocean of blood with a trickle of money:

https://memex.craphound.com/2018/11/10/winners-take-all-modern-philanthropy-means-that-giving-some-away-is-more-important-than-how-you-got-it/

As part of this PR exercise, the individual Sacklers kept their names and images out of the public eye. For years, there were virtually no news-service photos of individual Sacklers. When journalists dared to criticize the family, they used vicious attack-lawyers to intimidate them into retractions and silence (I was threatened by the Sacklers' lawyers).

They also worked their media mogul pals, like Mike Bloomberg, who added their names to the "Friends of Mike" list that Bloomberg reporters were required to consult before writing negative coverage:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/02/29/friends-of-mike-enemies-of-the-people/#sacklerbergs

But Stein's Law says that "anything that can't go on forever will eventually stop." As lawsuits mounted, the Sacklers found themselves increasingly synonymous with death, not charitable works. But like any canny criminal, the Sacklers had a getaway plan.

First, they extracted vast sums from Purdue and shifted it into offshore financial secrecy havens:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-purduepharma-bankruptcy/sacklers-reaped-up-to-13-billion-from-oxycontin-maker-u-s-states-say-idUSKBN1WJ19V

Even as this money was disappearing into legal black holes, the Sacklers demanded – and received – extraordinary protection from the courts, who aggressively sealed testimony and materials presented through discovery:

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-courts-secrecy-judges/

When this gambit finally failed, the Sacklers insisted that were down to their last $4 billion, and, with trillions in claims pending against them, they declared bankruptcy.

When a normal person declares bankruptcy, they are required to divest themselves of nearly everything of value they possess, and then still find themselves hounded by cruel arm-breakers who deluge them with threatening calls and letters:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/19/zombie-debt/#damnation

But for the richest people in America, bankruptcy is merely a way to cleanse one's balance sheet of liabilities for any atrocity you may have committed on the way, without giving up your fortune.

The Sacklers are a case-study in how a corrupt bankruptcy can be conducted.

Purdue Pharma presents a maddening case-study in the corrupt benefits of bankruptcy. When it was announced in March, many were outraged to learn that the Sacklers were going to walk away with billions, while their victims got stiffed.

First, they converted their victims' right to compensation into "property" that the Sacklers themselves owned. This transferred jurisdiction over these claims from the regular court system to the bankruptcy court. A bankruptcy judge – not a jury – would decide how much each of these claims was worth, and then what how much of that worth these victims (now recast as creditors) would be entitled to through the bankruptcy.

Thus tens of thousands of claims were nonconsensually settled without a trial, by an administrative judge with no criminal jurisdiction, not a federal judge who'd undergone Senate confirmation:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/03/31/vaccine-for-the-global-south/#claims-extinguished

These "coercive restructuring techniques" are not available to everyday people who are drowning in student debt or credit-card bills – these are the exclusive purview of the wealthiest Americans, who enjoy a completely different bankruptcy system that is rigged in their favor.

Three judges – David Jones and Marvin Isgur of Houston and Bob Drain of New York – hear 96% of the country's large corporate bankruptcies:

https://www.creditslips.org/creditslips/2021/05/judge-shopping-in-bankruptcy.html

These judges are unbelievably horny for corporations, embracing a legal theory "that casts the invention of the limited liability corporation alongside that of the steam engine as a paradigmatic development in the pursuit of prosperity":

https://prospect.org/justice/how-do-you-solve-a-problem-like-the-sacklers-purdue-pharma-bankruptcy/

Now there are more than three bankruptcy judges in America, so how do the nation's biggest companies get their cases heard by these three enthusiastic Renfields for corporate vampirism?

They cheat.

For example: when GM was facing bankruptcy, it argued that it was a New York company on the basis that it owned a single Chevy dealership in Harlem, and got in front of Judge Drain.

The Sacklers were – characteristically – even more brazen. They really wanted to get their case in front of Judge Drain, the nation's most enthusiastic supporter of "third party releases," through which bankrupt billionaires can wipe the slate clean, securing dismissals of all claims by the people they wronged.

Drain is also uniquely hostile to independent examiners, "an independent third-party appointed by the court to investigate 'fraud, dishonesty, incompetence, misconduct, mismanagement, or irregularity…by current or former management of the debtor."

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3851339

If you're the Sacklers, hoping to keep two thirds of your billions and extinguish all claims by your victims, there is no better helpmeet than Judge Robert Drain of the Southern District of New York.

So, 192 days before filing for bankruptcy, the Sacklers opened an office in White Plains, New York (a company may claim jurisdiction in a specific court once they've operated a business there for 180 days).

Then they filed a bankruptcy in which they altered the metadata on their casefile, inserting the code for a Westchester county hearing into the machine-readable, human-invisible parts of the documents they uploaded to the federal Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) system (they also captioned the case with "RDD, for "Robert D Drain").

They chose their judge, and the judge obliged. UCLA Law's Lynn LoPucki is one of the leading scholars of these bankruptcy "megacases," and has written extensively on why these three judges are so deferential to corporate criminals seeking to flense themselves of culpability. She sees judges like Drain motivated by "personal aggrandizement and celebrity and ability to indirectly channel to the local bankruptcy bar. The judge is the star and the ringmaster of a megacase – very appealing to certain personalities."

Thus, these judges are "willing and eager to cater to debtors to attract business…[an] assurance to debtors that…these judges will not transfer out cases with improper venue or rule against the debtor…"

https://www.fulcrum.org/concern/monographs/02870w66d

This kind of judge-shopping goes beyond the Sacklers; the cases that Drain and co preside over make a mockery of the idea of America as a land of equal justice. "Prepack" and "drive-through" bankruptcies are reliable get-out-of-jail-free cards for capitalism's worst monsters: private equity firms.

Whether PE murdered your grandmother by buying her care-home and putting each worker in charge of 30 seniors:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/portopiccolo-nursing-homes-maryland/2020/12/21/a1ffb2a6-292b-11eb-9b14-ad872157ebc9_story.html

or poisoned your kids by filling your neighborhood with carcinogens:

https://www.webmd.com/special-reports/ethylene-oxide/20190719/residents-unaware-of-cancer-causing-toxin-in-air

limited liability wipes the slate clean.

30% of America's bankruptcies are private equity companies using the bankruptcy system to wipe away claims for their misdeeds, while keeping a fortune, thanks to the shield of limited liability.

Take Millennium Health, JamesS lattery's fake drug-testing company, which promised to help nursing homes figure out whether seniors were abusing (or selling) their meds by testing their piss for angel dust and other drugs. Slattery defrauded Medicare and Medicaid for millions, borrowed $1.8 billion (Slattery got $1.3 billion of that). He eventually walked away from this fraud after paying a mere $256m to settle all claims, and kept a fortune in assets, including the 40 vintage planes his private company ("Pissed Away LLC" – I am not making this up) owned:

https://prospect.org/justice/how-do-you-solve-a-problem-like-the-sacklers-purdue-pharma-bankruptcy/

For the wealthy, bankruptcy is the sport of kings, a way to skip out on consequences. For the poor, bankruptcy is an anchor – or a noose. This is by design: judges who preside over elite bankruptcies speak of their protagonists as heroic "risk takers" and tiptoe around any consequences, lest these titans be chained to a mortal's fate, costing us all the benefits of their entrepreneurial genius.

PE companies helped the Sacklers design their own bankruptcy strategy, and it was a standout, even by the standards of Bob Drain and his kangaroo bankruptcy court. But now, the Supreme Court has pumped the brakes on the whole enterprise.

The judges ruled that the exceptions the Sacklers took advantage of were intended for bankrupts in "financial distress" – not billionaires with vast fortunes hidden overseas. In so doing, the court threatens all manner of corrupt arrangements, from "the Boy Scouts, wildfires and allegations of sexual abuse in the church diocese — where third parties get a benefit from a bankruptcy they themselves aren’t going through.”

The case was brought by the DoJ's US Trustee Program, which lost in the Second Circuit when it tried to halt the Purdue bankruptcy and argued that the Sacklers themselves had to declare bankruptcy to discharge the claims against them.

Now the Supremes have hit pause on the bankruptcy the Second Circuit approved, and will hear the case themselves. It's only one step on a long road, but it's an unprecedented one. Some of the country's filthiest fortunes are riding on the outcome.

Going to Defcon this weekend? I’m giving a keynote, “An Audacious Plan to Halt the Internet’s Enshittification and Throw it Into Reverse,” tomorrow (Aug 12) at 12:30pm, followed by a book signing at the No Starch Press booth at 2:30pm!

https://info.defcon.org/event/?id=50826

I’m kickstarting the audiobook for “The Internet Con: How To Seize the Means of Computation,” a Big Tech disassembly manual to disenshittify the web and bring back the old, good internet. It’s a DRM-free book, which means Audible won’t carry it, so this crowdfunder is essential. Back now to get the audio, Verso hardcover and ebook:

http://seizethemeansofcomputation.org

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/11/justice-delayed/#justice-redeemed

Image: Edwardx (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Serpentine_Sackler_Gallery,_June_2016_05.jpg

CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

[justinspoliticalcorner]

David Smith at The Guardian:

It will be a study in contrasts around age, gender, race, temperament and policy. It will also be the first time in US presidential history that a former courtroom prosecutor will take the debate stage alongside a convicted criminal with the White House at stake. Vice-President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, has served as a trial lawyer, district attorney and state attorney general in California. Former US president Donald Trump, her Republican rival, has been convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up a sex scandal.

The pair will go head to head in Philadelphia on Tuesday night in their first – and perhaps only – debate, just 75 days after Joe Biden’s dire performance against Trump triggered a political earthquake that ultimately forced him from the race for the White House. Few expect such a transformative result this time. But Trump has his last best chance to end Harris’s extended “honeymoon” while the Democrat is aiming to prosecute her opponent’s glaring liabilities before tens of millions of voters watching on live television. “It’s the first time Donald Trump is actually going to be cross-examined in front of the American people,” said Tara Setmayer, a former Republican communications director on Capitol Hill. “Kamala Harris’s career and experience as a prosecutor, attorney general and a senator is something that Trump should not underestimate in this debate.”

This will be Trump’s seventh appearance in a national general election debate, making him the most experienced debater in US presidential history. Against Biden in June he repeated familiar falsehoods that mostly went unchallenged. Harris is expected to be a more formidable opponent and could put Trump on the defensive over facts, policy and his conduct following the 2020 election. The 59-year-old has not been shy about embracing her career in law enforcement so far in the campaign. A video at the recent Democratic national convention in Chicago declared: “That’s our choice. A prosecutor or a felon.” In a speech accepting the party’s nomination, Harris told cheering delegates: “Every day, in the courtroom, I stood proudly before a judge and I said five words: Kamala Harris, for the people.” She has also been touting her record taking on predators and fraudsters, telling crowds across the country: “I know Donald Trump’s type!” Harris brought that experience to bear in her memorable 2018 cross-examination of Brett Kavanaugh during Senate confirmation hearings after Trump, then president, nominated him as a justice on the supreme court.

But she is unlikely to go after Trump directly over his convictions – or three other criminal cases still looming over him. When, at a rally in New Hampshire this week, an audience member shouted, “Lock him up!” Harris replied: “Well, you know what? The courts are going to handle that, and we will handle November. How about that?” In May Trump became the first former US president to be convicted of felony crimes when a New York jury found him guilty of all 34 charges in a scheme to illegally influence the 2016 election through a hush-money payment to an adult film performer. On Friday the judge, Justice Juan Merchan, delayed Trump’s sentencing until 26 November – after the election date of 5 November. For any other candidate on a debate stage, the convictions would be a huge liability. But Trump has repeatedly rallied his base by falsely claiming that the case, and others relating to election interference and mishandling classified information, are bogus and politically motivated. Should the topic arise on Tuesday, he is likely to cast himself as a martyr and also remind viewers that he was nearly assassinated in July. The 90-minute duel, held at Philadelphia’s National Constitutional Center, will be moderated by the ABC News anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis. In accordance with rules negotiated by both campaigns, there will be no live audience and candidates’ microphones will be muted when it is not their turn to speak.

The same rules seemed to work in Trump’s favour when he took on Biden in Atlanta in June. Aaron Kall, director of debate at the University of Michigan, said: “Trump adjusted well to no audience and the cutting of the microphones in Atlanta. Biden clearly didn’t. “He had never debated when there’s no audience; same thing with Harris. Not getting any feedback and not knowing how things are going, you have to trust your judgment and who’s got better media instincts than a reality television host?” The muting of the microphones may not only save Trump from himself – he interrupted Biden 71 times during their first presidential debate in 2020 – but prevent Harris offering sharp rejoinders such as “I’m speaking”, a line she delivered against Mike Pence in the vice-presidential debate four years ago. Harris and Trump have never met before in person and, in the city of Rocky Balboa, are likely to take on the roles of boxer and fighter respectively. Trump, 78, is not known for his discipline, preparation or fidelity to the truth. His debate performances, like his governing style, are typically based on gut instinct rather than considered analysis.

The first (and possibly only) debate between Kamala Harris (D) and Donald Trump (R) will take place on Tuesday with ABC as the host outlet that will air on numerous cable, streaming, and broadcast outlets.

Tuesday night is the prosecutor v. felon debate, and it’ll be an epic one in which hopefully Harris wins.

Will Harris emerge as the victor in her path to become the first woman to become President? Or will Trump win the debate to set him on a path to a return to 1600? Stay tuned.

[mariacallous]

Criminal prosecutors may soon get to see over 900 documents pertaining to the alleged theft of a diary belonging to President Joe Biden’s daughter after a judge rejected the conservative group Project Veritas’ First Amendment claim.

Attorney Jeffrey Lichtman said on behalf of the nonprofit Monday that attorneys are considering appealing last Thursday’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres in Manhattan. In the written decision, the judge said the documents can be given to investigators by Jan. 5.

The documents were produced from raids that were authorized in November 2021. Electronic devices were also seized from the residences of three members of Project Veritas, including two mobile phones from the home of James O’Keefe, the group’s since-fired founder.

Project Veritas, founded in 2010, identifies itself as a news organization. It is best known for conducting hidden camera stings that have embarrassed news outlets, labor organizations and Democratic politicians.

In written arguments, lawyers for Project Veritas and O’Keefe said the government’s investigation “seems undertaken not to vindicate any real interests of justice, but rather to stifle the press from investigating the President’s family.”

“It is impossible to imagine the government investigating an abandoned diary (or perhaps the other belongings left behind with it), had the diary not been written by someone with the last name ‘Biden,’” they added.

The judge rejected the First Amendment arguments, saying in the ruling that they were “inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent.” She also noted that Project Veritas could not claim it was protecting the identity of a confidential source from public disclosure after two individuals publicly pleaded guilty in the case.

She was referencing the August 2022 guilty pleas of Aimee Harris and Robert Kurlander to conspiracy to commit interstate transportation of stolen property. Both await sentencing.

The pleas came two years after Harris and Kurlander — two Florida residents who are not employed by Project Veritas — discovered that Ashley Biden, the president’s daughter, had stored items including a diary at a friend’s Delray Beach, Florida, house.

They said they initially hoped to sell some of the stolen property to then-President Donald Trump’s campaign, but a representative turned them down and told them to take the material to the FBI, prosecutors say.

Eventually, Project Veritas paid the pair $20,000 apiece to deliver the diary containing “highly personal entries,” a digital storage card with private family photos, tax documents, clothes and luggage to New York, prosecutors said.

Project Veritas was not charged with any crime. The group has said its activities were newsgathering and were ethical and legal.

Two weeks ago, Hannah Giles, chief executive of Project Veritas, quit her job, saying in a social media post she had “stepped into an unsalvageable mess — one wrought with strong evidence of past illegality and post financial improprieties.” She said she’d reported what she found to “appropriate law enforcement agencies.”

Lichtman said in an email on behalf of Project Veritas and the people whose residences were raided: “As for the continued investigation, the government isn’t seeking any prison time for either defendant who claims to have stolen the Ashley Biden diary, which speaks volumes in our minds.”

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from The Nation:

Donald Trump believes that he has the Supreme Court in his back pocket. He is right. The court heard oral arguments on Thursday in Trump v. United States, the case about whether Trump is immune from prosecution over his attempt to obstruct Congress and reverse the results of the election he clearly lost. Trump is counting on delaying the trial about his crimes committed in the previous election until he gets to the next one, which he hopes to win so he can then dismiss the charges against him. The Supreme Court has done everything in its power to help Trump accomplish his goals, and that pattern continued on Thursday.

At this point, people who expect anything less than the maximum partisan thuggery possible from the Republicans justices are not paying attention—or worse, they’re actively lying to themselves and the American people about what the Roberts court has become. The question has long since ceased being “whether” the court will help Trump; the question is only “how” it will go about doing it.

Heading into oral arguments, the justices-for-Trump crowd had three ways to stand by their man: They could grant Trump absolute immunity; they could reject immunity but release their ruling as late as possible; or they could send the case back down to the DC Circuit court for an additional ruling (lawyers call this a “remand”) that would trigger another appeal and another opportunity for delay.

The first option is kind of a nonstarter. Unlike, say, the Republican judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the Republicans on the Supreme Court are generally careful to make sure that their pro-Trump rulings cannot be turned against them later and used by a Democratic president. Giving Trump blanket, absolute immunity could be used by people like the current president, Joe Biden, to do whatever he wanted. Granted, Biden would not use the newfound power to steal an election as Trump did—Democrats are eager to follow rules that don’t apply to the other side—and the Supreme Court knows that. But still, granting future presidents total immunity from criminal prosecution sets a precedent that even Republicans can see is dangerous.

The second option of just delaying the decision rejecting Trump’s argument has always been in play. But that option might not get the Supreme Court and Trump all the way to the next election. There is a timeline, albeit an unlikely one, where special counsel Jack Smith could still get through a trial before November, so long as the court rules against Trump by the end of the term.

That brings us to the third option: Remanding the case back to the DC Circuit. This is the option that causes maximum delay of Trump’s reckoning, allowing him to avoid it entirely if he wins the next election, while still preserving the court’s ability to say that blanket immunity is unconstitutional later down the line, should Trump lose. Remand is therefore the best possible option for the Republican justices if they want to see a Republican president elected in November—and at oral arguments, most of them signaled that’s exactly what they’re going to do.

[monukumarefr]

Legal Advice on Anticipatory Bail on the Ground of Role of the Accused in the FIR: | Criminal Law Attorney in Delhi NCR | Criminal Lawyer in Delhi NCR |

“An application for anticipatory bail can be filed before the Sessions Court and appeal to the High Court. Role of the accused in the First Information Report or FIR or the name of the accused in the FIR and his/her involvement in the commission of the crime is an important factor i.e. criminal defense and ground for bail. Further, the name of the alleged accused can be added in a criminal case at a later stage i.e. in the charge sheet or supplementary charge sheet.”

https://mylawyersadvice.com/uncategorized/legal-advice-on-anticipatory-bail-on-the-ground-of-role-of-the-accused-in-the-fir-criminal-law-attorney-in-delhi-ncr-criminal-lawyer-in-delhi-ncr/

[criminal-lawyer-in-delhi]

Advocate Sidhant Dhingra is widely recognized as one of the best criminal lawyers in Delhi, known for his expertise in criminal trial proceedings, bail matters, and high-profile cases, especially white-collar crimes. With extensive experience practicing in the Supreme Court of India, the High Court of Delhi, and District Courts, he has built a reputation for providing comprehensive legal services.

Sidhant Dhingra & Associates, the firm he leads, offers legal assistance at all stages of criminal cases, including FIR registration, investigations, trial defense, appeals, and revisions. The firm is known for its commitment to client protection, offering legal remedies such as bail and anticipatory bail, stay orders, and restraining orders to prevent undue harassment by authorities.

With a strategic and client-focused approach, Advocate Dhingra is the go-to legal expert for clients facing serious criminal charges, ensuring the best possible outcome through his deep knowledge of criminal law and dedication to justice.

[hero-israel]

What’s the situation like, with the protests? I’ve seen images of streets filled with protestors.

I don't live in Israel, but the situation got pretty extreme yesterday. After the Defense Minister said the judicial reform plan should be halted, Netanyahu fired him. It was already the middle of the night and yet people streamed into the streets and redoubled the already huge protests. The next morning the Histadrut - Israel's largest and most important union - called a general strike, the first in decades and by far the largest in the country's history. Pretty much EVERYTHING SHUT DOWN IMMEDIATELY. Schools, universities, businesses, embassies, Ben-Gurion airport (the only previous time I had ever heard of it closing was after a Hamas lucky shot in 2014, and this was seen as a death-level shock), the hotel and tourism industry (UNTHINKABLE, they kept Eurovision running even during a big blow-up with Gaza). Netanyahu backed down somewhat, said the plan would be postponed until summer and Lapid/Gantz/Herzog said it was time for real negotiation, the general strike ended and everything reopened and by my understanding the protests have calmed and shrunken. Now, maybe Netanyahu thought he could do a pretend postponement, wait for everyone's attention to lapse and energy to fade, then ram the same thing through anyway in the summer, but the threat of a general strike has really changed the equation. If he repeats, they'll repeat.

Here is a good article summarizing how things got here and what the political impact has been.

To give simpler background, as best I can as a long-term observer:

The Israeli Supreme Court acts without the checks and balances that most Westerners (and certainly Americans) would recognize. There is no input from voters or legislators. No Presidential nominees, no Congressional hearings. Israeli lawyers and judges appoint new judges, that's that. Because Israel has no Constitution, there's no real boundary on what the ISC can do. They can intervene on pretty much any issue as long as they say they are being "reasonable." Now it just so happens that the ISC has been a reliable protector of minority rights, women's rights, Arab rights, LGBT rights, etc. So it's "doing the right thing, the wrong way," because it could decide tomorrow to strip away minority rights just because, and nobody could say boo. It is not inherently unreasonable for people to want judicial reform, to want there to be some level of election-related involvement in who sits on the court. But that cause is now discredited because a gang of indicted criminals and terrorist sympathizers tried to ram it through while also ending all investigations into their own crimes, stealing the power for the Knesset to overturn court decisions, limiting the Law of Return, etc.

This began because Netanyahu has compulsively betrayed and backstabbed so many of his natural allies in right-wing parties (Gantz, Liberman, Sa'ar, Bennett, etc.) that he literally cannot form a governing coalition with people who know how to govern. His only chance to get a majority was to elevate a Halloween parade of ultra-ultra-fringe lunatics (Ben-Gvir, Smotrich, Maoz), and that's who is in charge now. It's ironic because the whole point of Benjamin Netanyahu - the "value proposition" as it were - is that he was good at preventing major change while also growing the economy and diplomatic partnerships. And he has now shit on all that. If a new election were held today, Lapid or Gantz would be PM tomorrow. Inshallah.

There is A LOT in Israel that is clunky and unfair. The rabbinate, the marriage laws, school system, Temple Mount status quo, Haredi draft, ISC jurisdiction, and that's just in Israel, not even getting to the Palestinian Territories. In all such cases, it is better for people to try to cope with a clumsy work-around than to charge right at the gate with a big fast change. People have been fighting over literally every grain of sand there for 2,000 years and they are lucky it works even as well as it does.

[noneedtofearorhope]

January 8, 2024

Minneapolis, MN — In a historic ruling, Hennepin County Judge William Koch vacated Marvin Haynes’ murder conviction, dismissed his charges with prejudice, and ordered his release from prison where he was sentenced to serve life. Haynes walked out of MCF-Stillwater as an exonerated man into the loving arms of his family and supporters on Dec. 11, 2023.

Marvin Haynes was 16 years old when he was framed for murder by the Minneapolis Police and Hennepin County Attorney’s Office. Haynes’ wrongful conviction was supervised by former Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar and upheld by the Minnesota Supreme Court years later in an appeal.

After a Petition for Post-Conviction Relief was filed and evidentiary hearings were held in November 2023, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty and Judge Koch agreed to vacate Haynes’ conviction. The judge ruled that Haynes’ due process was denied because his conviction relied on “constitutionally improper” eyewitness evidence.

Read Unicorn Riot’s Investigative Series on The Case of Marvin Haynes and watch our film: Part One – Part Two – Part Three – Part Four – The Film – Further Reporting

Proclaiming his innocence since being arrested in May 2004, Haynes remained hopeful his truth would be heard. Along with his sisters, led by Marvina, and his family and advocates, the fight for Marvin’s freedom never ceased despite falling on deaf ears for nearly two decades.

The Great North Innocence Project (GNIP) took up Haynes’ case in late 2022. Their legal team and staff found new evidence of coerced and false testimony along with faulty police procedures. An expert reviewed the suspect line-up techniques and witness processes applied by the police. Witnesses signed affidavits recanting previous testimony as well as Haynes’ family swearing he was at home sleeping at the time of the murder. Based on these findings, GNIP submitted an application of exoneration to Minnesota’s Conviction Review Unit (CRU), which they helped create, in December 2022.

GNIP attorneys and staff then took the fight for Haynes’ freedom to the court itself. They filed a Petition for Post-Conviction Relief in the District Court of Minnesota in June 2023 which ultimately led to Haynes’ vindication.

[...]

GNIP lawyers were able to get patched through to Haynes in Stillwater prison on Dec. 6 to tell him over the phone on his 36th birthday that his conviction was soon to be vacated and he would be a free man. “That was the best birthday present I ever received,” said Marvin.

[...]

Dozens of other Black men, who were youth in the 2000s, have been calling out what they deem their own wrongful convictions. “Like many Black boys at the time, our criminal legal system too easily wrote [Haynes] off, failed to protect his rights and sent him to prison,” said Moriarty at the press conference.

During the reign of Hennepin County Attorney’s Mike Freeman and Amy Klobuchar, “the state prisons became the Blackest places in [Minnesota’s population],” said Michelle Gross to Unicorn Riot, the President of Communities United Against Police Brutality. “The prison population of people of color increased by over 300% during that time period.”

In a similar case to Haynes, however two years apart, Myon Burrell was wrongfully convicted of a Minneapolis murder and sentenced to life in prison before he was able to get his sentence commuted and released from prison after pressure from the community during Klobuchar’s run for presidency in December 2020.

Many other families have been pushing the names of other prominent inmates like Phillip Vance, Deaunteze Bobo and Cornelius Jackson, to name a few, who also proclaim their innocence.

[...]

Summary of Marvin Haynes’ Case

Marvin Haynes was accused of robbing a flower shop in North Minneapolis and fatally shooting 55-year-old Harry “Randy” Sherer in May 2004. He was charged with assault and murder despite no physical evidence linking him to the crime. Haynes was found guilty by a jury in a 2005 trial.

Proclaiming innocence after the verdict, Haynes’ exhorted “I didn’t kill that man.” Haynes was sentenced to life in prison. Haynes’ attempt for a new trial was then denied and his legal team filed an appeal which was also denied in July 2006 by then Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar. Finally, in January 2007, the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld his conviction and life sentence as Justice Lorie Skjerven Gildea found no abuses by the state or district court in Haynes’ prosecution.

[...]

Haynes also has an ongoing civil suit alleging Hennepin County Attorney’s Office and Minneapolis Police withheld documents and information they’re compelled to provide from the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. A donation page has been created to help Haynes get back on his feet.

[advabhisheksinha]

HIGH COURT LAWYER

1) CRIMINAL REVISIONS,CRIMINAL MISC.CASES AND BAIL APPLICATIONS

Anticipatory bail application, Bail application, Cancellation of bail, Criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C, Matters under Delhi Police Act, 1978, Quashing of charges, FIR

2) CRIME AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN

Sexual Harassment, Domestic Violence Cases, POCSO, Other criminal matters against Women

3) CRIMINAL WRIT PETITIONS

Custodial death, Externment, History Sheet, Preventive detention - Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, Preventive detention – COFEPOSA, Preventive detention

4) FAMILY LAW MATTERS

Divorce Cases under Hindu Marriage Act, Restitution of conjugal rights, Child adoption & maintenance matters (Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956), Alimony, Child custody including under Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, Confirmation of divorce decree (Indian Divorce Act), Divorce Matters under Muslim Marriage Act

5) SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT MATTERS

Agricultural Land, Flats and Multi Storeyed Buildings, House Property, Other Matters relating to specific performance, Partnership and Contract Act, Company Law

6) ARBITRATION ACT 1940, ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT,1996

7) CORPORATE MATTERS

Money recovery, Financial Criminal Matters, Company Law, Fraud, Cheating, White Collar Crime

8) INSURANCE LAW AND CONSUMER PROTECTION CASES