Hooray for Monica! She passed the Alaska bar exam!

Monica is the author of the blog Buzzwords, which, sadly, is no more. Both of us blogged throughout law school and she has taught me much about the public interest legal world and has been an inspiration and good friend as I’ve gone from grad student to lawyer.

Congratulations, Monica! I hope you’ve been doing some well-earned celebrating!

⇒

“It is just objectively true — verifiably, demonstrably true — that Republicans are running far more personal and scurrilous attack ads than Democrats are in this election cycle.” ⇒

“Less than five days remaining before noveling begins, and NaNoWriMo Kick-Off Parties will be rocking the globe this week and weekend.” ⇒

“I don’t see any way to look at the Vista product matrix and not come to the conclusion that Microsoft holds its customers in contempt.” ⇒

⇒

Hello from the Lubrect Experimental Forest of the University of Montana School of Forestry.¹ I’m here for a week of “trial boot camp” and, for the most part, I’m loving every minute of it.

Ok, to be honest it seems a bit unfortunate that the week after I get sworn in and can finally start handling my own cases I have to leave for a week to do something else. I’ve learned that some of my fellow new public defenders who were also just sworn in last week have already done their first jury trials, so I’m clearly slacking and have some catching up to do.

On the other hand, this training is a great thing. I did a mock voir dire today² and it was definitely a tremendous learning experience that I’m glad I got to have before I actually had to do it for real. Because I’ve never done a jury trial before, I’ve never had to select a jury (nor did I have to simulate the process in any class or clinic prior to now). What I’ve learned is this: It’s not easy. People say all kinds of crackheaded things in response to your questions and your job is to make split-second decisions about how best to use that crackheadedness to your advantage. Should you go for a strike-for-cause, or should you try to use the crazy to teach the jury something more valuable? And whichever you choose, what exactly should you say to achieve that result?

What you’ve heard is true: Jury selection is an art, not a science. Today made one thing very clear: I am not yet an artist in this medium.

So it’s all good. I’m told when I return from the wilderness I’ll have more clients than I can shake a stick at. If you don’t hear from me for a while, the silence will be the sound of me being overwhelmed.

1. How, exactly, it’s experimental, I’m not sure. I guess people do research here or something.↩
2. “Voir dire” refers to “jury selection.” Why don’t lawyers and judges just say “jury selection” so that everyone would know what they’re talking about? Because lawyers and judges are pompous asses, that’s why. Ok, maybe it’s because “voir dire” is French for something like “to speak the truth,” and that kind of does describe what the whole exercise is supposed to be about, so, well, ok, maybe the fact that lawyers and judges are pompous asses is not the only reason they call it “voir dire”…↩

“Paradoxically, the very magnitude of the president’s failure has become his tacit ally. It’s just such a big thing to come to grips with. And reinvesting in the president’s folly, even after any hope of recouping the money is gone, carries the critical fringe benefit of sustaining our own collective and increasing threadbare denial.”

“Scalia is no honest broker. He is a radical extremist intent on imposing his views of what the Constitution should be.”

“I still don’t see who anointed him and why, but the media is biting and he’s bound to become a household word before too long.” Um, he already is a household word… ⇒