Rare is different than uncommon. Murder is (thankfully) uncommon, but I wouldn't say it is rare. Surely you understand the difference in both the connotative and denotative meaning of the words in question. Given your exemplary education I would expect a higher than seventh grade understanding of the subtle differences. (Please note - this is not an insult; as I teach seventh grade, I am merely pointing out that defining "rare" as merely "uncommon" is on-level with my seventh graders).

Were the issue only plea negotiations you might have a point.

It's not;you don't. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you do realize that but are simply choosing to ignore it in order to continue to stroke your ego. I could be wrong. It could be that you really do think this has all been about plea negotiations. If so, I'm sorry for giving you too much credit.

LOL at "I'm right, and you're stupid."

So...now you're an attorney AND a therapist? Good to know! ;) I also loved that you told me and SWTXBelle that we have poor reading comprehension skills yet, you ignore her statement about having training on child abuse and then go back to our lack of education in plea negotiations (because that's not what anyone here claims to have experience in other than you). I also wanted to echo what AZTheta mentioned about not feeling comfortable with an attorney who thinks he or she should go on an internet forum and just speak openly about cases whether or not they made it into the news. You are not the only person on here who has ever gone to law school or graduated from law school. There are a few attorneys on this site and they never talk about their cases--past or present. So, since you feel I am incompetent in whatever it is I do (since you don't know but, assume you do), I will call you incompetent and say I would never send a family member or friend to you. I wonder if the Oklahoma Bar Association is okay with your ethics.

No. The point is simply that your lived experience does not trump the lived experiences of others. You may be the best-versed in the law, but that does not make you the only person who has been involved in this type of thing.

Feel free to report me for discussing something which is public record. The case I linked wasn't in the news. Making the news isn't what is required for something to be of public record. Criminal pleas are not private matters.

You are way out of your league talking about legal ethics. Just stop.

I'm the only one who has commented in this thread who has ever been part of a plea negotiation, so I am the only person who has been involved in this type of thing.

FYP.

Too bad Kevin is the only GC attorney commenting in this thread.

And I work closely with attorneys for a range of issues. While these attorneys discuss their perspectives and experiences they are quick not to go into much detail for their cases. They make general comments about specific cases, or more specific comments about general cases, but are more inclined to say "it is the (insert case) if you want to research the details on public record." To go into great detail about cases when discussing touchy topics can be construed as a version of name dropping and there is a fear of leisure talk resulting in accidentally divulging information that is not public record and providing legal opinions that are not public record.

What information did I divulge which is not public record?

Hint: I gave you the public record. Everything I've said is part of it.

Interesting, DrPhil, what did you enter a plea to?

Hint: The point eludes you.

Many points elude him. He still thinks it's about plea negotiations.

Denis Healey succinctly said it best. My own father taught me "don't be a blabbermouth. It's way worse than having to have the last word". He also liked to remind me that when you burn your own ass, you are the one who has to sit on the blister. So think about it.

Happy Saturday, one and all!

Wow. I just can't get over his pretentious attitude.

AND WE HAVE A WINNER.

THIS.

And this other thread was just recently "ruined" because of his abundance of legal knowledge……………

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...d.php?t=139889

We don't have a problem with him being a lawyer and having possibly more legal knowledge than the rest of us. The problem is that we're not permitted to speak or have an opinion on these news stories because we're lowly teachers, business people, scientists, etc., and we apparently can't respond to what's been presented to us in the news if it has anything to do with lawsuits, plea negotiations, judges, lawyers, writs, subpoenas, affidavits, settlements, indictments, answers, verdicts, or anything else that deals with the law.

We know we don't have all the facts of this case. We know that people can lie. We're all just responding to what we read, which is what everyone does when they read ANY news story. Unless you were there and lived and breathed what occurred, then you'll never be guaranteed the absolute truth, and that goes for all of us.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/3fa1e42b0...r6fpo1_500.gif

But you really need to. Your attitude has been just as pretentious, if not even shittier, on other occasions. You're the last person to talk about reading comprehension, and I think you, like many of the people on this board, have some sort of personality disorder.

Just move on.

But I know you can't. LOL