With a Rebel Yell

Confederate veterans sounding the rebel yell (circa 1930).

As today marks the 150 anniversary of Lincoln’s delivery of the Gettysburg address, here now a novel bit of American Civil War minutiae. The battle cry of Confederate soldiers was known as the rebel yell, a name more recently associated with Billy Idol’s single of the same name, released November 1983 (in fact the song title references a rot-gut spirit). Union soldiers would describe the call as a “rabbit’s scream,” a cross between an “Indian whoop and wolf-howl,” and “a foxhunt yip mixed up with sort of a banshee squall.”

The Confederate yell was intended to help control fear. As one soldier explained: “I always said if I ever went into a charge, I wouldn’t holler! But the very first time I fired off my gun I hollered as loud as I could and I hollered every breath till we stopped.” Jubal Early once told some troops who hesitated to charge because they were out of ammunition: “Damn it, holler them across.”  –Historian Grady McWhiney (1965)

As no audio recordings of the rebel yell exist from the Civil War, historians have used various onomatopoeiae to describe its sound including:

  • Yee-haw/yee-ha
  • Wa-woo-woohoo, wa-woo woohoo
  • Yay-hoo
  • Woh-who-ey! who-ey! who-ey! Woh-who-ey! who-ey!

Via Ken Burns’ The Civil War.

Jesús Malverde, Patron Saint of Drug Dealers

tumblr_lobnm6P4fp1qgz3e6o1_250

Depending on who you ask, Jesús Malverde was either a hero or a menace to the people of Sinaloa. Though details are murky, Malverde, “The King of Sinaloa,”  was killed by authorities who regarded him as a bandit. On the other hand, the people regarded him as a Robin Hood-type character who gave what he stole and fought against oppression. While the church refuses to recognize Malverde as a saint, since his death in 1909, he has been praised as a folk-hero and canonized as the narco-saint.

Malverde’s legacy is captured on several films, each one containing a long interlude of a narcocorrido (a type of Mexican music and song tradition which evolved out of the norteño folk corrido tradition, often depicting drug smuggling, murder, and extortion). In one episode of AMC’s Breaking Bad, DEA Agent Hank Schrader is shown with a bust of Malverde on his desk.

As a bonus, here now the narcocorrido from the second season of Breaking Bad, “Negro Y Azul:”

Via the Upcoming Breaking Bad Auction.

“Conjoined”

water_melon

“I thought about two hot twins who are connected and wondered, ‘What if one fell in love and wanted to be separated?'” he told The Huffington Post. “And I wondered if the other one would get jealous.”

So naturally you would make that into a stag film.

Via Huffington Post (NSFW).

See also Alice Dregers’ article on the sex lives of conjoined twins.

Non-Conjoined Twins As Legal Actors

twins-poster-thumb

However, DNA matches have connected identical twins to the crime, but criminal charges cannot be pursued against them because their DNA is exactly the same and the victims cannot identify which of the twins may have committed the crime.

Via The Merc.

See also, Summers v. Tice and the case of the lawyer too clever by half.

Urban Dictionary Finds Place in Official Court Opinions

yolo-final

What once was restricted to Wikipedia, the scholarly source, has now extended to a research tool with potentially less integrity. In a recent piece, the New York Times reports on the growing use of urbandictionary.com as a dictionary of slang and colloquialisms legitimate enough for reference in official court opinions. As official, print dictionaries like Websters and the OED lag behind the parlance of our times, Urban Dictionary maintains an up to date, peer-reviewed list of common words.

Uses of Urban Dictionary, started in 1999 by founder Aaron Peckham from his college dorm, include last month’s Wisconsin opinion where the court sought to determine what was meant by two suspected robbers who referred to themselves as the “jack boys.” A court in Tennessee sought to define what a manager accused of sexual harassment by an employee meant when using the phrase “to nut.”

Prior to the inception of Urban Dictionary, courts would hire linguists to conduct surveys of the population to determine what was meant by a slang term, not found in any traditional dictionary. Now, anyone can provide a definition for a word, whether original or not, which must be approved by five other site users before appearing on the site.

While Rutgers law professor Greg Lastowka anticipates that the use of Urban Dictionary will become more prevalent, Peckham points to the inherent problem with using his site as a traditional dictionary:

[P]rivate analyses the site has conducted show that “funny” is the No. 1 reason people give for voting for posts.

Whether courts will take into account the demographics of the users of the site or that anyone and four of their friends can skew results remains to be seen. YOLO.

Via NYTimes.

More Unilateral Contracts with Teeth

trump-nyc-birth-certificate

From Facebook to the Tonight Show, unilateral contracts abound. This latest high-profile case features the host of Real Time with Bill Maher, Mr. Bill Maher himself, and none other than Donald J. Trump (the J. stands for Just-how-much-money-will-I-waste-on-public-spectacle” [his grandmother’s maiden name]). Mr. Trump’s lawyer provides a synopsis of the unilateral contract at issue through his January 8, 2013 letter:

Dear Mr. Maher:

I represent Mr. Donald J. Trump.  I write on his behalf to accept your offer (made during the Jay Leno Show on January 7, 2013) that Mr. Trump prove he is not the “spawn of his mother having sex with an orangutan.”

Attached hereto is a copy of Mr. Trump’s birth certificate, demonstrating that he is the son of Fred Trump, not an orangutan. Please remit the $5 million to Mr. Trump immediately and he will ensure that the money be donated to the following five charities in equal amounts: Hurricane Sandy Victims, The Police Athletic League, The American Cancer Society, The March of Dimes, and The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.

As previously reported here, to enforce a contract the party seeking to enforce the contract must show a meeting of the minds. Said another way, each party must enter the contract in earnest. Neither pretense, jest, nor parody may create the foundation of a contract. An offer made through a joke is not an offer at all and cannot be the basis for a contract. Take this precedence from Lewis v. Lowry, 295 F. 2d 197 (4th Cir. 1961):

If negotiators in a collective bargaining session should arrive at a complete agreement on the eve of April Fool’s Day and, out of a perverted sense of humor, should reduce to writing, sign, and distribute a pretensive agreement far from the real agreement they had reached, surely either party could show that the pretensive agreement was in fact pretensive, and the right of each to require that the real agreement be reduced to writing would be preserved.

Mr. Maher said he would donate $5 million to the charity of Trump’s choice if the Mr. Trump could prove he is not the “spawn of his mother having sex with an orangutan.” Mr. Maher was mocking Trump’s much-publicized announcement in October that he would donate $5 million to charity if Obama would release his college records.

While the earnestness of the offer is a matter for the jury, the case will be kicked out as soon as the judge gets the chance, but not before wasting judicial resources on the already strained California Superior Court system.

In other news, attorneys for Mr. Maher have begun a search for an orangutan named Fred C. Trump.

Via Yahoo!.

Read the complaint here.

 

2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Holds Giving a Police Officer the Finger is Not Valid Basis for a Traffic Stop

FlipTheBird_Fullpic_1

Judge Jon O. Newman, writing for a unanimous panel, found that mild-mannered John Swartz did not provide a basis for a traffic stop when he flipped off New York cop Richard Insogna. A little backstory: John and his wife Judy Mayton-Swartz were driving down the highway when John spotted Officer Insogna using a radar gun to tag motorists. John, the passenger in this car, displeased with Officer Insogna’s speed trap, extended his arm out the window of the car and saluted Officer Insogna with one finger. The Court provides a nice little footnote to the history of the middle finger and even a nod to American University Professor of Law Ira Robbins’ article, Digitus Impudicus: The Middle Finger and the Law.

Officer Insogna gave chase and stopped John and Judy in front of their son’s house, ultimately arresting John for disorderly conduct because he may have heard John call himself “an asshole.” John’s criminal case was dismissed based on speedy trial grounds but John responded with a civil rights suit against Officer Insogna.

At deposition, Officer Insogna maintained that after he saw John give him the finger, he decided to follow the car “to initiate a stop on it.” As reasons he stated: (1) John’s gesture “appeared to me he was trying to get my attention for some reason,” (2) “I thought that maybe there could be a problem in the car. I just wanted to assure the safety of the passengers,” and (3) “I was concerned for the female driver, if there was a domestic dispute.” With raised-eyebrows, Judge Newman disposed of Officer Insogna’s dubious testimony, offering this interpretation:

Perhaps there is a police officer somewhere who would interpret an automobile passenger’s giving him the finger as a signal of distress, creating a suspicion that something occurring in the automobile warranted investigation. And perhaps that interpretation is what prompted Insogna to act, as he claims. But the nearly universal recognition that this gesture is an insult deprives such an interpretation of reasonableness. This ancient gesture of insult is not the basis for a reasonable suspicion of a traffic violation or impending criminal activity. Surely no passenger planning some wrongful conduct toward another occupant of an automobile would call attention to himself by giving the finger to a police officer. And if there might be an automobile passenger somewhere who will give the finger to a police officer as an ill-advised signal for help, it is far more consistent with all citizens’ protection against improper police apprehension to leave that highly unlikely signal without a response than to lend judicial approval to the stopping of every vehicle from which a passenger makes that gesture.

Even Aristophanes would have to be proud.

Read the opinion Swartz v. Insogna (2d Cir. Ct. of App. 2013) Docket No. 11-2846-CV.

Read Ira P. Robbins, Digitus Impudicus: The Middle Finger and the Law, 41 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1403 (2008).