This dumbass is a serial killer in the making.
ETA: The lawyer guy in Austin, not Cass.
robo, you say the sweetest things to me.
This dumbass is a serial killer in the making.
ETA: The lawyer guy in Austin, not Cass.
Judge Carlos H. Barrera, before whom Reposa has argued several cases, is more circumspect. “I don’t think the show hurts him a lot except with his reputation among traditional lawyers and judges.” The soft-spoken judge and I are chatting in his chambers, and this last remark pulls me up short. Isn’t Texas chockablock with traditional lawyers and judges?
Barrera allows a chuckle. “You probably have a greater number of defense attorneys who think he’s okay than do judges and prosecutors. I say probably, overall, two thirds of all people who work in the courthouse think he goes too far.”
<snip>
“He’ll make comments that are unnecessary,” Barrera says, “although they might be true. He can’t refrain. They make him look bad.”
Like badgering the state’s expert witness about the level of pain a blood-engorged penis jammed up her butt would cause.
TWO DAYS EARLIER
“Oh, man, I was so fuckin’ right about that penis thing. The jerk-off sign? Same trial. Okay, wrong on that. Not wrong-wrong, you know, but wrong to, like, do it. I apologized. Took my jail time. Told you I came out with four clients? Took the home confinement with the ankle monitor, paid the $3,000 fine. Took the work release picking up trash on the side of the road. The three-year probation, up next March.”
The case hinged, as per the Austin defense attorney I spoke to earlier, on the Adam Reposa show. Back-and-forth with the state’s expert medical witness about the level of pain caused by anal penetration.
“She’s like, ‘Well, I don’t know how to answer that question.’
“So I said, ‘Well, let me ask, if you get smacked in the head full-swing with a golf club, is that gonna hurt?’
“‘Yes.’
“‘Well, if you get hit in the a------ with a f------ d---, is that gonna hurt?’”
Well, I sure don’t believe that. You said “a------” and “f------ d---” in court?
Sheepish pause. More margaritas. “No, I did not. I said something like ‘So you would also agree then, the first time you get anally penetrated by a penis it is going to cause pain?’”
The expert witness waffled, he says. “So I respond, ‘Well, are you personally familiar with the phenomenon?’
“The state objected. The judge sustained it. All hell breaks loose. I’m like, ‘Is anal sex embarrassing? You’re a doctor. Does the subject of anal sex embarrass you, Doctor?’ Jesus.
“That’s what I got nailed on. The prosecutor filed a grievance with the state bar. The law says that if you ask a question that’s just intended to embarrass a witness and not have any substantial purpose, that’s grievable. My purpose was obviously to find out, What’s the basis of your opinion? Have you ever been penetrated? If her answer is yes, then my next question is, ‘Did it hurt?’
“And how’s she gonna answer? ‘Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the first time it happened to me it didn’t hurt.’ She loses all her credibility. Or she says, ‘No, I have no idea.’ Well, everybody on this jury knows that you know it hurts. I’ve got them, and I’m never gonna lose them.
“Criminal case? I won. Not guilty on every count. And then after I got the contempt I did go kind of postal, because that’s when I really wanted to show the world how terrible the lawyers are in Austin.”
It does strike me that taunting rival attorneys in the newspaper with foul plays on their names—“Betty Butthole,” “Prick McGuire”—qualifies as going postal.
Interesting to come back and see that my brother was right and it was a protest against gentrification. Just for the record, I never said I supported this particular method of protest; I think it implies that the lines are being drawn on race rather than on income level, which is not really what's happening (although, in some neighborhoods, that distinction can be almost entirely academic, sadly.)
Minority neighborhoods tend to have lower taxes, which means less money to support their schools, which means the kids do worse when it comes to testing. And of course that means the school get even less money the next year. It's a vicious cycle based on race.
AISD is considered "property wealthy" under the state's "recapture" law, which requires the district to send a projected $135.6 million to the state for distribution to property poor school districts in FY2014. Since FY2002, AISD has paid the state more than $1.5 billion in recapture payments, all of which comes from tax dollars generated in Austin. AISD is the single largest payer of recapture representing nearly 12 percent of the recapture revenue that the State collects.
He scares me.
Again, serial killer in the making. Mark my words.
That sounds like it might be a more effective approach than stickers.
Eta:
Public response to a couple of reps I've received: I didn't say I wanted to date him -- I just would like to meet him. For the record, I prefer to date men whose individuality is more quietly and sanely expressed. Also men without major substance abuse problems.
But I do enjoy interesting. And despite my initial impulses to label him a simple exhibitionist buffoon -- which he also is, I think -- the guy is interesting. Also probably high out of his skull much of the time. And crazy. And lacking in impulse control. And far too prone to serious lapses in judgment. But interesting. Actually does give a damn. Will go way out on a limb for a client or a principal (albeit sometimes in ways I find ridiculous). And bizarrely enough, apparently intelligent and very effective in a courtroom, which I would never expect. That's interesting.
ETA:
And after reading the playboy article and a pm exchange with Mark, I have an odd sense I might actually rather like him (though probably in small doses).
As one of those guilty of sending the above referenced reps, I have to say I'm...relieved. Carry on.
This second commercial for Adam Reposa, by filmmaker Bob Ray, was rejected by Adam Reposa, criminal defense lawyer and hero of liberty, on the grounds that it is too "avant garde," "snobby," and "cinematography," and that is "does not properly convey Mr. Reposa's intended message."
The first attempt at this commercial (ADAM REPOSA: Hero of Liberty [N.B. -- the one I posted just above] with the intended message of rebuking the new ban on Big Gulps and other large sodas in NYC, was rejected by Mr. Reposa. Mr. Reposa stated that it did not "properly convey his intended message" of "freedom to drink large sodas."
Mr. Reposa suggested some unwanted and unsolicited changes: "make it more patriotic by adding the Star Spangled Banner," "do more choppy editing, like the first one," "make it less snobby and avant garde," "less cinematography," etc. Bob Ray thought these ideas sucked. But, being the total pro he is, Bob Ray re-edited the commercial.
Here is the revised version of the commercial.
I wonder if Mr. Cartooney would claim fair use as parody.There's also the issue of unauthorized use of the city's logo.
I do think that's a real issue, Lillith. But IMO the stickers were not a good way to address that issue.