web analytics

The Paper Disgrace

By Mahons On May 12th, 2019

Harvard Law School has disgraced itself by bowing to the mob rule of its student body and stripping a Dean (and his wife) of their titles because he is part of the Harvey Weinstein defense team. The overindulgence of the Metoo movement has reached a new low. By people charged with knowing better.

It is fundamental to our legal system that everyone is entitled to a zealous defense. This is especially true of unpopular defendants. Even guilty ones. Harvard is buckling to simple local opinion. The person who should get the heave ho is the Administrator who won’t defend the Dean. It is an absolute dereliction of duty and an abandonment of moral character.

13 Responses to “The Paper Disgrace”

  1. This is one of those rare occasions I agree entirely with a post on ATW. Well said, Mahons. Could not agree more.

  2. Yes Mahons, this academic cowardice is becoming the rule, not the exception.

  3. Concur

  4. Agreed.

  5. Well said, Mahons.

  6. I wonder if there is anyone here who will support the decision ?

    PS – I presume the title is a pun of some sort but can someone cleverer than me explain it ?

  7. The Paper Chase. A book and later movie about first year at Harvard Law.

  8. As not all will be aware of this incident, which buttresses mahon’s correct point.

    On March 5, 1770, British soldiers fired
    on a mob of colonists in Boston. This
    incident, known as the Boston Massacre,
    enraged American colonists. Yet John
    Adams, future president of the United
    States and cousin of Boston Patriot-leader
    Sam Adams, ended up defending a group
    of hated British soldiers at their trials.

    http://www.crf-usa.org/images/pdf/JohnAdamsandtheBostonMassacreTrials

  9. In 1945 Otto Stahmer, the President of the RAK of Schleswig-Holstein (effectively their Bar Association) represented Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring. Göring is arguably the most evil man in history to ever stand trial (those in the Nazi regime with more culpability than him were dead by the time of the trials – Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels and Heydrich). Stahmer, despite his client’s overwhelming guilt, and the mountain of evidence that proved such guilt, presented a well thought out, well crafted defence. And no one has ever, to my knowledge, suggested that he was wrong to do so.

    So if Hermann Göring is entitled to a vigorous defence then surely Harvey Weinstein and all other people are so entitled.

  10. Thanks Mahons

  11. good post right on the money Mahons

  12. Where did I go right?

  13. Come on ATWs. Is there anyone prepared to step up to the plate and counter argue ?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.