A straight up due process claim that has nothing to do with the bill of rights. I was under the impression that these didn’t even happen anymore. Are these common in suppression hearings?
To clarify what D.C. has said, the Due Process challenges he’s about to assert are the only challenges you’re likely to see at a real-life I.D. suppression hearing.
What they are, and how they work? No spoilers. We’ll be covering that in the next pages.
Well I, for one, am waiting with baited breath.
But I hope you get outside tomorrow and “help” find some eggs.
Nice to know all the law schools are now using your book as a text. It must be THE definitive one, since the judge doesn’t even have to mention a title or ask if DC knows it. Just “Chapter 3”. Congratulations :)
She might have been breaking the fourth wall there, a bit.
It’s like, I go to all this trouble to outline and script and plan this thing often months in advance… and when it’s time for them to actually say their lines on the page they just do whatever they please. I have half a mind to leave them to their own devices and see how they like it then.
Well, why not? Look how well it worked for Microsoft’s @TayandYou 😺
Creative people always run into the fact that their characters start to assume a life of their own, independent of their creator’s wishes. (cf. Edward Gorey’s ‘The Unstrung Harp’ for a classic illustration of that principle.)
One of my favorites.
That reminds me… an esteemed law professor wrote a version of the Gashlycrumb Tinies, but for famous legal cases. Dara Lind jokingly suggested I do illustrations for it in Gorey’s style. I sketched this a few minutes later:
Next thing I knew, the professor and I were talking about turning his thing into a novelty book. But one thing led to another, and it didn’t happen. (Would have been fun, though!)
Just tell me who “B” is and what rhymes with “dope” and we’ll call it even.
If memory serves, it was something like “B is for Bond, whose bag got a good grope.”1 But this was more than a year ago, and memory may not serve.
1 Bond v. U.S., 529 U.S. 334 (2000) (officer’s physical manipulation of bus passenger’s carry-on luggage was unreasonable search).
Dear lord, that’s fantastic. I have a friend from when I was in law school who utterly loved the Gashlycrumb Tinies, to the point that he and his wife swore that’s how they planned to teach their eventual kids the alphabet. He needs to see this (and others like it, if you ever do them). If anything ever happens to get you back on this road, this would be a PHENOMENAL book.