Give me a lawyer[,] dog.....

"If y'all, this is how I feel, if y'all think I did it, I know that I didn't do it so why don't you just give me a lawyer dog cause this is not what's up."

http://reason.com/blog/2017/10/30/he...-dog-the-court

Kinda funny. The Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that the comment above, made by a defendant only "ambiguously referenced a lawyer."

Apparently there was confusion over whether he wanted a lawyer, or he wanted a "lawyer dog."

All kind of jokes from there, no? Would that lawyer work pro bone-oh?

(I didn't really mean this to be a serious discussion, but just in case--the law in Louisiana is if it is an ambiguous request for a lawyer, police are entitled to continue questioning. For example, if they say, "maybe I need a lawyer," that's ambiguous--they didn't ask for a lawyer, they said maybe they needed one.)

Well there's McGruff the crime dog. He probably works with lawyer dogs all the time.

Personally, I think the intent is pretty clear. While the vernacular might be rather uneducated and distinctly African-American, I don't think the intent is in question. If it had been spoken like the following there would be very little question how the judges would rule:

Quote:

---

If you....here is what I think...if you think I did it, I know I didn't...so why don't you just give me a lawyer, man, because I'm not about to be convicted of something I didn't do

---

or even

Quote:

---

I tell you what, I reckon y'all reckon I did it, I know'd di'n't...so why don't you just give me a law-yer man because y'all fixing to convict me of something I didn't

---

Anything about requesting a "lawyer dog" is just some judges trying to find a means to justify their desired outcome, NOT a ruling based on legal principle. Especially when you consider the fact that it is NOT the defendant transcribing his own statements but someone else. Unless the Louisiana Supreme Court wants to define ambiguous to literally mean anything other than explicitly requesting a lawyer (which I would argue this is as close as you can get to it as saying "I want a lawyer now").

Id suggest making it clear one wants a lawyer in that situation.

But honestly this old country white boy would view any subsequent sentence just as ambiguously.

A legal system should not have an attitude. Its unnecessary and somewhat outside the law.

Pedro, it's ambiguous regardless of the fact that apparently Rashaad Carruth was arrested in Louisiana. :)

The "dawg" part could be taken out completely, he still was asking a question "why don't you just give me a lawyer", not "give me a lawyer." It's open to debate, as is everything, but is it any different from Darrell's example of someone saying "maybe I need a lawyer"? Not much IMO.

The "dog" part is funny it would seem under Louisiana law there is intentionally some gray in there, which they used.

A long time ago, in a courtroom far, far away ( as in my courtroom ), we used to let people into the courtroom with their cellular phones, with the stipulation that they turn said devices off during actual court proceedings.
One day, and while court proceedings were in progress and the Judge was on the bench, a phone rang in the courtroom, and the ringer volume was turned up as loud as it could go, and the owner of said phone answers it and says in a loud, clear voice........ "Yo dawg, I'm all up in the courtroom!" ...........whereupon at such time I snatched him up out of his seat, escorted him outside the courtroom, put handcuffs on him and advised him "Yo dawg, now you gonna be all up in my jail for disrespecting the court and my Judge! Ya dig, dawg?"
That day we started making everyone take their cell phones back out to their vehicles, no exceptions.
One other time we had some guy address the Judge as "dawg" during his hearing, and the Judge went 10-8 on him. Put the guy in jail overnight for contempt of court. Using the slang term "dawg" in court isn't acceptable. Period.

As a side note, my Judge here is a very amiable guy, even-keeled, mild mannered, firm but fair.
But when he raises voice in the Courtroom during a hearing that he is presiding over, that's your first clue that you are FUBAR. He doesn't play with those who are disrespectful of the court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by suncat05

He doesn't play with those who are disrespectful of the court.

---

Good for him. Far too many people in this world have failed to learn basic respect to others or how to act in public. I'm sure you and he deal with them far too often.

Guy was talking to police and not in court however. Imo, "ambiguous" or not he was asking for a lawyer as was his right.

Somehow I believe there's a lot more to the story though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingcat

Guy was talking to police and not in court however. Imo, "ambiguous" or not he was asking for a lawyer as was his right.

Somehow I believe there's a lot more to the story though.

---

The LA law is written in a way that favors the police in these situations, and we can debate if that's good or bad, but it seems this case is within that approach, slang aside.

Now if that's a good thing or not is another question. Personally I tend to favor the police in such situations, b/c I have dealt with real criminals and I know the system gives them far too many breaks.

I don't want to really discuss the merits, I just thought the story was funny. But I will say for background that the guy was arrested for being a child molester. I do think they were going to do anything they could to not let that guy off the hook.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darrell KSR

I don't want to really discuss the merits, I just thought the story was funny. But I will say for background that the guy was arrested for being a child molester. I do think they were going to do anything they could to not let that guy off the hook.

---

That's the thing about criminal law. Of course you want to have due process, but it's also true that there are some very very bad people in the world, some of whom hide very effectively behind that due process.

As the saying goes, a liberal is just a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CitizenBBN

As the saying goes, a liberal is just a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet.

---

Hadn't heard that but I like it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badrose

Hadn't heard that but I like it.

---

It's a good adage. One of my favorites. I think it captures a lot of the ideological differences between the two sides. Don't want to get into that on this board versus the Barber Shop, but it does draw along key ideological differences. And does so with some humor.

And some would say. a conservative is only a liberal who hasn't had their civil rights infringed upon. ;)

I am both liberal and conservative by the way...as we all should be imo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingcat

And some would say. a conservative is only a liberal who hasn't had their civil rights infringed upon. ;)

I am both liberal and conservative by the way...as we all should be imo

---

First one gets mugged, making one a conservative. They one gets one's rights infringed, making one a Libertarian. :)

Damn right,dawg. We all get because of Tubby's favorite shooter.

But if it werent for Illinois, Louisiana would be the most corrupt state.