“Judge Ignores Defense Lawyer Because He Is an Owl”

Source: Judge Ignores Defense Lawyer Because He Is an Owl

The above item is from Lowering the Bar. I’m thinking I’d personally prefer the owl representing me than the lawyer who randomly groped women.

But hey I am perseverating. As an apology, here’s Kevin Underhill’s opening paragraphs, with a photo of the owl lawyer (just in case you want to retain him and need to visually identify him when he comes to court for you):

The caption in this KGMH report oversells the story a bit, but then so does my headline.

Solomon

TheĀ Aspen Times reported on May 19 that a man who was accused of violating a protective order brought a stuffed owl along with him and suggested that it was going to act as his defense attorney. Referring to the owl as “Solomon,” presumably to suggest wisdom, Charles Abbott claimed that it had no fewer than three law degrees and was more responsive than a public defender was likely to be.

“He’s a very sensitive guy,” Abbott told the judge, “[and] has law degrees from Yale, Harvard, and Stanford.” He must be sensitive, if he’s willing to work for this guy despite presumably being at least half a million dollars in debt now. It’s also frankly a little surprising that somebody smart enough to graduate from Yale, Harvard, and Stanford law schools wouldn’t also realize that he only needed one law degree. But then he is a stuffed animal.

Despite his impressive credentials, the judge just ignored him.

Oh, geez. He’s a STUFFED owl! Well, that changes everything, doesn’t it?

 

This entry was posted in F. The lawyer, I. Communicating with lawyers, J. Judge and courtroom, Law, suits and order and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.