I Have a New Lawyer!

And he’s excellent. But the judge in my case against the LA Times will not allow him a few weeks to familiarize himself with my case.

So now I have to argue my own case.

If you’re in LA, please consider showing your support. Wear white, hearing is at 9 am FRIDAY 7/14 at LA Superior Court, 111 N Hill St, LA, Dept. 74.

Allow a few hours. Courts are slowwww.

This entry was posted in Blog on by .

About Ted Rall

Ted Rall is the political cartoonist at ANewDomain.net, editor-in-chief of SkewedNews.net, a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is the author of the biography "Trump," to be published in July 2016.

11 thoughts on “I Have a New Lawyer!

  1. Keeeeripes. Good ya’ got lawyered up – stoopitt judge is obviously biased, you should ask for a new venue.

    I’ve run into that attitude in judges before. Obviously, a big, powerful corporation can do no wrong; and just as obviously a little guy has no business bothering a pillar of the community.

  2. What does your new lawyer say about the judge’s refusal? It sounds like bias to me. 🙁

  3. Best of luck, Ted. You have me hoping for you (and wishing I could do more, but I’ve never seen any justice in the US legal system, except in TV shows and movies).

    • But this is exactly like a TV show!

      I hope they cast Greg Germann as the intrepid new lawyer!

      Pacing has improved as the first season is picking up speed now that they have established a solid footing. So many twists and turns – abused SLAPPs, counter-racism charges, on and on… leaves the audience hanging on with their fingernails.

      I give it 8/10 stars. Can’t wait for the second season, let’s hope the show isn’t cancelled prematurely due to cost-overruns now that we’re invested with the actors. Tell all your friends to tune in so the suits notice the high ratings!

      The first few episodes were a little convoluted, granted, so many characters, and all these forced flashbacks with the younger Ted and the policeman (both were overacting I think). And the CSI-level unrealistic technology where they just take the audio tape and magically restore it almost overnight within a single episode… totally unrealistic that a police department would open themselves up like this, right?

      The big bad corporation in bed with the police is a bit overdone trope by now but they make it fresh again precisely by presenting it in such a cartoonish way in contrast to more gritty shows like The Wire

      • I disagree, Andreas.

        No TV show would portray the bias inherent in a capitalist devised system of “justice”, where the TV show itself would be under the sway of the same capitalist laws of economy, with the inherent implication that “there is no alternative”—while at the same time designating anyone a terrorist who might imagine another economic order to be a possibility.

        The US has a sad history of blacklisting writers and preventing them from working.

        An organized plebeian opposition to life under a capitalist government would be disparaged as communist, all to the approval and satisfaction of self-described Democratic Party liberals.

        So what is actually occurring now, as it is, has no place in the really existing entertainment industry—not in the systemically imposed events on Ted, nor in the industry itself, as it really exists.

      • andreas5 – I give your show 9/10 stars. It’d be a 10, but it’s just a *little* too far fetched. 😀

  4. How’d it go, Ted ? Defending oneself in a case like this, with the other side loaded to the gills with expensive shysters is, of course, a No-No, but might possibly be grounds for a motion of mistrial (?)….

    What the hell is the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists, of which you are a former president, doing here ? According to Wikipedia, «The AAEC has filed friend-of-the-court briefs in several cases dealing with freedom of the press, including the 1988 Supreme Court case Flynt v. Falwell (Hustler Magazine v. Falwell). Aside from First Amendment issues, the Association does not take sides in political controversies.» If they could act to defend Larry Claxton Flynt, shouldn’t they intervene in your case as well ? I can’t believe you haven’t talked to them about your case ; what was their response ? (My apologies if you’ve already detailed this earlier….)


  5. One of the travails that now complicates the lives of those who ‘protect’ us is the smartphone, that produces detailed videos of police shooting unarmed felons to keep us safe. Even though the phone shows an unarmed person of colour being shot by police, the police explain that, as trained law enforcement professionals, they could tell that the now deceased person was about to kill someone, and their prompt action saved many lives. Usually, the courts, after viewing the smartphone video, agree with the constabulary, who understand these things much better than judges or juries.

    So, in June, the LA Times reported that the court found Mr Rall’s suit frivolous, and ordered him to pay SLAPP damages to the LA Times. The police tape, they said, proved that Mr Rall lied, just as the tapes of unarmed persons of colour clearly show that, while unarmed, they were just about to kill many innocent victims. How they were going to do this is not clear to the layperson, but it’s obvious to our police force, and the judge and/or jury generally accept the expertise of the constabulary.

    So I fear that Mr Rall never had a chance.

    If a suit is likely to succeed, many lawyers will offer to take it ‘on contingency,’ which means, if you win, your lawyer gets all the money. If a suit is hopeless, all lawyers will say, ‘You can win this, but only if you hire us and give us a $20,000 retainer.’ (In the unlikely event that you win, their fees will be equal to the full amount of the award for damages. Plus the initial $20,000. But this is a rare occurrence.)

    Just as the US of A has the very best healthcare system in the world, and the longest life expectancy (for the job creators), the US of A has the best justice system in the world, where the 6 major newspaper publishers need never worry about frivolous lawsuits when they publish false, defaming articles.

    • «… the US of A has the best justice system in the world, where the 6 major newspaper publishers need never worry about frivolous lawsuits when they publish false, defaming articles.» Thank you, Michael, my confidence in humanity (or at least a geographically and economically limited portion of it) has been restored….

      But I can’t but pity those poor people in other parts of the world, who miss out on such a brilliant system….