Thursday, April 14, 2005

Yippee kiyay etc.

Two exams down, three to go. To mark such progress last December, I employed a filmic metaphor that some of you, or maybe it was me, described as nerdy. This time round I figured I'd put forth a more muscular metaphor befitting the present circumstances.

To that end, if these exams were the Die Hard Trilogy, we would be around the point in Die Hard 2 where Bruce Willis, seeking access to a communications tower, is lured into an ambush by vicious terrorists (including a before-his-fame Robert Patrick, disguised as a painter). Much like the forces that John McClane faced in that instance, the Criminal Law exam was equally trying. But, if I may draw a further parallel to that scene, I feel that, weighted down by the "debris" of pressure, I grabbed the "gun" of knowledge and - as the exam bore down on me on the "moving sidewalk" of time - shot the test in the "kneecaps" of failure... Screw you that was an awesome scene.

As I've said before, Criminal Law is the subject I find most interesting, and I was looking forward to this exam somewhat. For you longtime readers, or fellow UBCers, you may recall that I was the only one (that I know) in an entire Criminal class who convicted a woman of abducting a youth, albeit momentarily, on the December exam. Hey, when someone asks me for an impromptu photo shoot in the woods, I get suspicious.

Well this time around, not only did we get to outline the strength of a case against two accused brothers, but we got to play judge and sentence one of them to punishment. This particular man assaulted another with brass knuckles while in a dissociative state, and then proceeded to hijack a car. From what I gather, most people assigned him a minimal sentence, two years or less, to be served conditionally in a treatment facility. Not me. Oh no, not me. Once again securing my notoriety as a "hangin' judge," I sentenced the accused to a term of seven years and imposed a $2000 fine on his ass. Suck on that, Donald "automaton" Johnstone.

Whatever the outcome of that may be, and it may not be pretty, I am simply glad this exam is over. Now I can put away my Criminal Code and never look at it again during my entire career as a lawyer. Really, when will any of those sections become relevant again?

Of course, this elation is only momentary, as I must study forthwith, particularly Property Law. If I may return to my metaphor for a moment, (of course I can, what are you going to do, comment?) I would point out that the Property test would be in the Trilogy about when John McClane gets the pummeling of a lifetime from the colossal German terrorist, Targo, on the tanker. As those of you who are studying for this upcoming test, try to tell me that's not at least half true.


Anonymous said...

dude--you didn't say Die Hard!


Anonymous said...

Didn't the German terrorist dude beat the crap out of John McClane at the end of Die Hard 3? If you're only on your third exam I would have put the Property Law exam back in the second Die Hard when he's fighting the big guy on the airplane wing. This allows you to properly say, "Yippee Kiyay, etc" when you light the gasoline of "ownership" and blow it sky high.

Lawyerlike said...

Fighting that dude on the plane coincides, rather, with our third exam, Torts. This still allows Property to be the Targo pummeling.

Lastly, Legal Institutions would coincide with the end of "Vengeance." By that time we're all burned out, and studying will be pretty lazy, which is actually a pretty apt way to describe that ending. After they blow up most of New York, it's a bit of a letdown to head to Canada and blow up a tiny helicopter.