The Boy Who Sued

I'm graduating from law school this week, but more importantly, this is the end of 7 straight years of post-secondary school for myself. Unlike many of my friends in law, I went straight through: from high school to undergrad to law. I don't think there's any distinct advantage or disadvantage to doing so, the only practical difference being which generation of Law & Order cast members we identify with.

It's not lost on me that the end of my 7-year journey corresponds nicely with that of another schoolboy. I think you know who I'm talking about: we've both studied in ancient English castles, we both speak dying languages (my French to Harry's Snake-tongue) and we both narrowly survived the fatal curse of an ancient dark lord - oh, have I not mentioned that on this blog before?



Of course, I'm don't share an entirely similar situation with that of an entirely fictitious British adolescent. I have degrees in English, Economics and Law, whereas the extent of Harry Potter's education ends at grade 5, just after long division but far before algebra or basic world history. Harry is British whereas I can only fake my Cockney accent (but fairly well, I might add). And Harry prefers harsh, magical retribution, while I have a tendency to over-prescribe criminal punishments on exam questions. (Maybe that last one isn't really so different.)

Nevertheless, it's the similarities which allow me to speculate on what will happen at the end of Harry's Hogwarts career. Many people think he will die, just as people suppose that law students will kill off any last vestiges of childlike wonderment for a lifetime of hard-nosed (no pun intended, Voldemort) frugality.



No, and - although I won't be vindicated until the July release of the last novel - it's my firm belief that Harry will graduate and come to several key realizations: this magic nonsense does not hold up in court, and a simple charge of attempted murder is far more industrious than brewing any number of fakakta spells to, what, kill an old bald dude? Trust me, there's an easier way to battle guys in robes - it's called the legal system.

Section Fore! Subsection Oh!

With 5 days left till the end of law school, I find it difficult to focus on studying for my last class. At the same time, I'm thinking of things I plan on doing this summer, and the new focus it will require. Such as:

- Reading novels, without isolating facts, relevant issues, holdings, and Denning quotes.
- Going to a friend's wedding, closing my mind to the newfound tax implications of this momentous event.
- Making road trips in my car, acknowledging only the road signs and not the new legal jurisdictions I enter.
- Relaxing on a beach on the Amalfi Coast, selectively considering the wisdom of public nudity laws.
- Touring the Whitechapel area of London, without consulting the Statute of Limitations should I solve the identity of Jack the Ripper.
- Practicing my golf swing, resisting the urge to compare mulligans to de novo appeals.
- Enjoying a zombie movie, without questioning whether the actus reus element of zombie murder is sufficiently made out.
- Practicing my golf swing on zombies... OK, that's definitely some kind of illegal.

Playstation in the Second Degree

It's one of the more surprising aspects of law school that I've been able to keep up with reading whilst devoting a fair amount of time to video games. And one of the things I like best about this site is that it gives me the excuse to view everything through rose-coloured legal-shaded glasses.

On that note, here's a list of the games I've been playing throughout law school, and an appraisal into the legality of what I get up to in each:


God of War II:
Goal? As Kratos, violently dethrone the various Gods of Olympus and install yourself as the first mortal God of War.
Legal? Although the ancient Greek civilization might be credited with founding the system of jurisprudence we hold so dear today, I can't imagine those wise jurists would condone my use of spinning decapitations with the Blades of Chaos. (Part of a "Vindictive Combo!")



Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater:
Goal? Covertly land in the jungles of Southern Russia and deactivate a newly designed, long range nuclear weapon.
Legal? This one's a gray area: you play as an operative for the U.S. government and therefore all action - such as exploding enemy kneecaps - should be implicitly legal. But then what to make of the Russian government's sanctioned use of loads and loads of eye-gouging torture?



Red Dead Revolver:
Goal? Remove corrupt town officials and win the local deadly showdown contest.
Legal? Surprisingly, yes. The lawlessness of the Old West took little umbrage with the vigilante brand of justice necessary to persevere in the game. Shotgun to the face? A fair and reasonable reaction to provocation.




NHL 2K6:
Goal? Lead your team to the playoffs and hopefully the Stanley Cup, but most of all, have fun.
Legal? You'd think so, but the kind of hits I lay down in this game fall into the Holt v. Verbruggen definition of "assault and battery not reasonably contemplated by voluntary participation in professional sports."



Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas:
Purpose? Avenge your dear mother's death and become kingpin of the imaginary state of San Andreas.
Legal? Awww, hell no.

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.

"Far & Away" anyone?

First off, I understand the plight of modern day farmers, especially in these wintry economic times. However, at the risk of sounding heartless, I seriously do not appreciate the modification of standard time to suit Betsy the Cow, when Ryan the Law Student needs every precious hour he can get to study for his exams. What's wrong with it being dark outside? I prefer illumination of the mind, if you will.

That aside, I spent several hours of our newfound daylight (minus one) in a Starbucks. I devoted the time to Criminal Law, hands down the most interesting subject you take in first year. It is, at once, a vindication that the things you see on Law & Order are indeed based on reality, and also an impressive glimpse into the world of criminal jurisprudence that the media often generalizes. It also is home to the phrase "intoxication akin to automatism," a criminal defence that really rolls off the tongue. I just like saying it.

Anywho, during my time at the 'Bucks, I wrote a "practice" criminal exam, which is notable for its hilarity. It concerned ne'er-do-well Will Templeton, a "small time Vancouver crook." In a Rube Goldberg-like series of events, he was forced to take a hostage to pay off loan shark debts, but then ran into a police officer and, frightened by his past history of police abuse, ran to his apartment, downed a bottle of rum, attempted to burn his hostage-taking mask and bat (described by Will as being a "good idea" at the time) at which point the fire spread and forced an elderly woman to jump from her second story window, breaking her legs. Oh Will.

For the record, he gets off on the attempted hostage taking (lacking the actus reus proving that he went beyond mere preparation of the crime), but is guilty of arson causing bodily harm. Furthermore, at the risk of being disbarred, I would point out that, according to the fact pattern, the offence took place on April 1st, 2001, and thus the accused has the defence of "April Fools!" I haven't looked it up, but I'm sure there's some statutory provision that if an offence should fall before noon on this traditional holiday, the accused is excused and the victim will be forced to laugh in response.

Not to disappoint my musically savvy readers, background music for this caffeinated study session was provided by Broken Social Scene and their indispensable 2002 album, You Forgot it in People. It truly has a distinct Canadian sound. Check out the track "Cause = Time," which is eerily close to the finest Tragically Hip song ever committed to soundwaves, "Escape is at Hand for the Travellin' Man."

Focus turns to Property Law now, which no one in the history of legal study will ever construe as "fun" or even "mildly interesting." It is a detestable subject, made arcane by a litany of meaningless terms and archaic rules. Unlike Criminal Law, it produces gag-inducing phrases, like "bona fide purchaser for value without notice." There is so much red tape associated with acquiring any kind of property. Whatever happened to the days of racing on horseback across a plain, and planting a flag on property to show it's yours... then being shot in defence of that property, but miraculously being brought back to life in the arms of Nicole Kidman?

Any chance Napoleon won that battle?

No sooner do I discover and rave about the band Louis XIV then I find myself in possession of a ticket to a show they're playing. Even better, they're on a bill with two other equally amazing bands, The Futureheads and B.C.'s own Hot Hot Heat. I've managed to unearth Louis XIV's earlier albums and EPs too, and I'm certain they'll put on a good show. Any downloaders out there, check out "Illegal Tender." Tell me if I'm wrong, but there's something positively Gilbert and Sullivan about that song, notwithstanding its ass-kickery. If the band's original name was supposed to be the Pirates of Penzance, it wouldn't surprise me.

As for the British laddies, those who watch the O.C. with the same frequency as I do will recall hearing the Futureheads shamelessly blared over the opening scenes of last week's episode - "Meantime" was the tune. And those who didn't hear Hot Hot Heat's first album might currently be inclined to say they sound like the Killers, when if fact it's the other way around. All in all, it should be great. Or, to quote a friend of mine, it'll be Hot Hot Neat! (Ouais, c'est vrai AM, et si tu veux le réfuter, tu devrais commencer un blog de ton propre!)

Yet tomorrow night, is of course, the Joel Plaskett show. I'm aiming to get a few choice photographs of the Lankster himself. I'll also get some shots of opener Pete Elkas, a musician who I played roadie to for all of 2 minutes a year ago. At Joel's Kingston show, Elkas was also the opener and he asked me to hold his guitar while he put away some equipment. As any roadie would do, I acted like I could care less.

To cap off this amazing trifecta of aural pleasure, it's just over a month till I see U2 and Kings of Leon in town. It's my last night in Vancouver before I head home for the summer. It'll be tough to leave this city even for four months, but it should be a great send off. Here's hoping that they play "Stay."

Elsewhere, it's a four day weekend here, and most people have vacated the premises, heading back home. This leaves me alone with only the Canadian Justices themselves. Really, who can be lonely when you've got loudmouth Denning over there in the corner!

As for studying, two subjects are particularly frightening. Contracts has gotten quite difficult of late, and Property... Property shall be my Waterloo. I think to ease myself into this study-fest occupying the next several weeks, I'll start with the others, Torts, Legal Institutions and Criminal Law. Though, I suppose if I really wanted to study Criminal Law I could just fire up the ol' PS2, pop in some Grand Theft Auto and truly get into the mind of a criminal. That's all kinds of illegal!

Those Marvin Monroe tapes work wonders

If memory serves correctly, there was a mass cull of chickens in this province many months past due to fears of avian flu (the flu du jour at the time). I'm not sure how many they slaughtered in those fateful abattoirs, all I know is they missed one little chicken, for certainly, the sky is falling!

The city woke up to a few centimeters of snow this morning, and panic hit the streets. (Unfortunately, it was not due to rage-infected zombies as would have been cool.) I have never seen such a quick transition from snowflake #1 to talk of a snow day. I admit, I was surprised to see snow in this famously green city, but I couldn't help but think that Albertans would be laughing and telling the snow to "come back when you've got something interesting to tell me." Snow, being a solidified form of water and unable to construct speech, would fail to make a witty response.

Anyway, I do hope tomorrow is a snow day. The first week back after holidays are always pretty tough. One can't just step up unprepared to the foosball table. On top of that, we are getting exam marks back and surveying the damage. The prognosis is stable, so far, but that could all change with a subject known as Criminal Law.

They tell us there is no wrong answer in law school. But clearly, when you are given a fact pattern and asked to either acquit or convict a woman, and every single person except you acquits her, the maxim must fail. If I were to be right, and this were a real case, news bureaus would be busy trying to come up with a new graphic for their latest headline: a Grand Miscarriage of Justice.

But hey, maybe things will be alright. Stranger things have happened. Snow has fallen in Vancouver. (Someday zombies, someday).