The most recent episode of the Lawyer 2 Lawyer podcast discussed the death penalty with a motley group panel consisting of Judge Alex Kozinski from the United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit, exonerated death row survivor Ronald Keine from Witness to Innocence, and M*A*S*H actor Mike Farrell from Death Penalty Focus.
Here is a description of the podcast:
The Eighth Amendment protects people from cruel and unusual punishments in the United States but what does that mean? In the last 38 years, Americans used hangings, gas chambers, lethal injections, electrocutions, and firing squads to execute convicted murderers. Given the recent reports of botched lethal injections, some experts are calling for the return of the firing squad as the most humane form of capital punishment. On this episode of Lawyer 2 Lawyer, host J. Craig Williams interviews Judge Alex Kozinski from the United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit, exonerated death row survivor Ronald Keine from Witness to Innocence, and M*A*S*H actor Mike Farrell from Death Penalty Focus. Together they discuss the merits of firing squads vs. lethal injections, corruption in the judicial system, and the morality of western society. Tune in to hear about the 144 exonerated death row survivors as well as Ronald Keine’s near miss with the gas chamber.
Judge Alex Kozinski sits on the bench of the United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit where he’s served since his appointment on November 7th 1985. Prior to his appointment Judge Kozinski occupied other prestigious positions including Chief Judge of the US Claims Court and Office of Counsel to the President. He is married with three children plus three grandchildren.
Ronald Keine is an exonerated death row inmate who was just 9 days from his execution in the gas chamber when the actual murderer confessed to the crime. Today, he an Assistant Director of Membership and Training for Witness to Innocence an anti-death penalty organization whose leading voice is that of exonerated death row survivors.
Mike Farrell played Captain BJ Hunnicut for eight years on the hit television show M*A*S*H as well other roles like Jim Hansen in another series called Providence. In the 90s, he served for three years as a member of the State of California’s Commission on Judicial Performance. Mr. Farrell is a life-long opponent of the death penalty and has been the President of Death Penalty Focus since 1994.
Stop-and-Frisk, Judge Scheindlin, and the First Amendment
On the most recent edition of the Lawyer2Lawyer podcast, host J. Craig Williams discusses the Second Circuit Court of Appeals panel that not only stayed Judge Shira Scheindlin’s order in the NYPD stop-and-frisk case but also removed her from the case. Williams spoke with University of Pennsylvania Law Professor Kermit Roosevelt about the potential First Amendment implications of the Second Circuit’s decision to remove Judge Scheindlin due to her speech that preceded her decision.
Here is a description of the podcast:
“It’s impossible to figure out exactly what the judge did wrong,” University of Pennsylvania Law Professor Kermit Roosevelt says, discussing Federal District Court Judge Shira Scheindlin’s removal from Floyd, et al. v. The City of New York, known as the “stop-and-frisk” case. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Judge “ran afoul” of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges given her participation in media interviews and by making public statements about the “stop and frisk” case. The 2nd Circuit’s ruling did not provide further detail or examples. In this edition of Lawyer2Lawyer, your host J. Craig Williams invites Roosevelt to discuss Scheindlin’s removal, whether this action is a question of judge’s first amendment rights, and the possible outcomes of her appeal.
Roosevelt is a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. Working in a diverse range of fields, he focuses in constitutional law and conflict law. Professor Roosevelt was recently a part of a New York Times Room for Debate, discussing Scheindlin’s removal and what restrictions should be placed on judges. He has also served as a law clerk to Supreme Court Associate Justice David H. Souter and D.C. Circuit Court Judge Stephen F. Williams.
“Should a Chimpanzee Have Human Rights?”
That was the topic being discussed on the Lawyer2Lawyer podcast. Here is a description of the (somewhat strange) show:
If it’s not legally a human, it’s a thing. But animal rights advocates argue these alternatives fail to recognize that there are many cognitively complex species who deserve to be treated as people. The Nonhuman Rights Project is planning to file a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a chimp to grant her the right to bodily liberty. This will release her from the cage she is currently living in, and the project will have her admitted into a cageless sanctuary. Steven M. Wise, president of The Nonhuman Rights Project, has been researching and planning this case for 20 years.
Steven M. Wise has been practicing animal protection law nationwide for for the past 30 years. He was the first professor to teach animal law at Harvard University and is still teaching animal law courses all over the world. He has published four books on the matter, including Rattling the Cage – Toward Legal Rights for Animals.
On this edition of Lawyer2Lawyer, hosts Bob Ambrogi and J. Craig Williams will talk with Wise about the case to grant a chimp the right to bodily liberty and The Nonhuman Rights Project’s long-term plans for animal rights
Patenting Podcasts: Personal Audio vs. Electronic Frontier Foundation
Recently, Lawyer2Lawyer interviewed the parties in the podcast patent dispute–Personal Audio and Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Here is a description of the episode:
Personal Audio’s founder Jim Logan created and patented an idea which, in his eyes, covers the concept of podcasting. “This is the story of the American inventor,” Richard Baker, Personal Audio’s vice president of licensing, says. Personal Audio has filed lawsuits against several podcasters and media companies, claiming patent infringement by popular programs such as NBC’s The Adam Carolla Showand by CBS for its podcast distribution of multiple shows including The Voice and Meet the Press. On the other side, The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has spearheaded a campaign dubbed “Save Podcasting!” to rescind Personal Audio’s patent. EFF’s goal is to revoke Personal Audio’s right to compensation from any podcast program. Daniel Nazer, a staff attorney working on the campaign, represents EFF on the program.
On this edition of Lawyer2Lawyer Bob Ambrogi
and J. Craig Williams
talk with Richard Baker and Brad Liddle, Personal Audio’s president of licensing, and Daniel Nazer of EFF to hear their thoughts on what defines a patent troll, the specifics behind the cases, and more.
Tushnet and Eskridge on Same-Sex Marriage Cases
On the most recent episode of Lawyer2Lawyer,
hosts Bob Ambrogi and J. Craig Williams will talk with Constitutional Law Professors Mark Tushnet and William Eskridge about what the history of both the gay rights and the civil rights movements have to say for the future of gay rights in America.
• Harvard Law Professor Mark Tushnet specializes in constitutional law and theory, with a focus in examining the practice of judicial review in the U.S. and worldwide. He has served as a law clerk to Justice Thurgood Marshall. Currently, his focus is in constitutional history and the development of civil liberties. He is known for his critical and controversial analysis of Supreme Court rulings, including Brown v. The Board of Education and Roe v. Wade.
• William Eskridge, Yale Law Professor, focuses in statutory interpretation. He represented a same-sex-married couple from 1990-1995 who sued for recognition of their marriage and has published many books covering the political framework of gay rights. The historical component of his book GayLaw was the basis of an amicus brief he drafted for the Cato Institute and for much of the Court’s (and dissenting opinion’s) analysis in Lawrence vs. Texas, the decision which made same-sex sexual activity legal in every U.S. state.
“Will Accused Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Get the Death Penalty?”
This was the question being investigated on the Lawyer 2 Lawyer podcast. Here is a description of the show:
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving brother of the accused for the Boston marathon bombings, has become a face of the media lately. His prosecution and potential sentence raises many questions for both the public and the legal world. Attorneys and co-hosts J. Craig Williams and Bob Ambrogi joinAttorney Jack Cunha and Professor Douglas Berman to discuss the prosecution and trial of the suspect.
- Jack Cunha, of Cunha & Holcomb, is a practicing criminal attorney based in Boston, Massachusetts. A former instructor at Suffolk and Harvard Law Schools, Cunha lectures nationally for various associations and schools such as The National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, Harvard Law, and CLE Programs mainly on criminal defense.
- Douglas Berman, Professor of Law at The Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law, has taught a myriad of courses at Ohio State including criminal law, criminal punishment and sentencing, and the death penalty. He is co-author of a casebook, Sentencing Law and Policy: Cases, Statutes, and Guidelines. He also writes a popular blog titled Sentencing Law and Policy.
Tune in to hear what these experienced professionals have to say as they answer questions such as: Although Massachusetts outlawed the death penalty in 1984, will prosecutors use federal law to seek the death penalty for Tsarnaev? Will the fact that the suspect is only 19 call for mitigation? and more.