12 Days of Christmas

On the twelfth day of Christmas, my true love sent to me Twelve drummers drumming, Eleven pipers piping, Ten lords a-leaping, Nine ladies dancing, Eight maids a-milking, Seven swans a-swimming, Six geese a-laying, Five golden rings, Four calling birds, Three French hens, Two turtle doves, And a partridge in a pear tree!

The following is a parody * It is not meant to be taken seriously and is considered protected speech by the US Supreme Court

For the 12 Days Of Christmas,
Judge M_____Sentenced with Glee:

12 Life Sentences
11 Crack Pipe Cases
10 ten-twenty-life cases
9 Ladies of the Evening
8 Maids who were stealing
7 Strong Armed Robberies
6 GORT sentences

5 15 year minimum mandatories….

4 technical probation violations
3 guideline enhancements
2 Grand Theft Autos

and one withhold CTS.

*HUSTLER MAGAZINE v. FALWELL, 485 U.S. 46 (1988):

“At the heart of the First Amendment is the recognition of the fundamental importance of the free flow of ideas andopinions on matters of public interest and concern. "[T]hefreedom to speak one's mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty — and thus a good unto itself — but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole." Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States,Inc., 466 U.S. 485 , 503-504 (1984). We have therefore been particularly vigilant to ensure that individual expressions of ideas remain free from governmentally imposed sanctions.The First Amendment recognizes no such thing as a "false"idea. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 339 (1974).As Justice Holmes wrote, "when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas — that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market . . . ." Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616,630 (1919) (dissenting opinion).


“The sort of robust political debate encouraged by the FirstAmendment is bound to produce speech that is critical of those who hold public office or those public figures who are"intimately involved in the resolution of important public questions or, by reason of their fame, shape events in areas o fconcern to society at large." Associated Press v. Walker, decided with Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts, 388 U.S. 130,164 (1967) (Warren, C. J., concurring in result). JusticeFrankfurter put it succinctly in Baumgartner v. UnitedStates, 322 U.S. 665, 673-674 (1944), when he said that"[o]ne of the prerogatives of American citizenship is the right to criticize public men and measures." Such criticism, inevitably, will not always be reasoned or moderate; public figures as well as public officials will be subject to "vehement,caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks," NewYork Times, supra, at 270. "[T]he candidate who vaunts his spotless record and sterling integrity cannot convincingly cry`Foul!' when an opponent or an industrious reporter attemptsto demonstrate the contrary." Monitor Patriot Co. v. Roy,401 U.S. 265, 274 (1971).

“Were we to hold otherwise, there can be little doubt that political cartoonists and satirists would be subjected to damages awards without any showing that their work falsely defamed its subject. Webster's defines a caricature as "the deliberately distorted picturing or imitating of a person,literary style, etc. by exaggerating features or mannerisms for satirical effect." Webster's New Unabridged TwentiethCentury Dictionary of the English Language 275 (2d ed.1979).

"The appeal of the political cartoon or caricature isoften based on exploitation of unfortunate physical traits orpolitically embarrassing events — an exploitation often calculated to injure the feelings of the subject of the portrayal.The art of the cartoonist is often not reasoned or evenhanded,but slashing and one-sided. One cartoonist expressed the nature of the art in these words: "The political cartoon is a weapon of attack, of scorn and ridicule and satire; it is least effective when it tries to pat some politician on the back. It is usually as welcome as a bee sting and is always controversial in some quarters." Long, The Political Cartoon: Journalism's Strongest Weapon, The Quill 56, 57 (Nov. 1962).

Parodies: fair game or foul ball for the blog???