A prosecutor of some sort has leveled some serious charges:
Rumpole: You worked so hard on the Brandeis post??? How do you explain the fact that much, if not all, of your post appeared in a New York Times article several weeks earlier??
Plea of not guilty, demand discovery, 15 days for motions.
Typical hot head suspicious prosecutor.
1) Look at the top of this blog. See where it says: "Search this blog"? Type in "Brandeis" and see when our post about Brandeis first appeared.
Now Mr. Ashcroft, who posted first about the good Jutstice?
2) We readily admit to reading the NY Times. The Times reported on Brandeis' birthday, and we credited the Times in our post:
The New York Times recently remembered that as a young lawyer, Brandeis co-wrote an article for the Harvard Law Review, The Right to Privacy, that Roscoe Pound, dean of the law school, would later say did nothing less than add a chapter to our law.
The Defense rests.
See You In Court.
Ps: If we weren't so jet lagged and beat from flying home this week, we would have had something better to post than this cheap shot from some unimaginative knucklehead who has nothing better to do than cast unwarranted aspersions.
Of course, we are in the business of defending against those who cast such aspersions, so in retrospect, thank goodness for knuckleheads like our fair, suspicious, reader.