March 23, 2025 • 51 mins
Review of Daredevil Born Again episode 4, "Sic Semper Systema." Join us for our discussion of who should receive the White Tiger's belongings from the medical examiner, the administration of justice for a suspect who stole Fiddle Faddle, Bail Reform, Redevelopment in local governments, the morality discussion between Daredevil and Punisher, False Imprisonment and Torture.
No part of this recording should be considered legal advice.
Follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, and TikTok @TheLegalGeeks
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Joshua Gilliland (00:05):
Hello everyone , my name is Joshua Gilliland.
One of the founding attorneysof the Legal Geeks With me to
discuss episode 4 of DaredevilBorn Again is retired judge Matt
Sherino and Chris Butler.
Your Honor, how are you tonight?
I am well.
Thank you very much, joshExcellent and Chris.
(00:25):
How are you tonight?
I am well.
Thank you very much, joshExcellent and Chris.
How are you doing.
Kris Butler (00:28):
I'm great, I'm doing what looks like better
than Frank Castle's doing.
Joshua Gilliland (00:34):
He looked rough.
I mean, needs vitamin D, needsa razor?
Yeah, there's a lot going onthere, so let's break this down.
This is, I think, an extremelywell-acted episode when we get
to the exchange betweenDaredevil and the Punisher, but
(00:57):
we got some work to do before weget there, and so, chris, let's
talk about the medical examinerwith the white tiger.
My immediate reaction was likewho gets the belongings?
Did you have any thoughts?
And then we'll pivot to JudgeReno.
Kris Butler (01:20):
Yeah, one of my favorite subjects from law
school is states and trusts, soI looked up to New York law and
(01:55):
so it's similar to what I haveexperienced with here, where
it's sort of you know, thedecedent Hector in this case has
a spouse, then the spouseinherits anything, especially if
they, if they have no kidswhich I were pretty sure Hector
had no kids, right?
I think they didn't sayanything, like she was pregnant.
So then his wife getseverything, gets everything.
But if he had kids and nospouse, then the kids get
everything.
If they have both, then howthey break down the assets is
(02:16):
the spouse gets the first$50,000 plus half of the
remaining balance and then thechildren get everything else.
And if no spouse or kids,parents of the decedent get
everything.
And if he only has siblings,then the siblings get everything
.
Joshua Gilliland (02:29):
Your Honor, your thoughts, with the lawyer,
seeing the medical examiner andgetting effectively an evidence
bag which on one level surprisedme because I thought wouldn't
this be evidence, but the lawyerleaves with the bag and we see
an encounter with the niece.
What were your thoughts?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (02:49):
Yeah , and as much as this is
basically his personal property,I could see the medical
examiner giving it to his lawyerif the lawyer is a known entity
to safeguard it, either as theexecutor of the estate or just
as someone that knows the family, so would be able to turn it
over to the familyor of theestate, or just as someone that
knows the family, so would beable to turn it over to the
family.
And, as Chris said, theproperty for the bulk of it is
(03:12):
going to go to the wife.
These did not seem to be peopleof great means, so pretty much
the wife would have inheritedeverything.
Additionally to that first$50,000, there is a long list of
household and personal propertyitems that would automatically
kind of like a Homestead Acttype of thing that also
(03:33):
automatically goes to the spouse, and then the assets are
divided out, as Chris juststated as Chris just stated.
Joshua Gilliland (03:43):
Well said, it's a reminder of intestate
secession, with a wrinkle ofcriminal procedure in there as
well.
So all kinds of Good barquestion, right?
Yeah a lot of crossing thestreams.
So what's happening here?
So we then have the issue thatthe lawyer is rightly upset.
(04:06):
His client got killed andraises the issue of that.
There was no shell casing.
And the medical examiner islike, hey, not on the body, not
me, I'm cool, I was not at thescene.
Like that's not my bailiwick.
So Matt eventually goes anddoes a borderline scientific
(04:28):
investigation to figure outwhere the shell casing could be
by letting a bottle roll downand letting gravity do its thing
to find out where the bottlelands.
In order to figure out where ashell casing could land, the
lawyer's turning himself into awitness at this stage.
But uh, chris, did you have anythoughts and reactions to that
(04:51):
issue?
Kris Butler (04:51):
yeah, well, so you, you uh have this where he's
being scientific, but also whenhe um confronts the cop, um,
because he's listening to hisheartbeat.
Uh, you know, because mattmurdoch is a human lie detector,
not only just with sound, butalso when it comes to, like the,
the pheromones and detecting asweat that he can with people.
(05:12):
So he did that.
So this was a another extensionof his uh excellent hearing,
which I thought was cool.
But, yeah, he, he set himselfup to to be a witness, like,
let's say, it was the cop thatyou know, did it the one he
confronted?
Because not only do you havehim as a witness, cherry could
be a witness to witnessintimidation from the last case,
(05:35):
uh, so it seems like the onlyperson at the firm that could
not be uh held or held as awitness is, um, uh, kristen
mcduffie.
Joshua Gilliland (05:45):
Yeah, the other attorney, the yeah, taking
cherry with him could havehelped solve that issue.
But this also raises thequestion about is there like,
who would he be representing?
Like, if he's trying to gatherevidence to make you know, find
out what happened to his client,that's not necessarily
(06:05):
something being done in thescope of representation.
Kris Butler (06:07):
It's falling into a different category uh, because,
unless he's setting up for asimple suit, yeah, then which
would then change?
Joshua Gilliland (06:15):
because it's then lawyers witness and that's
something we need to avoid.
It's there's only rareexceptions when that could be
allowed, but it it's generally.
We don't want lawyers to bewitnesses.
Your Honor, your reaction tothe scene.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Ret) (06:35):
I think he's basically accepted
the fact that there's not goingto be much of an investigation
with regards to the White Tigersmurder.
So he's going to take it uponhimself, maybe, to see what
happened and, as Chris said, Ithink that it's possible that
there might be a wrongful deathaction if he does find out that
(06:57):
the person who either ordered itor the government entity that
partook in it has deep enoughpockets to bother to sue, and in
which case he would probablyhave to, at that point, turn it
over to another law firm to dobecause, yes, he would be a
witness in as much as he's theone who found the smoking shell.
Joshua Gilliland (07:24):
Which brings us to the issue of confronting
the detective at the courthouse.
I was not surprised that thecop didn't have a reaction that
he was involved with the killingof the white tiger, like it was
(07:44):
not him.
And I was not surprised by that, but I found it interesting
with, well, who did so?
It's not that easy of an answer.
There are the Marvel shows andStar Wars shows where it's
painfully obvious, like you know, somebody who's the reveal,
(08:05):
stranger and the Acoly acolyteagain, painfully obvious.
This is not one of thosepainfully obvious moments of who
who's doing this.
So, uh, I'm curious to seewhere this goes um.
But that then raises uh, whatwill happen shortly?
Uh, we, we have.
(08:25):
You know the reason why.
Matt's at the courthouse.
He has a new client, somebodywho's really had a rough go at
life, a long rap sheet, sohistory of getting into trouble.
And and the dude sold fiddlefaddle caramel court, something
(08:47):
that's tasty.
Dude is poor, struggling to getby eating scraps truly horrible
life situation.
And he wanted something sweetand he does all these weird
arguments of I paid for it lastweek.
It's like, well, that's not howthis works you know, yeah,
(09:09):
maybe it was a scroll.
Yeah, I, I was impressed theywent there um valid legal
defense super, it wasn't ascroll.
Yeah, it's dude like the.
The scroll defense I don'tthink is gonna to fly.
That might happen once andeveryone goes no no, we're not,
but again, it's a niceacknowledgement of secret
(09:29):
invasion and Captain Marvel andthe fact that you know there are
scrolls among them in society.
Now, so cool, your Honor, yourthoughts.
Because you presided for manyyears, You've seen a lot.
What was your reaction to thisindividual who clearly struggled
(09:52):
?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (09:52):
Yeah , yeah, and New York versus
Leroy Bradford was a verytelling example of the New York
City criminal justice system,especially before the bail
reform acts of 2020.
And you know he's charged withpedant larceny, which is an a
(10:14):
misdemeanor in violation ofSection 155.25, which is
basically stealing any kind ofproperty, and you know, sitting
in arraignments I had many many,many, many, many of these cases
that came before me and itactually presented a very
accurate portrayal of thosesituations and the conversations
(10:35):
that lawyers had with theirclients with regards to those
situations that happened everynight over and over again, and
it generally was before the bailreform acts of 2020, the system
where you would get anescalation.
So the first time that youshoplift, you might get an ACD,
(10:58):
which is a adjournment incontemplation of dismissal,
which means that if you stay outof trouble for X amount of
months usually six then the casegets dismissed and sealed.
You would probably be able toplead it down to a violation of
disorderly conduct, maybe with aday of community service, maybe
(11:23):
with no days of communityservice, depending on the amount
that you stole.
The next time that you did, itwould definitely be with a
couple of days of communityservice, and probably the fourth
time that you get caughtstealing something, they would
make you plead to themisdemeanor charge, probably
with time served.
And then the time after thatmaybe 10 days, the time after
(11:46):
that, maybe 30 days, 60 days, 90days and it reaches a point
where, if you've done like threeor four of them, the
prosecution is no longer goingto make any offer and they would
say to me that this is anoperation spotlight case, your
honor, which means that this isa recidivist and he's going to
keep doing this.
So our offer is an 80 year,which basically means you judge,
(12:08):
make whatever offer you want tomake, uh, and we would use, you
know, the same kind of thing.
Okay, we gave you 30 times last, 30 days, last time, this time
it's going to be 60.
If it's a young enoughindividual with a pretty clean
record, maybe probation.
If it's someone with anextensive record, probation is
not.
(12:28):
Matt was correct in his adviceto Leroy.
He wasn't going to make itprobation.
Probation for an amiss demeanorin New York for this kind of
crime would have been a year.
He would not be reportingdiligently, he would not be
staying out of trouble.
And the problem with theprobation plea and in all
honesty and a lot of times Ididn't offer it if I didn't
(12:51):
think the person had a chance ofdoing it because I thought it
was setting them up for failureand then once they miss
probation or don't report or getarrested for anything else, the
standard of proof for violationof probation is very low.
And then if you're found guiltyof the violation of probation
you do the year.
So you're really setting somepeople up for failure in a
(13:13):
system like that.
Now, in 2020, the bail reformtook place in New York.
Soon thereafter was thepandemic, but even before the
pandemic, we had started toreform our bail laws in New York
and it made most nonviolentcrimes, like these, non-bail
eligible.
So he would not have to facethe situation, because what
(13:38):
would happen to Leroy in?
The common thing is the offerwould be an A in 30 days or an A
in 10 days, as Matt was able toget it barking down with great
results and, because of his pastwarrants, bail would be set and
(14:08):
he would sit in jail until histrial for a much longer amount
of time than the 10 days or the20 days or the 30 days that he
would have gotten to begin with.
So eventually he would comebefore you in an all-purpose
part, as they're schedulingtrials, and the offer would
become an eight-time servebecause you've already served 30
days, time served becauseyou've already served 30 days,
and so the system had a way ofgetting rid of cases, but at the
same time, you had people thatwere basically doing crimes of
poverty sitting in jail eventhough there is a presumption of
(14:31):
innocence for periods of timebecause they could not make bail
.
So New York decided that itwould make most of these
nonviolent crimes non-baileligible.
You are allowed to putconditions as a judge, like
going to supervise release,going to various programs.
Some of those programs thentried to help the people and
(14:56):
then the case would work its waythrough the system.
So New York has tried to getrid of that situation that
happened to Leroy by doing this.
Now, crime did spike.
People argued that the bailreform was the reason for the
spike.
There's arguments on both sidesof that, and some of the bail
(15:19):
reforms were then reformed tomake them a little bit harsher
on the defendants and make iteasier for the judges to set
bail even when they werenonviolent crimes, if they had
just committed one, or whilethey had one case that was going
on, they committed anothercrime that again then made it
bail eligible, even though itwas a nonviolent thing.
(15:41):
So they gave the judgesmechanisms to kind of go back a
little bit towards the oldsystem that Mr Leroy was dealing
with and that's kind of whereNew York currently is within the
world of bail reform and thesekinds of things, and other
(16:02):
cities have done the same thingSan Francisco, portland and
they're struggling with.
Did they reform it too much?
Is that the reason for variouscrime spikes and whether it's
going to change everything?
And you know, the scales ofjustice is a great symbol for
(16:22):
the legal system becauseeverything is a pendulum that
goes back and forth.
Joshua Gilliland (16:29):
It's curious you discussed the Bail Reform
Act because in California we hadkind of a parallel course with
a crime reform act I think itwas prop 47, I might be wrong on
that.
Uh, big born from what happenedin the 1990s.
So in the 1990s, with ourproposition initiatives after
(16:51):
the like, horrific kidnappingand murder of poly class, uh,
like you know, the guy who ranfor attorney general, one of the
Democratic challenger,basically blamed the Republican
for, like, the death of PollyKlass and it backfired in his
campaign like he lost inspectacular fashion because one
(17:12):
of the initiatives you knowbrought in three strikes,
inifornia and that was marketedto voters as, like it's
inherently dangerous felons thatwould, if they commit multiple
crimes, they go away because ofyou know they keep committing
horrible crimes.
Well, it was more strictliability offense, like my
(17:35):
grandfather did, prisonministries and the gentleman
that was incarcerated his crimeswere were dumb, like he was the
dumb bad guy robbed a vendingmachine as his third strike and
then prison for life in SanQuentin.
Well, as a society we got no,no, this went too far and we do
(18:00):
some reforms here, which wasmeant to help, but then people
start freaking out because youhave individuals going into, you
know, big box stores and justwalking out with stuff and I was
like, okay, that ain't right,like that's, that's, you know.
(18:26):
So now retailers are sufferingand so in this past election
cycle we tightened things up.
I'm not quite sure how thingsare going to pan out, because I
think it's a little early.
I'm not a criminal defenseattorney.
This type of law really upsetsme because it's the issue of
like.
We have other problems, youknow problems.
What's driving individuals tocommit crimes?
How do we address those, asopposed to having a, you know,
(18:47):
giving up on rehabilitation andjust going straight to, you know
, a school to prison pipeline,which is I don't agree with.
Uh, so this man's struggle,depicted in this fictional show
with superheroes and aliens, washauntingly disturbing.
Uh, chris, uh, the judge and Ijust talked a lot.
(19:11):
Do you have any thoughts to add?
Kris Butler (19:14):
I mean, I don't have a a lot more to say.
I know that here in Michiganthere was a lot of a slate of
bill reform acts, that bailreform acts that were brought up
(19:35):
last year.
So I just know in my work thatyou know there have been, you
know, inmates just like thejudge talked about had you know,
that were sitting in jail for alengthy time because of covid,
you know.
But because the court systemwas so backlogged because of
(19:58):
covid, you had people sittingthere for nonviolent crimes that
had to be in jail for a lotlonger than they normally would
have.
And that's just the reality ofthe situation.
So I did think it wasinteresting that they brought up
this point and then stayed onit for a while, because even on
you know other shows with for awhile.
(20:22):
Because even on you know othershows with legal shows that like
have like all they do is legaldrama.
Um, sometimes they don't standon things like this for a while.
Joshua Gilliland (20:27):
You may have a five minute scene and then it's
on to something else entirelyyeah, it was thoughtful and well
done and hopefully makes peoplethink, which brings us to, I
believe, your Honor.
You're the one who actuallybroke down the Latin title of
this episode, and could you walkus through that please?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (20:55):
Yeah , the title of this episode was
Sic Semper Systemia or Systemia,and I think it was a play on on
on sick Semper Tyranus, whichwas what John Wilkes Booth
yelled when he killed the tyrant, abraham Lincoln.
Thus thus to all tyrants andthis is thus always to the
systems, systems, and I thinkthat that was the key focus of
(21:21):
this show that you know, thecriminal justice system, the
city government system.
So a lot of this show had todeal with the way systems worked
and I thought that they did areally good job.
Back to Leroy Bradford.
You know that they reallyshowed the lawyer with the
discussion with this client, thelawyer then going out and
having a discussion with the ADAand then the return to the
(21:46):
client.
I mean, as Chris said, theyusually show what won't stick
with it for all of those parts,and they were very accurately.
You know I've overheard many,many of those conversations and
it was very accurately done,including, you know, the
frustration of Leroy Bradfordwho you know recognizes that
(22:08):
this stay in jail will have moreresults in just the time that
is spent in prison, because youknow, you miss your showing up
for your welfare, you missshowing up for other
governmental things and then youlose your apartment that you
have through maybe Section 8 orother government programs.
So the consequences of thosefew days in jail can far
(22:33):
outnumber just those few days.
And granted, you could say andI understand this as well well,
he shouldn't have stolen thecereal, and that's true, he
should not have stolen thecereal.
But should the punishment forstealing a snack, when you're
(22:53):
too poor to buy any food andyou're eating out of dumpsters,
be the loss of your apartment,your government benefits?
You know?
20 days in jail, and some peoplewill say, yes, that's
absolutely what it should be andthat'll stop people from
stealing.
And that is one argument, andthat's a very true argument.
But you know, the system doeshave a way of grinding down the
(23:19):
less fortunate, and it has beenthat way for a long time.
I don't think there's any easysolutions to this, but the fact
that this show brought out thefact that the system acting in
such a way is something fordiscussion, I think, was really
(23:39):
really well done in this episode.
Joshua Gilliland (23:43):
Haunting.
Yeah, just again thoughtful,and again it's a superhero show
and it's making this, you know.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (23:55):
Yeah yeah, it really made you think
and you know, hopefully itreally made you think and, and
you know, hopefully other peoplehave this conversation and I
know these conversations aregoing on, uh, throughout the
country and, and, and you know,in and have been going on for a
very long time among thosepeople that that make criminal
justice reforms and and changes,um, but you know, average Joe
(24:17):
isn't necessarily thinking aboutthis and average Joe might
watch a superhero show and maybethen think about this and maybe
understand a little bit more ofthe other side than he did
before watching the show.
Joshua Gilliland (24:30):
It's.
Here in California there are alot of people living under
bridges and in tents and gulliesthat have jobs Like they've
been knocked down and they can'tget back up and they're still
trying to make ends meet.
And it's just, you know, theirlives can spiral and crash and
recovering from that isprofoundly difficult, and you
(24:53):
know this this fictionalcharacter's struggle is
highlighting.
You know he couldn't go to asocial security meeting unless
lost those benefits and that wasnow eating garbage.
It's like time out like that.
You know the reaction is I hopethat's not really happening.
It's like, oh wait, it does sovery well done so.
(25:17):
Hats off to the creators forputting this together.
Uh, I want to go to the mayorand then then the meeting with
frank castle.
So we have, you know, mayorfisk trying to rule by fiat of
doing urban redevelopment whichwas the theme of daredevil
(25:42):
season one of aggressive urbanredevelopment.
Uh, through, you know, bombingand all you know, gang violence
to I want to make this a niceplace and thus I'm going to kill
a lot of people to do it.
It's not how redevelopmentworks.
He's now mayor and, while Iactually appreciate the intent
(26:05):
of this could be a nice place,let's fix it up.
The reality is I can't justcall a press conference and say
we're going to go fix it up,because it then opens the door.
How's the process actually work?
I'm not sure who added thesenotes.
If it was your honor or Chrison the we built the city mantra,
(26:29):
your honor, why don't you takeit?
You're the first I won't sayresident New Yorker, but the
person who has lived in New York.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (26:40):
I've sat on community boards in New
York and certainly have manyfriends within the city
government.
In fact, the Department ofBuildings Commissioner is a good
friend of mine.
New York has a lot of rules whenit comes to doing anything and
(27:02):
it's very, very frustratingThings that should be done very
simply.
My favorite story is a simple,literally a fire hydrant that
was like five feet into thestreet as opposed to it being on
the sidewalk, and this wasbecause one part of the city,
(27:25):
you know, got the change orderfor moving the street, but the
part of the city that's supposedto move the fire hydrant didn't
get their order and they justneeded to move the fire hydrant
10 feet to basically put it onthe sidewalk because you
couldn't use the street becauseit had a fire hydrant in the
middle of it.
And it literally took sevenyears to move this fire hydrant
(27:49):
and every borough president inStaten Island would update at
his state of the borough thestory of the fire hydrant and it
was just.
It was.
It was really, reallyincredible and unfortunately
that that is the way the cityworks, because it's so large,
there's so many levels of youknow.
(28:11):
Things have to go to thecommunity board and then they
have to go to the the the boardof planners and to the city
planners and then there's to goto the city planners and then it
has to go to the city counciland then you know every agency
gets to weigh in and certainthings the agencies will fight
over each other as to who hasthe jurisdiction of doing it,
(28:31):
and you know this is where Ithink you know the name of the
episode really is true.
That's always the systems, likefighting a tyrant.
Fighting the systems is almostimpossible.
And the children singing webuilt this city is a great
backdrop to the amount of workit actually takes to build a
(28:56):
city.
And Mayor Blumberg, when he wasmayor, he had an interesting
twist.
He got the private industry todo a lot of the building for the
city and then it would eitherbe turned over to the city and
the developer in the area gotcertain easements to allow them
(29:19):
to do certain things that theywanted to do.
So he was very creative inmarrying private funds and
private entities with thegovernment.
But he didn't win all of hisbattles either, and it can be
very frustrating and I'm sure wehave not seen the last of the
(29:43):
mayor, king Payne, losing histemper with regards to trying to
get things done in the city.
Joshua Gilliland (29:52):
The look on his face hearing we built the
city both by schoolchildren atthe latvian embassy.
Like the look of pain on hisface.
I mean this is so well acted.
I mean there's a reason whythis actor is awesome, uh, but
it's just like oh, oh, boy likeI'm, and he's like no, no, I
(30:15):
don't need any more songs, thankyou, we're out of here I read.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Ret) (30:19):
I read a great tid, a great
tidbit on one of the articlesabout the show that when they
first did the students they wereso great that it almost seemed
unbelievable.
Joshua Gilliland (30:29):
So they had to add some less than good
students to make it sound morelike a real class singing, make
it sound more like a real classsinging, like the Harlem boys
choir in the glory soundtrack,you know, just just something
completely over the top.
It's like exactly.
(30:51):
It's like well, you should becrying at the end of it and just
in applauding and wanting moreas opposed to I got to go, kids,
thank you.
Kris Butler (30:58):
Yep.
You're like we'll sing somemore.
No, no, no, I'm good.
Joshua Gilliland (31:02):
I'm good.
You guys are awesome.
Love all of you, bye-bye.
Wow, chris.
Anything to add on the firehydrant in the street scenario?
Kris Butler (31:17):
No, the extent of my legal expertise when it comes
to those things would have beenlike the massive pothole, the,
the road work and all the youknow like.
Is this a county road?
Is this a city road?
Uh, or is it?
This is a state road but countyhas, you know, covers, repairs
or anything like that, so that Imay be able to get into Talking
(31:41):
about seven years worth of howto get this fire hydrant moved
down my wheelhouse.
I don't even think I have thepatience for that.
Joshua Gilliland (31:53):
Redevelopment is horrifically complicated.
I did some doc review on acontract project for one of the
cities in the Bay Area that hadan area to be redeveloped and
(32:14):
the complexity, the maze thathad to be navigated was like, oh
my word, uh, just horriblycomplex.
Uh, it's amazing we get thingsdone and there's a reason why
they're systems, because youknow the questions about, like
an environmental impact study iswhere we have to start.
(32:35):
Okay, it's like it's not a sexypress conference, but I can
understand calling the pressrelease or a news conference and
saying I want to do this stepone and then we're going to the
board like he could outline itand outline a vision.
I don't see a problem with that.
But you're then going to haveto control expectations of
(33:00):
trying to work through a maze ofnow I need to get board members
to agree and vote and god knowshow long the environmental
impact study is going to take.
Yeah, and again, ports, therecould be lots of bad mojo there.
I mean, mean there's uh inAlviso, california, which is
(33:22):
north of the Northern tip of SanJose.
You know, at the end of the19th century, beginning of 20th,
farm produce from SiliconValley which was growing oranges
and you know, produce wasgetting shipped out of there on
on scow scooters, big rectanglesfor sales as the semiconductor
(33:44):
industry built.
All the runoff from thatdevelopment went into the bay
and it landed there, becausethat's the tip of Silicon Valley
.
So all that mud is saturatedwith mercury and other bad stuff
.
And uh, well, there are thosewho want to be able to bring in
(34:04):
mega yachts to go see the 49ersplay, getting through the
remediation to do that, and thenbuild up elviso.
I don't know if I'll see thatin my lifetime, like that's.
Anyway, local governmentcleaning stuff up.
Ports are messy.
(34:24):
Let's talk about.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (34:27):
Look how long the big dig took in
Boston, oh God, I mean.
And granted, it's gorgeous.
It's gorgeous now.
Joshua Gilliland (34:35):
It was very worthwhile to do, but that was
going on for a long time yeah,we just don't crank these out,
and if you do, it's becauseyou're ignoring the environment.
It's like we're just gonna plowthrough this.
I mean, it's one thing to do,it's wartime and you need a
(34:55):
highway system through canada toto Alaska so you can supply
troops.
You know, I get, but even thenthat was slogging through
permafrost and miserable.
I get, we're not going to do anenvironmental impact study
during war.
However, when you don't have awar, you got to play by those
(35:18):
rules.
Don't have a war, you got toplay by those rules.
Speaking of war, let's talkabout this amazing scene with
murdoch confronting castle and Iuh, I think everyone has notes.
So, uh, your honor, I believethis is your note about did the
system bring justice for Foggywith Castle's debate with
(35:39):
Murdoch?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (35:41):
Yeah , but you know, back to the
title of the show, sympathia.
You know they really had aphilosophical dialogue as to
whether or not the systembrought justice to Foggy.
You know the fact that Bullseyeis sitting for the rest of his
(36:01):
life in prison.
You know he's still alive,unlike Foggy.
So, you know, did the systemfail him?
And Frank Castle, you know,keeps tweaking Matt Murdock
about that issue and thedialogue between them is you to
me, emmy, worthy and it.
(36:22):
They were both so good and soreal and you felt that you know
matt's pain while he was having,you know, this argument almost
with himself, because you knowhe's going through this himself.
As to, you know, since he'shung up the red suit is because
(36:44):
he believes in the system and hewants the system to have its
chance to work.
And that dialogue was justincredible.
Kris Butler (36:54):
Yeah, and you think about, at the end of season
three, you know Bullseye had hisback broken so presumably he
was taken into police custodyand he had that you know, spine
repair surgery.
But here we are, seven yearslater and that man is out on the
streets after he did a wholelegion of crimes, of killing
(37:18):
people, assaults across the city.
So you know, if you know notsaying that Frank is right to be
offing people everything.
But you know, did the systemreally work for Foggy, for
someone who also believed in thesystem and was killed by
someone that was not heldaccountable by it?
Joshua Gilliland (37:41):
Yeah, there's, there's so much to this.
I mean again just the actingchops of of both of these
individuals and the what waswritten and what, how it was
shot, just exceptional Cause youhave again Charlie Cox is
(38:01):
tearing up and it's like, okay,well done.
You know, it's like it's it'sso much pain from both of them.
And you know, one disturbingelement was Castle saying that
he keeps hearing his dead sonencouraging revenge, just to go
(38:22):
out and start killing, go outand start killing.
And I found that horrifying,that a little kid, you know like
your memory of your son.
Is him wanting extremeretribution like that?
Okay, it's like again, thepunisher needs therapy, but that
ain't gonna happen, uh, uh.
(38:43):
So that way, you know matt'snot hearing foggy saying kill
them all.
Uh, you know, it's uncle bendidn't tell peter parker.
You know, go on a killing spree, right, you know, like that's
again, it's not what heroes dothey're supposed to be?
Due process, uh, but some ofthe legal things I thought about
(39:03):
is castle's, a former clientand I just want to put out there
, you know.
The question is is discussionprivilege and I'm going to say
no, because there's no currentrepresentation I would say any
prior discussions are protected.
Still, that raises a funkyissue with the crime fraud
exception that a lawyer cannotbe part of helping plan a crime.
(39:27):
I don't think that's takingplace or took place, uh, but if
anything was, here's how you goout on a revenge killing spree
that would not be protected.
Um, but so much there.
Kris Butler (39:50):
Anything else to add on this confrontation them
(40:11):
and, uh, you know, he whentalking about his son, I don't
think he thinks it's a goodthing that he does hear this
voice, but he will acquiesce toit, so I think that will
hopefully lead to when heconfronts some of these copycats
and he's just like I'm notsomeone to emulate.
Joshua Gilliland (40:23):
You know that kind of thing, yeah which
happened to thing which happenedin the comics?
Right, you know again.
The police are supposed touphold the law and not engage in
summary executions.
Kris Butler (40:39):
And.
Joshua Gilliland (40:40):
I just know.
All right, we find out fromtherapy, which would be
privilege.
So there is husband-wifetherapy and we find out that, uh
, there was an affair and that,uh, mayor fisk says he just had
a conversation with adam, theparamour who had relations with
(41:05):
vanessa while Fisk was away, andwe find out that Adam's being
held in a dungeon and Fisk goesand has dinner.
We see the painting Rabbit in aSnowstorm from season one that
has blood splatter on it andthis raises issues that the
(41:27):
mayor has someone locked up fora long time.
Guy has long hair and a beardand he's enjoying what looks
like a very tasty dinner.
Your honor, can you walk usthrough the some of the issues
with this?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (41:45):
Sure To go with the things that he
could clearly be charged with.
He would be able to be chargedwith unlawful imprisonment in
the second degree, which ispenal law section 135.05 of New
York's penal law.
A person is guilty of unlawfulimprisonment in the second
degree when he restrains anotherperson.
(42:07):
Restrain is defined in 135.00of the New York Penal Law to
mean restricting a person'smovements intentionally and
unlawfully in such manner as tointerfere substantially with his
or her liberty.
So that's clearly the case inthis situation and that's a
(42:31):
class A misdemeanor.
He would also probably becharged with unlawful
imprisonment in the first degree, which again is that same level
of restraining another person,but in the first degree.
The enhancement is that you'reexposing him to serious physical
injury and the cage and theconditions that he's in arguably
(42:55):
would subject Adam to seriousphysical injury and that would
raise it to a class E felony,which is the lowest level of
felonies.
But he would also mostseriously be able to be charged
with kidnapping in the firstdegree and kidnapping is under
Section 135.25 of the New YorkPenal Law and a person is guilty
(43:18):
of kidnapping in the firstdegree when he abducts another
person.
It's pretty clear from thehistory that he is the one,
since he's the only one thatknows that Adam is there, that
he is the one that abducted orhad Adam abducted.
And abduct means to restrain aperson with intent to prevent
his liberation by eithersecreting or holding him in a
(43:41):
place where he is not likely tobe found.
Clearly, this undergrounddungeon is a place where he's
not likely to be found.
And if on the section two, aplace where he's not likely to
be found, and if on the sectiontwo, if you restrain a person
for a period of greater than 12hours with intent to either
cause physical injury or toterrorize him, you would be
subjected to kidnapping in thefirst degree.
(44:03):
And it's pretty clear from thecircumstances that he's been
there for a while.
As you said, he now has a beard, he looks like he's not being
fed well and is barely alive andclearly wants to leave.
So clearly he is committing atleast one, if not two, felonies
(44:31):
and if caught, he would beconvicted, possibly, of those
various crimes.
Joshua Gilliland (44:41):
There's possibly a conspiracy at play,
because Fisk isn't working alone.
There's at least a cateringservice involved to deliver a
meal like that.
And whoever is feeding Adam?
Because I doubt the mayor isswinging by with food, so that
(45:02):
there's some lackey at play.
So two people for a conspiracy.
There's some lackey at play, sotwo people for a conspiracy, so
we could tack that on Chris anythoughts on on this?
Kris Butler (45:18):
or, more importantly, how do you process
sitting mayor?
Yeah, I mean the I think we seekind of going on in New York
City right now.
It would have to be the JusticeDepartment more than likely to
bring charges and correct me ifI'm wrong, your Honor, but only
the governor.
Besides, maybe a recall onlythe governor could remove the
(45:41):
mayor from.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Ret (45:42):
In New York?
There's no recall.
So the governor would have toremove the kingpin and then,
once he's removed, either thestate or the federal government
could charge him in as much ashe is guilty of committing some
state crime issues With thecurrent mayor, mayor Adams.
(46:03):
The charges are federal innature, so it could only have
been brought by the federalagencies and the Department of
Justice.
Kris Butler (46:13):
I also wonder you know where was Adam when he got
kidnapped?
Because, let's say, he was inNew Jersey, you know, and now
it's a federal crime, could youkidnap to cross state lines?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Re (46:23):
Yes , that would definitely make it
a federal crime.
Joshua Gilliland (46:32):
It's super dangerous, uh, I mean bad life
choice.
Bad life choice, uh, and now wehave multiple felonies taking
place, a whole bunch of them.
I do want to highlight thatthere used to be a cause of
action called alienation ofaffection.
I think virtually every state,with the exception of four or
(46:53):
five, has knocked it off thebooks.
Uh, and it's the well, I'lljust say it's the mommy kissing
santa claus scenario that youknow what's daddy's recourse in
that situation.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Re (47:07):
New York just removed the adultery
crime from its penal law lastyear.
Wow, and in a matter of trivia,there really haven't been many,
if any, modern defendantscharged with adultery.
Joshua Gilliland (47:40):
However, one case of note.
The defendant was charged withadultery.
The case of Amy.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (47:43):
Fisher back in the day.
Joshua Gilliland (47:44):
Oh my, oh, wow , he was actually Joey Bofoco
was charged and convicted ofadultery as part of that
criminal case I remember theSaturday Night Lives with all
the parodies of all the TVmovies about that.
Wow, oh boy, last, last year.
(48:08):
That's late.
That's late to the party of uh,because that it's like for
alienation of affection.
It's just against public policy.
Like suing the paramour is justnot.
Something like that happens.
Uh, it's just again.
There's only a handful ofstates left and I think the
(48:30):
numbers decreased since I lastdid legal research on it.
But boy, howdy, I do want toraise this tease that they had.
We have Latvia, mentioned twice, we have the ADA and we have
the Latvian embassy.
(48:51):
Dr Doom is from Latveria, veryclose, close in spelling.
You know you have an E in DrDoom's country.
But it was like, hey, is this a?
You know?
Initially, after watching itwith the subtitles on, I was
like okay, they're not doing asoft launch of Dr Doom's home
(49:15):
country in this.
But I was initially kind ofexcited for is this, are they
going there?
And the answer is no, no, theydid not.
Kris Butler (49:26):
Yeah, my brother said the same thing while we
were watching it and I was justlike no, I don't think so, just
because I was like they're notgonna, they're not gonna put
that in.
I mean, granted, daredevil is avery popular show, so if they
were going to put it in a tvshow, this would be the one to
do it.
But no, I think they're goingto save that for Fantastic Four.
Joshua Gilliland (49:48):
Yeah, but again I was initially I mean
Judge Cherino and I tradedmessage.
I was like, is this a softintro of second watching with
subtitles?
I was like, no, just different,if you had that number of
(50:16):
people from Dr Doom's countryliving in the United States,
that it's a thing that peopleknow about it.
So I digress.
People know about it, so Idigress anyway.
Uh, thank you all for tuning in.
Is there anything for the goodof the order?
Either of you would like toshare.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino ( (50:36):
Can't wait for the next episode.
Yep same love it.
Joshua Gilliland (50:40):
so, uh, for those going to wonder, con
friday 4 pm uh, the legal Geekswill be speaking on YAR.
The Pirates of Star Wars Superexcited.
Been working on the slides.
Gonna have a good time, andChris and I and others will be
in Tokyo for Star WarsCelebration.
So if you're going ping us, itshould be a good time.
(51:03):
And everyone, wherever you are,stay safe, stay stay healthy
and stay geeky, take care.
Hello everyone , my name is Joshua Gilliland.
One of the founding attorneysof the Legal Geeks With me to
discuss episode 4 of DaredevilBorn Again is retired judge Matt
Sherino and Chris Butler.
Your Honor, how are you tonight?
I am well.
Thank you very much, joshExcellent and Chris.
(00:25):
How are you tonight?
I am well.
Thank you very much, joshExcellent and Chris.
How are you doing.
Kris Butler (00:28):
I'm great, I'm doing what looks like better
than Frank Castle's doing.
Joshua Gilliland (00:34):
He looked rough.
I mean, needs vitamin D, needsa razor?
Yeah, there's a lot going onthere, so let's break this down.
This is, I think, an extremelywell-acted episode when we get
to the exchange betweenDaredevil and the Punisher, but
(00:57):
we got some work to do before weget there, and so, chris, let's
talk about the medical examinerwith the white tiger.
My immediate reaction was likewho gets the belongings?
Did you have any thoughts?
And then we'll pivot to JudgeReno.
Kris Butler (01:20):
Yeah, one of my favorite subjects from law
school is states and trusts, soI looked up to New York law and
(01:55):
so it's similar to what I haveexperienced with here, where
it's sort of you know, thedecedent Hector in this case has
a spouse, then the spouseinherits anything, especially if
they, if they have no kidswhich I were pretty sure Hector
had no kids, right?
I think they didn't sayanything, like she was pregnant.
So then his wife getseverything, gets everything.
But if he had kids and nospouse, then the kids get
everything.
If they have both, then howthey break down the assets is
(02:16):
the spouse gets the first$50,000 plus half of the
remaining balance and then thechildren get everything else.
And if no spouse or kids,parents of the decedent get
everything.
And if he only has siblings,then the siblings get everything
.
Joshua Gilliland (02:29):
Your Honor, your thoughts, with the lawyer,
seeing the medical examiner andgetting effectively an evidence
bag which on one level surprisedme because I thought wouldn't
this be evidence, but the lawyerleaves with the bag and we see
an encounter with the niece.
What were your thoughts?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (02:49):
Yeah , and as much as this is
basically his personal property,I could see the medical
examiner giving it to his lawyerif the lawyer is a known entity
to safeguard it, either as theexecutor of the estate or just
as someone that knows the family, so would be able to turn it
over to the familyor of theestate, or just as someone that
knows the family, so would beable to turn it over to the
family.
And, as Chris said, theproperty for the bulk of it is
(03:12):
going to go to the wife.
These did not seem to be peopleof great means, so pretty much
the wife would have inheritedeverything.
Additionally to that first$50,000, there is a long list of
household and personal propertyitems that would automatically
kind of like a Homestead Acttype of thing that also
(03:33):
automatically goes to the spouse, and then the assets are
divided out, as Chris juststated as Chris just stated.
Joshua Gilliland (03:43):
Well said, it's a reminder of intestate
secession, with a wrinkle ofcriminal procedure in there as
well.
So all kinds of Good barquestion, right?
Yeah a lot of crossing thestreams.
So what's happening here?
So we then have the issue thatthe lawyer is rightly upset.
(04:06):
His client got killed andraises the issue of that.
There was no shell casing.
And the medical examiner islike, hey, not on the body, not
me, I'm cool, I was not at thescene.
Like that's not my bailiwick.
So Matt eventually goes anddoes a borderline scientific
(04:28):
investigation to figure outwhere the shell casing could be
by letting a bottle roll downand letting gravity do its thing
to find out where the bottlelands.
In order to figure out where ashell casing could land, the
lawyer's turning himself into awitness at this stage.
But uh, chris, did you have anythoughts and reactions to that
(04:51):
issue?
Kris Butler (04:51):
yeah, well, so you, you uh have this where he's
being scientific, but also whenhe um confronts the cop, um,
because he's listening to hisheartbeat.
Uh, you know, because mattmurdoch is a human lie detector,
not only just with sound, butalso when it comes to, like the,
the pheromones and detecting asweat that he can with people.
(05:12):
So he did that.
So this was a another extensionof his uh excellent hearing,
which I thought was cool.
But, yeah, he, he set himselfup to to be a witness, like,
let's say, it was the cop thatyou know, did it the one he
confronted?
Because not only do you havehim as a witness, cherry could
be a witness to witnessintimidation from the last case,
(05:35):
uh, so it seems like the onlyperson at the firm that could
not be uh held or held as awitness is, um, uh, kristen
mcduffie.
Joshua Gilliland (05:45):
Yeah, the other attorney, the yeah, taking
cherry with him could havehelped solve that issue.
But this also raises thequestion about is there like,
who would he be representing?
Like, if he's trying to gatherevidence to make you know, find
out what happened to his client,that's not necessarily
(06:05):
something being done in thescope of representation.
Kris Butler (06:07):
It's falling into a different category uh, because,
unless he's setting up for asimple suit, yeah, then which
would then change?
Joshua Gilliland (06:15):
because it's then lawyers witness and that's
something we need to avoid.
It's there's only rareexceptions when that could be
allowed, but it it's generally.
We don't want lawyers to bewitnesses.
Your Honor, your reaction tothe scene.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Ret) (06:35):
I think he's basically accepted
the fact that there's not goingto be much of an investigation
with regards to the White Tigersmurder.
So he's going to take it uponhimself, maybe, to see what
happened and, as Chris said, Ithink that it's possible that
there might be a wrongful deathaction if he does find out that
(06:57):
the person who either ordered itor the government entity that
partook in it has deep enoughpockets to bother to sue, and in
which case he would probablyhave to, at that point, turn it
over to another law firm to dobecause, yes, he would be a
witness in as much as he's theone who found the smoking shell.
Joshua Gilliland (07:24):
Which brings us to the issue of confronting
the detective at the courthouse.
I was not surprised that thecop didn't have a reaction that
he was involved with the killingof the white tiger, like it was
(07:44):
not him.
And I was not surprised by that, but I found it interesting
with, well, who did so?
It's not that easy of an answer.
There are the Marvel shows andStar Wars shows where it's
painfully obvious, like you know, somebody who's the reveal,
(08:05):
stranger and the Acoly acolyteagain, painfully obvious.
This is not one of thosepainfully obvious moments of who
who's doing this.
So, uh, I'm curious to seewhere this goes um.
But that then raises uh, whatwill happen shortly?
Uh, we, we have.
(08:25):
You know the reason why.
Matt's at the courthouse.
He has a new client, somebodywho's really had a rough go at
life, a long rap sheet, sohistory of getting into trouble.
And and the dude sold fiddlefaddle caramel court, something
(08:47):
that's tasty.
Dude is poor, struggling to getby eating scraps truly horrible
life situation.
And he wanted something sweetand he does all these weird
arguments of I paid for it lastweek.
It's like, well, that's not howthis works you know, yeah,
(09:09):
maybe it was a scroll.
Yeah, I, I was impressed theywent there um valid legal
defense super, it wasn't ascroll.
Yeah, it's dude like the.
The scroll defense I don'tthink is gonna to fly.
That might happen once andeveryone goes no no, we're not,
but again, it's a niceacknowledgement of secret
(09:29):
invasion and Captain Marvel andthe fact that you know there are
scrolls among them in society.
Now, so cool, your Honor, yourthoughts.
Because you presided for manyyears, You've seen a lot.
What was your reaction to thisindividual who clearly struggled
(09:52):
?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (09:52):
Yeah , yeah, and New York versus
Leroy Bradford was a verytelling example of the New York
City criminal justice system,especially before the bail
reform acts of 2020.
And you know he's charged withpedant larceny, which is an a
(10:14):
misdemeanor in violation ofSection 155.25, which is
basically stealing any kind ofproperty, and you know, sitting
in arraignments I had many many,many, many, many of these cases
that came before me and itactually presented a very
accurate portrayal of thosesituations and the conversations
(10:35):
that lawyers had with theirclients with regards to those
situations that happened everynight over and over again, and
it generally was before the bailreform acts of 2020, the system
where you would get anescalation.
So the first time that youshoplift, you might get an ACD,
(10:58):
which is a adjournment incontemplation of dismissal,
which means that if you stay outof trouble for X amount of
months usually six then the casegets dismissed and sealed.
You would probably be able toplead it down to a violation of
disorderly conduct, maybe with aday of community service, maybe
(11:23):
with no days of communityservice, depending on the amount
that you stole.
The next time that you did, itwould definitely be with a
couple of days of communityservice, and probably the fourth
time that you get caughtstealing something, they would
make you plead to themisdemeanor charge, probably
with time served.
And then the time after thatmaybe 10 days, the time after
(11:46):
that, maybe 30 days, 60 days, 90days and it reaches a point
where, if you've done like threeor four of them, the
prosecution is no longer goingto make any offer and they would
say to me that this is anoperation spotlight case, your
honor, which means that this isa recidivist and he's going to
keep doing this.
So our offer is an 80 year,which basically means you judge,
(12:08):
make whatever offer you want tomake, uh, and we would use, you
know, the same kind of thing.
Okay, we gave you 30 times last, 30 days, last time, this time
it's going to be 60.
If it's a young enoughindividual with a pretty clean
record, maybe probation.
If it's someone with anextensive record, probation is
not.
(12:28):
Matt was correct in his adviceto Leroy.
He wasn't going to make itprobation.
Probation for an amiss demeanorin New York for this kind of
crime would have been a year.
He would not be reportingdiligently, he would not be
staying out of trouble.
And the problem with theprobation plea and in all
honesty and a lot of times Ididn't offer it if I didn't
(12:51):
think the person had a chance ofdoing it because I thought it
was setting them up for failureand then once they miss
probation or don't report or getarrested for anything else, the
standard of proof for violationof probation is very low.
And then if you're found guiltyof the violation of probation
you do the year.
So you're really setting somepeople up for failure in a
(13:13):
system like that.
Now, in 2020, the bail reformtook place in New York.
Soon thereafter was thepandemic, but even before the
pandemic, we had started toreform our bail laws in New York
and it made most nonviolentcrimes, like these, non-bail
eligible.
So he would not have to facethe situation, because what
(13:38):
would happen to Leroy in?
The common thing is the offerwould be an A in 30 days or an A
in 10 days, as Matt was able toget it barking down with great
results and, because of his pastwarrants, bail would be set and
(14:08):
he would sit in jail until histrial for a much longer amount
of time than the 10 days or the20 days or the 30 days that he
would have gotten to begin with.
So eventually he would comebefore you in an all-purpose
part, as they're schedulingtrials, and the offer would
become an eight-time servebecause you've already served 30
days, time served becauseyou've already served 30 days,
and so the system had a way ofgetting rid of cases, but at the
same time, you had people thatwere basically doing crimes of
poverty sitting in jail eventhough there is a presumption of
(14:31):
innocence for periods of timebecause they could not make bail
.
So New York decided that itwould make most of these
nonviolent crimes non-baileligible.
You are allowed to putconditions as a judge, like
going to supervise release,going to various programs.
Some of those programs thentried to help the people and
(14:56):
then the case would work its waythrough the system.
So New York has tried to getrid of that situation that
happened to Leroy by doing this.
Now, crime did spike.
People argued that the bailreform was the reason for the
spike.
There's arguments on both sidesof that, and some of the bail
(15:19):
reforms were then reformed tomake them a little bit harsher
on the defendants and make iteasier for the judges to set
bail even when they werenonviolent crimes, if they had
just committed one, or whilethey had one case that was going
on, they committed anothercrime that again then made it
bail eligible, even though itwas a nonviolent thing.
(15:41):
So they gave the judgesmechanisms to kind of go back a
little bit towards the oldsystem that Mr Leroy was dealing
with and that's kind of whereNew York currently is within the
world of bail reform and thesekinds of things, and other
(16:02):
cities have done the same thingSan Francisco, portland and
they're struggling with.
Did they reform it too much?
Is that the reason for variouscrime spikes and whether it's
going to change everything?
And you know, the scales ofjustice is a great symbol for
(16:22):
the legal system becauseeverything is a pendulum that
goes back and forth.
Joshua Gilliland (16:29):
It's curious you discussed the Bail Reform
Act because in California we hadkind of a parallel course with
a crime reform act I think itwas prop 47, I might be wrong on
that.
Uh, big born from what happenedin the 1990s.
So in the 1990s, with ourproposition initiatives after
(16:51):
the like, horrific kidnappingand murder of poly class, uh,
like you know, the guy who ranfor attorney general, one of the
Democratic challenger,basically blamed the Republican
for, like, the death of PollyKlass and it backfired in his
campaign like he lost inspectacular fashion because one
(17:12):
of the initiatives you knowbrought in three strikes,
inifornia and that was marketedto voters as, like it's
inherently dangerous felons thatwould, if they commit multiple
crimes, they go away because ofyou know they keep committing
horrible crimes.
Well, it was more strictliability offense, like my
(17:35):
grandfather did, prisonministries and the gentleman
that was incarcerated his crimeswere were dumb, like he was the
dumb bad guy robbed a vendingmachine as his third strike and
then prison for life in SanQuentin.
Well, as a society we got no,no, this went too far and we do
(18:00):
some reforms here, which wasmeant to help, but then people
start freaking out because youhave individuals going into, you
know, big box stores and justwalking out with stuff and I was
like, okay, that ain't right,like that's, that's, you know.
(18:26):
So now retailers are sufferingand so in this past election
cycle we tightened things up.
I'm not quite sure how thingsare going to pan out, because I
think it's a little early.
I'm not a criminal defenseattorney.
This type of law really upsetsme because it's the issue of
like.
We have other problems, youknow problems.
What's driving individuals tocommit crimes?
How do we address those, asopposed to having a, you know,
(18:47):
giving up on rehabilitation andjust going straight to, you know
, a school to prison pipeline,which is I don't agree with.
Uh, so this man's struggle,depicted in this fictional show
with superheroes and aliens, washauntingly disturbing.
Uh, chris, uh, the judge and Ijust talked a lot.
(19:11):
Do you have any thoughts to add?
Kris Butler (19:14):
I mean, I don't have a a lot more to say.
I know that here in Michiganthere was a lot of a slate of
bill reform acts, that bailreform acts that were brought up
(19:35):
last year.
So I just know in my work thatyou know there have been, you
know, inmates just like thejudge talked about had you know,
that were sitting in jail for alengthy time because of covid,
you know.
But because the court systemwas so backlogged because of
(19:58):
covid, you had people sittingthere for nonviolent crimes that
had to be in jail for a lotlonger than they normally would
have.
And that's just the reality ofthe situation.
So I did think it wasinteresting that they brought up
this point and then stayed onit for a while, because even on
you know other shows with for awhile.
(20:22):
Because even on you know othershows with legal shows that like
have like all they do is legaldrama.
Um, sometimes they don't standon things like this for a while.
Joshua Gilliland (20:27):
You may have a five minute scene and then it's
on to something else entirelyyeah, it was thoughtful and well
done and hopefully makes peoplethink, which brings us to, I
believe, your Honor.
You're the one who actuallybroke down the Latin title of
this episode, and could you walkus through that please?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (20:55):
Yeah , the title of this episode was
Sic Semper Systemia or Systemia,and I think it was a play on on
on sick Semper Tyranus, whichwas what John Wilkes Booth
yelled when he killed the tyrant, abraham Lincoln.
Thus thus to all tyrants andthis is thus always to the
systems, systems, and I thinkthat that was the key focus of
(21:21):
this show that you know, thecriminal justice system, the
city government system.
So a lot of this show had todeal with the way systems worked
and I thought that they did areally good job.
Back to Leroy Bradford.
You know that they reallyshowed the lawyer with the
discussion with this client, thelawyer then going out and
having a discussion with the ADAand then the return to the
(21:46):
client.
I mean, as Chris said, theyusually show what won't stick
with it for all of those parts,and they were very accurately.
You know I've overheard many,many of those conversations and
it was very accurately done,including, you know, the
frustration of Leroy Bradfordwho you know recognizes that
(22:08):
this stay in jail will have moreresults in just the time that
is spent in prison, because youknow, you miss your showing up
for your welfare, you missshowing up for other
governmental things and then youlose your apartment that you
have through maybe Section 8 orother government programs.
So the consequences of thosefew days in jail can far
(22:33):
outnumber just those few days.
And granted, you could say andI understand this as well well,
he shouldn't have stolen thecereal, and that's true, he
should not have stolen thecereal.
But should the punishment forstealing a snack, when you're
(22:53):
too poor to buy any food andyou're eating out of dumpsters,
be the loss of your apartment,your government benefits?
You know?
20 days in jail, and some peoplewill say, yes, that's
absolutely what it should be andthat'll stop people from
stealing.
And that is one argument, andthat's a very true argument.
But you know, the system doeshave a way of grinding down the
(23:19):
less fortunate, and it has beenthat way for a long time.
I don't think there's any easysolutions to this, but the fact
that this show brought out thefact that the system acting in
such a way is something fordiscussion, I think, was really
(23:39):
really well done in this episode.
Joshua Gilliland (23:43):
Haunting.
Yeah, just again thoughtful,and again it's a superhero show
and it's making this, you know.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (23:55):
Yeah yeah, it really made you think
and you know, hopefully itreally made you think and, and
you know, hopefully other peoplehave this conversation and I
know these conversations aregoing on, uh, throughout the
country and, and, and you know,in and have been going on for a
very long time among thosepeople that that make criminal
justice reforms and and changes,um, but you know, average Joe
(24:17):
isn't necessarily thinking aboutthis and average Joe might
watch a superhero show and maybethen think about this and maybe
understand a little bit more ofthe other side than he did
before watching the show.
Joshua Gilliland (24:30):
It's.
Here in California there are alot of people living under
bridges and in tents and gulliesthat have jobs Like they've
been knocked down and they can'tget back up and they're still
trying to make ends meet.
And it's just, you know, theirlives can spiral and crash and
recovering from that isprofoundly difficult, and you
(24:53):
know this this fictionalcharacter's struggle is
highlighting.
You know he couldn't go to asocial security meeting unless
lost those benefits and that wasnow eating garbage.
It's like time out like that.
You know the reaction is I hopethat's not really happening.
It's like, oh wait, it does sovery well done so.
(25:17):
Hats off to the creators forputting this together.
Uh, I want to go to the mayorand then then the meeting with
frank castle.
So we have, you know, mayorfisk trying to rule by fiat of
doing urban redevelopment whichwas the theme of daredevil
(25:42):
season one of aggressive urbanredevelopment.
Uh, through, you know, bombingand all you know, gang violence
to I want to make this a niceplace and thus I'm going to kill
a lot of people to do it.
It's not how redevelopmentworks.
He's now mayor and, while Iactually appreciate the intent
(26:05):
of this could be a nice place,let's fix it up.
The reality is I can't justcall a press conference and say
we're going to go fix it up,because it then opens the door.
How's the process actually work?
I'm not sure who added thesenotes.
If it was your honor or Chrison the we built the city mantra,
(26:29):
your honor, why don't you takeit?
You're the first I won't sayresident New Yorker, but the
person who has lived in New York.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (26:40):
I've sat on community boards in New
York and certainly have manyfriends within the city
government.
In fact, the Department ofBuildings Commissioner is a good
friend of mine.
New York has a lot of rules whenit comes to doing anything and
(27:02):
it's very, very frustratingThings that should be done very
simply.
My favorite story is a simple,literally a fire hydrant that
was like five feet into thestreet as opposed to it being on
the sidewalk, and this wasbecause one part of the city,
(27:25):
you know, got the change orderfor moving the street, but the
part of the city that's supposedto move the fire hydrant didn't
get their order and they justneeded to move the fire hydrant
10 feet to basically put it onthe sidewalk because you
couldn't use the street becauseit had a fire hydrant in the
middle of it.
And it literally took sevenyears to move this fire hydrant
(27:49):
and every borough president inStaten Island would update at
his state of the borough thestory of the fire hydrant and it
was just.
It was.
It was really, reallyincredible and unfortunately
that that is the way the cityworks, because it's so large,
there's so many levels of youknow.
(28:11):
Things have to go to thecommunity board and then they
have to go to the the the boardof planners and to the city
planners and then there's to goto the city planners and then it
has to go to the city counciland then you know every agency
gets to weigh in and certainthings the agencies will fight
over each other as to who hasthe jurisdiction of doing it,
(28:31):
and you know this is where Ithink you know the name of the
episode really is true.
That's always the systems, likefighting a tyrant.
Fighting the systems is almostimpossible.
And the children singing webuilt this city is a great
backdrop to the amount of workit actually takes to build a
(28:56):
city.
And Mayor Blumberg, when he wasmayor, he had an interesting
twist.
He got the private industry todo a lot of the building for the
city and then it would eitherbe turned over to the city and
the developer in the area gotcertain easements to allow them
(29:19):
to do certain things that theywanted to do.
So he was very creative inmarrying private funds and
private entities with thegovernment.
But he didn't win all of hisbattles either, and it can be
very frustrating and I'm sure wehave not seen the last of the
(29:43):
mayor, king Payne, losing histemper with regards to trying to
get things done in the city.
Joshua Gilliland (29:52):
The look on his face hearing we built the
city both by schoolchildren atthe latvian embassy.
Like the look of pain on hisface.
I mean this is so well acted.
I mean there's a reason whythis actor is awesome, uh, but
it's just like oh, oh, boy likeI'm, and he's like no, no, I
(30:15):
don't need any more songs, thankyou, we're out of here I read.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Ret) (30:19):
I read a great tid, a great
tidbit on one of the articlesabout the show that when they
first did the students they wereso great that it almost seemed
unbelievable.
Joshua Gilliland (30:29):
So they had to add some less than good
students to make it sound morelike a real class singing, make
it sound more like a real classsinging, like the Harlem boys
choir in the glory soundtrack,you know, just just something
completely over the top.
It's like exactly.
(30:51):
It's like well, you should becrying at the end of it and just
in applauding and wanting moreas opposed to I got to go, kids,
thank you.
Kris Butler (30:58):
Yep.
You're like we'll sing somemore.
No, no, no, I'm good.
Joshua Gilliland (31:02):
I'm good.
You guys are awesome.
Love all of you, bye-bye.
Wow, chris.
Anything to add on the firehydrant in the street scenario?
Kris Butler (31:17):
No, the extent of my legal expertise when it comes
to those things would have beenlike the massive pothole, the,
the road work and all the youknow like.
Is this a county road?
Is this a city road?
Uh, or is it?
This is a state road but countyhas, you know, covers, repairs
or anything like that, so that Imay be able to get into Talking
(31:41):
about seven years worth of howto get this fire hydrant moved
down my wheelhouse.
I don't even think I have thepatience for that.
Joshua Gilliland (31:53):
Redevelopment is horrifically complicated.
I did some doc review on acontract project for one of the
cities in the Bay Area that hadan area to be redeveloped and
(32:14):
the complexity, the maze thathad to be navigated was like, oh
my word, uh, just horriblycomplex.
Uh, it's amazing we get thingsdone and there's a reason why
they're systems, because youknow the questions about, like
an environmental impact study iswhere we have to start.
(32:35):
Okay, it's like it's not a sexypress conference, but I can
understand calling the pressrelease or a news conference and
saying I want to do this stepone and then we're going to the
board like he could outline itand outline a vision.
I don't see a problem with that.
But you're then going to haveto control expectations of
(33:00):
trying to work through a maze ofnow I need to get board members
to agree and vote and god knowshow long the environmental
impact study is going to take.
Yeah, and again, ports, therecould be lots of bad mojo there.
I mean, mean there's uh inAlviso, california, which is
(33:22):
north of the Northern tip of SanJose.
You know, at the end of the19th century, beginning of 20th,
farm produce from SiliconValley which was growing oranges
and you know, produce wasgetting shipped out of there on
on scow scooters, big rectanglesfor sales as the semiconductor
(33:44):
industry built.
All the runoff from thatdevelopment went into the bay
and it landed there, becausethat's the tip of Silicon Valley
.
So all that mud is saturatedwith mercury and other bad stuff
.
And uh, well, there are thosewho want to be able to bring in
(34:04):
mega yachts to go see the 49ersplay, getting through the
remediation to do that, and thenbuild up elviso.
I don't know if I'll see thatin my lifetime, like that's.
Anyway, local governmentcleaning stuff up.
Ports are messy.
(34:24):
Let's talk about.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (34:27):
Look how long the big dig took in
Boston, oh God, I mean.
And granted, it's gorgeous.
It's gorgeous now.
Joshua Gilliland (34:35):
It was very worthwhile to do, but that was
going on for a long time yeah,we just don't crank these out,
and if you do, it's becauseyou're ignoring the environment.
It's like we're just gonna plowthrough this.
I mean, it's one thing to do,it's wartime and you need a
(34:55):
highway system through canada toto Alaska so you can supply
troops.
You know, I get, but even thenthat was slogging through
permafrost and miserable.
I get, we're not going to do anenvironmental impact study
during war.
However, when you don't have awar, you got to play by those
(35:18):
rules.
Don't have a war, you got toplay by those rules.
Speaking of war, let's talkabout this amazing scene with
murdoch confronting castle and Iuh, I think everyone has notes.
So, uh, your honor, I believethis is your note about did the
system bring justice for Foggywith Castle's debate with
(35:39):
Murdoch?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (35:41):
Yeah , but you know, back to the
title of the show, sympathia.
You know they really had aphilosophical dialogue as to
whether or not the systembrought justice to Foggy.
You know the fact that Bullseyeis sitting for the rest of his
(36:01):
life in prison.
You know he's still alive,unlike Foggy.
So, you know, did the systemfail him?
And Frank Castle, you know,keeps tweaking Matt Murdock
about that issue and thedialogue between them is you to
me, emmy, worthy and it.
(36:22):
They were both so good and soreal and you felt that you know
matt's pain while he was having,you know, this argument almost
with himself, because you knowhe's going through this himself.
As to, you know, since he'shung up the red suit is because
(36:44):
he believes in the system and hewants the system to have its
chance to work.
And that dialogue was justincredible.
Kris Butler (36:54):
Yeah, and you think about, at the end of season
three, you know Bullseye had hisback broken so presumably he
was taken into police custodyand he had that you know, spine
repair surgery.
But here we are, seven yearslater and that man is out on the
streets after he did a wholelegion of crimes, of killing
(37:18):
people, assaults across the city.
So you know, if you know notsaying that Frank is right to be
offing people everything.
But you know, did the systemreally work for Foggy, for
someone who also believed in thesystem and was killed by
someone that was not heldaccountable by it?
Joshua Gilliland (37:41):
Yeah, there's, there's so much to this.
I mean again just the actingchops of of both of these
individuals and the what waswritten and what, how it was
shot, just exceptional Cause youhave again Charlie Cox is
(38:01):
tearing up and it's like, okay,well done.
You know, it's like it's it'sso much pain from both of them.
And you know, one disturbingelement was Castle saying that
he keeps hearing his dead sonencouraging revenge, just to go
(38:22):
out and start killing, go outand start killing.
And I found that horrifying,that a little kid, you know like
your memory of your son.
Is him wanting extremeretribution like that?
Okay, it's like again, thepunisher needs therapy, but that
ain't gonna happen, uh, uh.
(38:43):
So that way, you know matt'snot hearing foggy saying kill
them all.
Uh, you know, it's uncle bendidn't tell peter parker.
You know, go on a killing spree, right, you know, like that's
again, it's not what heroes dothey're supposed to be?
Due process, uh, but some ofthe legal things I thought about
(39:03):
is castle's, a former clientand I just want to put out there
, you know.
The question is is discussionprivilege and I'm going to say
no, because there's no currentrepresentation I would say any
prior discussions are protected.
Still, that raises a funkyissue with the crime fraud
exception that a lawyer cannotbe part of helping plan a crime.
(39:27):
I don't think that's takingplace or took place, uh, but if
anything was, here's how you goout on a revenge killing spree
that would not be protected.
Um, but so much there.
Kris Butler (39:50):
Anything else to add on this confrontation them
(40:11):
and, uh, you know, he whentalking about his son, I don't
think he thinks it's a goodthing that he does hear this
voice, but he will acquiesce toit, so I think that will
hopefully lead to when heconfronts some of these copycats
and he's just like I'm notsomeone to emulate.
Joshua Gilliland (40:23):
You know that kind of thing, yeah which
happened to thing which happenedin the comics?
Right, you know again.
The police are supposed touphold the law and not engage in
summary executions.
Kris Butler (40:39):
And.
Joshua Gilliland (40:40):
I just know.
All right, we find out fromtherapy, which would be
privilege.
So there is husband-wifetherapy and we find out that, uh
, there was an affair and that,uh, mayor fisk says he just had
a conversation with adam, theparamour who had relations with
(41:05):
vanessa while Fisk was away, andwe find out that Adam's being
held in a dungeon and Fisk goesand has dinner.
We see the painting Rabbit in aSnowstorm from season one that
has blood splatter on it andthis raises issues that the
(41:27):
mayor has someone locked up fora long time.
Guy has long hair and a beardand he's enjoying what looks
like a very tasty dinner.
Your honor, can you walk usthrough the some of the issues
with this?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (R (41:45):
Sure To go with the things that he
could clearly be charged with.
He would be able to be chargedwith unlawful imprisonment in
the second degree, which ispenal law section 135.05 of New
York's penal law.
A person is guilty of unlawfulimprisonment in the second
degree when he restrains anotherperson.
(42:07):
Restrain is defined in 135.00of the New York Penal Law to
mean restricting a person'smovements intentionally and
unlawfully in such manner as tointerfere substantially with his
or her liberty.
So that's clearly the case inthis situation and that's a
(42:31):
class A misdemeanor.
He would also probably becharged with unlawful
imprisonment in the first degree, which again is that same level
of restraining another person,but in the first degree.
The enhancement is that you'reexposing him to serious physical
injury and the cage and theconditions that he's in arguably
(42:55):
would subject Adam to seriousphysical injury and that would
raise it to a class E felony,which is the lowest level of
felonies.
But he would also mostseriously be able to be charged
with kidnapping in the firstdegree and kidnapping is under
Section 135.25 of the New YorkPenal Law and a person is guilty
(43:18):
of kidnapping in the firstdegree when he abducts another
person.
It's pretty clear from thehistory that he is the one,
since he's the only one thatknows that Adam is there, that
he is the one that abducted orhad Adam abducted.
And abduct means to restrain aperson with intent to prevent
his liberation by eithersecreting or holding him in a
(43:41):
place where he is not likely tobe found.
Clearly, this undergrounddungeon is a place where he's
not likely to be found.
And if on the section two, aplace where he's not likely to
be found, and if on the sectiontwo, if you restrain a person
for a period of greater than 12hours with intent to either
cause physical injury or toterrorize him, you would be
subjected to kidnapping in thefirst degree.
(44:03):
And it's pretty clear from thecircumstances that he's been
there for a while.
As you said, he now has a beard, he looks like he's not being
fed well and is barely alive andclearly wants to leave.
So clearly he is committing atleast one, if not two, felonies
(44:31):
and if caught, he would beconvicted, possibly, of those
various crimes.
Joshua Gilliland (44:41):
There's possibly a conspiracy at play,
because Fisk isn't working alone.
There's at least a cateringservice involved to deliver a
meal like that.
And whoever is feeding Adam?
Because I doubt the mayor isswinging by with food, so that
(45:02):
there's some lackey at play.
So two people for a conspiracy.
There's some lackey at play, sotwo people for a conspiracy, so
we could tack that on Chris anythoughts on on this?
Kris Butler (45:18):
or, more importantly, how do you process
sitting mayor?
Yeah, I mean the I think we seekind of going on in New York
City right now.
It would have to be the JusticeDepartment more than likely to
bring charges and correct me ifI'm wrong, your Honor, but only
the governor.
Besides, maybe a recall onlythe governor could remove the
(45:41):
mayor from.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Ret (45:42):
In New York?
There's no recall.
So the governor would have toremove the kingpin and then,
once he's removed, either thestate or the federal government
could charge him in as much ashe is guilty of committing some
state crime issues With thecurrent mayor, mayor Adams.
(46:03):
The charges are federal innature, so it could only have
been brought by the federalagencies and the Department of
Justice.
Kris Butler (46:13):
I also wonder you know where was Adam when he got
kidnapped?
Because, let's say, he was inNew Jersey, you know, and now
it's a federal crime, could youkidnap to cross state lines?
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Re (46:23):
Yes , that would definitely make it
a federal crime.
Joshua Gilliland (46:32):
It's super dangerous, uh, I mean bad life
choice.
Bad life choice, uh, and now wehave multiple felonies taking
place, a whole bunch of them.
I do want to highlight thatthere used to be a cause of
action called alienation ofaffection.
I think virtually every state,with the exception of four or
(46:53):
five, has knocked it off thebooks.
Uh, and it's the well, I'lljust say it's the mommy kissing
santa claus scenario that youknow what's daddy's recourse in
that situation.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (Re (47:07):
New York just removed the adultery
crime from its penal law lastyear.
Wow, and in a matter of trivia,there really haven't been many,
if any, modern defendantscharged with adultery.
Joshua Gilliland (47:40):
However, one case of note.
The defendant was charged withadultery.
The case of Amy.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino (47:43):
Fisher back in the day.
Joshua Gilliland (47:44):
Oh my, oh, wow , he was actually Joey Bofoco
was charged and convicted ofadultery as part of that
criminal case I remember theSaturday Night Lives with all
the parodies of all the TVmovies about that.
Wow, oh boy, last, last year.
(48:08):
That's late.
That's late to the party of uh,because that it's like for
alienation of affection.
It's just against public policy.
Like suing the paramour is justnot.
Something like that happens.
Uh, it's just again.
There's only a handful ofstates left and I think the
(48:30):
numbers decreased since I lastdid legal research on it.
But boy, howdy, I do want toraise this tease that they had.
We have Latvia, mentioned twice, we have the ADA and we have
the Latvian embassy.
(48:51):
Dr Doom is from Latveria, veryclose, close in spelling.
You know you have an E in DrDoom's country.
But it was like, hey, is this a?
You know?
Initially, after watching itwith the subtitles on, I was
like okay, they're not doing asoft launch of Dr Doom's home
(49:15):
country in this.
But I was initially kind ofexcited for is this, are they
going there?
And the answer is no, no, theydid not.
Kris Butler (49:26):
Yeah, my brother said the same thing while we
were watching it and I was justlike no, I don't think so, just
because I was like they're notgonna, they're not gonna put
that in.
I mean, granted, daredevil is avery popular show, so if they
were going to put it in a tvshow, this would be the one to
do it.
But no, I think they're goingto save that for Fantastic Four.
Joshua Gilliland (49:48):
Yeah, but again I was initially I mean
Judge Cherino and I tradedmessage.
I was like, is this a softintro of second watching with
subtitles?
I was like, no, just different,if you had that number of
(50:16):
people from Dr Doom's countryliving in the United States,
that it's a thing that peopleknow about it.
So I digress.
People know about it, so Idigress anyway.
Uh, thank you all for tuning in.
Is there anything for the goodof the order?
Either of you would like toshare.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino ( (50:36):
Can't wait for the next episode.
Yep same love it.
Joshua Gilliland (50:40):
so, uh, for those going to wonder, con
friday 4 pm uh, the legal Geekswill be speaking on YAR.
The Pirates of Star Wars Superexcited.
Been working on the slides.
Gonna have a good time, andChris and I and others will be
in Tokyo for Star WarsCelebration.
So if you're going ping us, itshould be a good time.
(51:03):
And everyone, wherever you are,stay safe, stay stay healthy
and stay geeky, take care.
Popular Podcasts
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Bobby Bones Show
Listen to 'The Bobby Bones Show' by downloading the daily full replay.