WordRake generates an entertaining periodic email warning against legalese tomfoolery. Today's contribution:
Two Ways to Tell a Judge You Have No Case:
First, ask for an extension, the more pages the better. . . .
Second, write something snide, hyperbolic, condescending, or obsequious. Or all four . . . .
[This case] is the stuff of which Turow best sellers and other works of "legal fiction" are made, and by which no jurist, either de jure or de facto, would wish to be remembered, but as to which the current chapter is about to be written by the august members of this select Panel -- albeit in a strangly oxymoronic, yet altogether predictable, "unpublished" fashion the very nature of which . . . ." Castillo v. Koppes-Conway, 148 P. 3d 298 (2006).
You get the point.
I can see he's not an SJA with the JAG. Not abbreviate, indeed! How then would the BN CDR send a pithy warning from the TOC to the BN reminding them that OPSEC is to be maintained at all times, but especially once you SP on patrol off the COP or FOB? A CO last week had COMCAM catch them in the act of OPSEC violations with LNs, whose possible affiliation with AQI puts the whole BN HQ at risk. Worse, the pictures got to G7, who passed it to the CG, who is breathing down the COL's neck up at the BCT. And I don't much like hearing from the old man, so square it up out there.
ReplyDelete