Law and Magic Blog (always worth a read and originally recommended by kalebeul):

I try to do my holiday shopping early, which is why I am on the prowl now.

recommends the Unemployed Philosophers Guild, although I was less taken by the Houdini mug (Houdini disappears if you fill it with coffee) than by some of the post-it notes, such as those featuring Cézanne and Freud, and a Van Gogh birthday card (not so good for Christmas, of course).

If that doesn’t suit, it’s now possible to buy your bust of Karl Marx online, thus saving me a trip to Trier to the Karl Marx Museum.

At the Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., you can download a PDF file of Christmas cards (mysteriously entitled ChristmasCards2006.pdf). The figure of Justice with a robin in one scale is nice, but there’s really time to make one’s own now.

LegalAndrew recommends chopsticks for Chinese-food-loving attorneys.

I have been known to order Christmas cards from the UK or USA, but you have to be careful to check the local postage for the size. Museum shops are always good. One colleague used to send me a Bodleian Library card with a book motif I was very fond of. You can see the 2010 one here called Festive Library:

A lead story on the Sunday edition of the Daily Star is headed PIPPA PERVS: Sick Germans target royal sister.

It takes one to spot one, of course.

Here is the BILD story in German.

Unfortunately, the Star mistook a Google Translate version of the story for BILD’s English website:

The briefs encounter – proudly dubbed the “Panties Blitzer” by the newspaper – shows Pippa revealing all as she gets into a car in London last week.
“When the 27-year-old beauty on Wednesday in London rose in her car, she accidentally granted a glimpse of her panties,” leers the paper in its English language version.
And the mangled caption continues: “With their unwanted Panties Blitzer, Pippa to its reputation as ‘Her Royal Hotness’ fair – not only the British are very excited about her sexy appearance.”

(Via Tabloid Watch – the UK equivalent of BILDblog – the latter is more concerned about allegedly killer cucumbers at present)

Under the heading Air passengers in ‘Lord of the Flies’ mutiny after seven-hour delay, the Evening Standard reported on 27 May:

One witness likened the scene on the Middle East Airlines service to “something from Lord Of The Flies” as passengers raided the galley for meal trays and a Lebanese woman suffered heart palpitations. The flight to Beirut was one of 80 delayed for an average of two hours or cancelled as thunderstorms and winds of up to 40mph battered the country. City worker Jordan Lancaster was among the 250 people who boarded the flight at 1pm. It then missed its departure slot.

Ms Lancaster, a 45-year-old legal translator travelling to an archaological dig, called the Evening Standard at 7pm and said: “It is like something from Lord Of The Flies, people are hysterical. There are at least four babies and lots of elderly people on board.

“The crew have given up trying to explain the situation to people, and it has ended up in fisticuffs. Several men are also arguing with the captain. This guy in his fifties is so worked up he is being given oxygen.”

As Ms Lancaster was talking, a male cabin crew member could be heard over the intercom saying: “If any of our crew have been rude to you, we apologise for that.

Jordan Lancaster runs squaremilelanguages in London. In an interview (interview) she quotes ‘per ardua ad astra’ as her motto, but it took a long time to work on this occasion.

Next time I’m stuck on a plane on the tarmac – it happened at Christmas in Nuremberg, with a pilot from Augsburg Airways who wanted us to be towed into the air – must remember my mobile phone and a journalistic hook like ‘Lord of the Flies’.

(Thanks to Andrew of ITI for the tip-off)

Eversheds have a number of interesting-looking publications on their website. I was drawn there by a tweet by David Turnbullrecommending A European Dictionary of Selected Legal Terms (PDF).

The Dictionary looks like this:

life insurance • assurance-vie • Lebensversicherung • assicurazione sulla vita • seguro de vida

limitation of actions • prescription • gesetzliche Verjährungsfristen • prescrizione • prescripción

liquidated claim (sum) • dette (créance) certaine • ziffernmässig bestimmte Forderung • credito liquido ed esigibile • reclamación de una cantidad precisa
…
loophole (in the law) • lacune (juridique) • Gesetzeslücke, Hintertürchen • scappatoia, via d’uscita (per eludere la legge) • laguna legal

But much more interesting is the PDF on Legal drafting in English. This is actually, unlike what it sounds like, a ragbag of useful observations on legal English.

For instance, there’s a list of legal English terms that have entered other languages, notes on Scottish, Australian, Canadian, Indian and Irish legal English, and criminal law terms with their approximate equivalents in UK, US, Canada and Australia (I missed the term perp walk – but I suppose it’s uniquely US). Particularly useful are hints on what British English won’t work in the USA (I do dislike whilst):

A word about “whilst” and “as”. In standard British English, “whilst” is often used to mean “during the time that”. This usage is very rare in the USA (Americans would use “while”). “Whilst” and “while” can also mean “although”, “despite the fact that”. When you have those meanings in mind, use “although” or “despite the fact that”. The conjunction “as” is often used in British English to mean “because”: Example: “As no other student seemed to know the answer, Mary spoke up and had the correct information.” The meaning will be clearer to more people if you use “because”, or “since”, rather than “as”.

And there are some references to other language too. There is a glossary of false friends and a bibliography. Well worth a look.

(In drafting advice from past masters, I wonder why they give Confucius in Chinese as K’ung Ch’iu – OK, that was his name, but it’s not that usual and not very pinyin either).

I had heard some positive opinions on LinkedIn, but I don’t want to join yet. It seems, however, that unless you’re a member you can’t ask them to stop contacting you, or if you do send them a request, they assume you are a member. Here is the sorry tale:

May 7
From: Mr Linkee (I ‘know’ him)

> To: [mail@mmarks.eu]
From: linkee@aol.com]
Subject: Invitation to connect on LinkedIn
I’d like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn.
– L

May 7
From MM to Linkee

No thank you – I don’t use LinkedIn.
Regards
Margaret Marks

May 10
From: Mr Linkee

Reminder about your invitation from Mr Linkee

LinkedIn
This is a reminder that on May 7, Mr Linkee sent you an invitation to become part of his or her professional network at LinkedIn.
Follow this link to accept Mr Linkee’s invitation.
https://www.linkedin.com/e/…..
Signing up is free and takes less than a minute.

The only way to get access to Mr Linkee’s professional network on LinkedIn is through the following link:
https://www.linkedin.com/e/…
You can remove yourself from Mr Linkee’s network at any time.
LinkedIn Survey Invitation

One more reminder came.

May 16
From MM

Hi L
… Would you please please arrange to stop sending me invitations to LinkedIn? Thanks!

May 16
From: Mr Linkee

Hi Margaret,
How many invites have you had from Linkedin? I only joined them nine days ago.

May 18
From helpful LinkedIn member on mailing list:

Margaret,

Based on your question, I sent a support request to LinkedIn. They have responded, and you might be interested (see below).
The problem is, they don’t say how a non-member should contact them. I’ll ask.
In the meantime, I suggest that you write to
– abuse@linkedin.com
– legal@linkedin.com and/or
– privacy@linkedin.com

==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ====

Member By Web Form (…) – 05/16/2011 12:33
I am a LinkedIn member but I know someone who is not, and they do not want to receive any more invitations to join.
Is there any way for LinkedIn to put those email addresses on a “Do Not Invite” or “Do Not Contact” list?
==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ====
We can put email addresses to ” do not contact” list those who dont wish to get any communication from linkedin.
However for privacy reason we need the person’s consent to put into ” do not contact” list.
Please know that once the email address is put into ” do not contact ” list you will no longer receive any email from LinkedIn or our members on this email address. If you decide at a later date that you want to set up a LinkedIn account, you will need to first contact us to have your email address removed from the “do not contact” list.

Thank you for being a valued member of our LinkedIn community!

Santobroto
LinkedIn Customer Service

May 18
From MM

Dear LinkedIn,

This is a copy of the first of *three* invitations I have received now to
join a “professional network” on LinkedIn.
Despite my refusing them, they kept coming.
Would you please stop me receiving invitations.
Thank you and regards

Margaret Marks

May 18
From LinkedIn

LinkedIn Customer Support Message
Subject: Invitation to connect on LinkedIn
We’ve received your message and we’re working to get you an answer. If you have a Premium account or you’re a LinkedIn Ads customer, we strive to reply within 24 hours. For all other members, we do our best to respond within 48 hours…but at times we do see delays. We’ll get back to you soon!
Original Contact:
Member Comment: Margaret Marks 05/18/2011 13:03

May 20
From LinkedIn

LinkedIn Customer Support Message
Subject: Invitation to connect on LinkedIn
Hi Margaret,

Thank you for contacting LinkedIn Customer Service.

I’m sorry for the inconvenience these messages have caused. Members who say they know you have used that email address to send you an invitation to join their LinkedIn network.

You don’t need to have the email registered to a LinkedIn account or be a LinkedIn member to receive these invitations. However, if you don’t ever want to receive LinkedIn invitations, please let me know and I’ll promptly block this email address. This will prevent members from sending you LinkedIn messages and also prevent the email address from being used to open a LinkedIn account in the future.

LinkedIn is the world’s largest professional network with millions of members. We help you control your professional online identity and exchange information with trusted connections and be good at what you do. To learn more about LinkedIn you can go to http://learn.linkedin.com/what-is-linkedin.

Should you choose to reply, I’ll add your email address to our “do not contact” list.

I look forward to hearing your response in order to further assist you.

Sunita
LinkedIn Customer Service

I did reply and ask to be blocked.

May 20

LinkedIn Customer Support Message
Subject: Invitation to connect on LinkedIn
Hi Margaret,

Thank you for the confirmation email.

Per your request, the email provided has been added to our “do not contact” list. You will no longer receive any email from LinkedIn or our members on this email address. If you decide at a later date that you want to set up a LinkedIn account, you will need to first contact us to have your email address removed from the “do not contact” list.

Regards,

Sunita
LinkedIn Customer Service

The meaning of no longer receiving any email from LinkedIn or their members at this email address remains obscure, in view of the following received today:

May 22
From LinkedIn

Hi Margaret,

You recently contacted our Customer Support Team. As a valued member of LinkedIn, you’ve been selected to participate in a survey regarding your most recent experience with us. The survey will take about 2 minutes to complete and your feedback will be used to help us improve our service to you.

The details of your experience are as follows:
Member Initiated Subject Line: Invitation to connect on LinkedIn
Date of Contact: 05/18/2011 13:40
Reference Number: 110518-002687

Please click here to take the survey.
Your satisfaction matters to us and we hope that you’ll take a couple minutes to help us in our quest for excellence in service.

Image ~ LinkedIn Operations ~
If you do not wish to receive any more invitations to participate in support surveys, click here.

A bit of googling did indicate that you can invite someone to be a contact rather than inviting them to join your professional network. But both, I imagine, are intended to go to other members.

LATER NOTE:

May 23
From LinkedIn

Hi Margaret,

I truly apologize for the inconvenience this has caused you.

You will no longer receive any email from LinkedIn or our members on this email address.

Regards,

Sunita
LinkedIn Customer Service

Via Michael Bohlander’s page at Durham University, a PDF file of a paper on Basic Concepts of German Criminal Procedure – a modified version of a chapter of his forthcoming book Principles of German Criminal Procedure, Hart Publishing 2011.

One of the major distinctions often heard about the German as a member of the family of continental legal systems is that its procedure is inquisitorial as opposed to the common law adversarial model. But what does that really mean? Is it all encapsulated in the role of the judge, or are there other features that define the character of the German procedure as inquisitorial? Is it actually still useful to use the terminology of “inquisitorial vs. adversarial”? Does “inquisitorial” not tend to convey connotations that remind us of medieval practices involving dungeons, torture, extorted confessions, draconic punishments and the personal union of prosecutor, judge and executioner in the figure of the inquisitor, or a burden on the defendant to prove their innocence etc.? Is the standard of proof in the continental systems, sometimes called intime conviction according to its
French variant or freie Überzeugung in German, really lower than the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard that common lawyers tend to be so proud of? A quick look at the law will teach us that none of these worrisome features are part and parcel of the German approach, and indeed any modern continental procedure, even if some very high level common law practitioners and academics that I have met over the years seem to think that, for example, continental inquisitorial systems do not have an equivalent to the 5th Amendment in the US Constitution and that an accused has to cooperate with the prosecution in her own trial and prove her innocence.

I must admit I have no problems with the term inquisitorial, but I remember Sharon Byrd introducing an alternative term – she refuses to call the continental system inquisitorial, and instead calls it accusatorial (I had to look that up). I see no reason why a word shouldn’t have a variety of meanings. (Where did I see a cartoon this week with the caption ‘Nobody ever expects the Spanish revolution’?) In a footnote, Bohlander suggests the term judge-led.