Podcasts about child victims act

Lesa Amoore and Paris Chong discuss the darker side of the modeling industry, transitioning from lighthearted talk about topless modeling and photographers to the serious issue of abuse and exploitation. They recall Carrie Otis speaking out about her experiences with Gerald Marie of Elite Paris and delve into the broader issue of predators in the industry, referencing Me Too, Mario Testino, and Terry Richardson. Amoore highlights the work of Model Alliance and the passage of laws like the Child Victims Act, Adult Survivors Act, and Fashion Workers Act to protect models. They express concern over the lack of accountability for enablers and the ongoing prevalence of abuse, even in other industries like music. Both women agree that the industry can be predatory and express their reasons for not wanting their sons to become models due to these concerns.Show Clip from The Paris Chong Show with Lesa Amoorehttps://youtu.be/1JDlqPtIr0Qhttps://www.theparischongshow.com

Lesa Amoore, renowned photographer and former model, joins Paris Chong on The Paris Chong Show for a fascinating conversation. They reminisce about past collaborations, including pop-up events and photo shoots with celebrities like Bella and Gigi Hadid. Lesa shares insights into her creative process, discussing her transition from fashion photography to capturing more natural elements like animals and plants. She also recounts memorable moments from shoots, such as using an underwater camera and a serendipitous pool/pond location, highlighting the unexpected mistakes and happy accidents that often lead to stunning results.The discussion takes a serious turn as Lesa and Paris address the darker side of the modeling industry. They discuss the experiences of Carrie Otis and the prevalence of abuse and exploitation, particularly in the pre-internet era. Lesa, a member of the Model Alliance, sheds light on the legislative efforts to protect models and support survivors, such as the Child Victims Act and the Fashion Workers Act. They condemn the individuals who have gotten away with harmful behavior and emphasize the need for accountability and change within the industry.Ultimately, the conversation underscores the complex realities of the fashion and photography world, blending anecdotes of creative collaboration with a frank discussion of its challenges. Lesa's experiences, both in front of and behind the camera, offer a unique perspective on the industry's evolution and the ongoing fight for safety and ethical practices. This episode provides a candid look into Lesa Amoore's career, her artistic journey, and her advocacy for change.Show Notes:www.theparischongshow.com/episodes/lesa-amoore-photographer-and-former-model-promotes-advocacy-for-fashion-workersChapters:(00:00:00) Intro(00:00:31) Lesa Amoore(00:01:22) New Work(00:03:33) Pond and a Pool(00:08:39) Modeling(00:09:58) Model Alliance(00:14:47) 60 Minutes Interview(00:20:50) French Connection(00:23:49) Modeling Industry Changing(00:27:25) Pizza Night(00:31:02) What's Next?(00:36:14) Where Can We See More?(00:40:26) The Fashion Workers Act(00:42:26) Outro

Join the conversation with C4 & Bryan Nehman.  C4 & Bryan kicked off the show this morning discussing Gov. Moore's gaggle with the press over the budget.  20% of healthcare workers are attacked on the job.  City Council President Zeke Cohen joined the show discussing the ongoing issue with BGE rates, DPW & the impact the budget will have on Baltimore City.  Orioles Broadcaster Geoff Arnold recapped yesterday's big win over Toronto on Opening Day. C4 & Bryan also discussed the Child Victims Act.   Listen to C4 & Bryan Nehman live weekdays from 5:30 to 10am on WBAL News Radio 1090, FM 101.5 & the WBAL Radio App.

John Pollock and Brandon Thurston cover the latest involving the Ring Boy lawsuit and the Janel Grant case.The Ring Boy lawsuit will continue after the Maryland Supreme Court's ruling this week to uphold the Child Victims Act. Since the ruling, additional survivors have joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs. The amended complaint was filed by Janel Grant's legal team last Friday with new details and names attached and we will go through all the key points outlined in the 101-page filing.Plus: Stephanie McMahon appears on The Pat McAfee Show, WWE Royal Rumble business notes, latest Netflix viewership charts, and WWE is launching EVOLVE on Tubi.RELATED:Janel Grant expands lawsuitAdditional plaintiffs join Ring Boy lawsuitMaryland Supreme Court upholds Child Victims ActWWE promotes the success of the Royal Rumble   WWE EVOLVE announced on Tubi Music courtesy: “Panic Beat” by Ben TramerPOST WrestlingSubscribe: https://postwrestling.com/subscribePatreon: http://postwrestlingcafe.comForum: https://forum.postwrestling.comDiscord: https://discord.com/invite/Q795HhRMerch: https://store.postwrestling.comTwitter/Facebook/Instagram/YouTube: @POSTwrestlingBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/postwrestling.comWrestlenomicsSubscribe: https://wrestlenomics.com/podcast/Patreon: https://patreon.com/wrestlenomicsSubstack: https://wrestlenomics.substack.com/Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/YouTube: @WrestlenomicsBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/wrestlenomics.comAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

John Pollock and Brandon Thurston cover the latest involving the Ring Boy lawsuit and the Janel Grant case.The Ring Boy lawsuit will continue after the Maryland Supreme Court's ruling this week to uphold the Child Victims Act. Since the ruling, additional survivors have joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs. The amended complaint was filed by Janel Grant's legal team last Friday with new details and names attached and we will go through all the key points outlined in the 101-page filing.Plus: Stephanie McMahon appears on The Pat McAfee Show, WWE Royal Rumble business notes, latest Netflix viewership charts, and WWE is launching EVOLVE on Tubi.VIDEO VERSION: https://youtube.com/live/TVHpSWOh2ZQRELATED:Janel Grant expands lawsuitAdditional plaintiffs join Ring Boy lawsuitMaryland Supreme Court upholds Child Victims ActWWE promotes the success of the Royal Rumble   WWE EVOLVE announced on Tubi Music courtesy: “Panic Beat” by Ben TramerPOST WrestlingSubscribe: https://postwrestling.com/subscribePatreon: http://postwrestlingcafe.comForum: https://forum.postwrestling.comDiscord: https://discord.com/invite/Q795HhRMerch: https://store.postwrestling.comTwitter/Facebook/Instagram/YouTube: @POSTwrestlingBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/postwrestling.comWrestlenomicsSubscribe: https://wrestlenomics.com/podcast/Patreon: https://patreon.com/wrestlenomicsSubstack: https://wrestlenomics.substack.com/Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/YouTube: @WrestlenomicsBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/wrestlenomics.comSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/wrestlenomics-radio2532/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Deep Dive into Wrestling Legal Battles and Monopolistic Behavior | Bodyslam BriefsIn this long-overdue episode of Bodyslam Briefs, Jeff, also known as EvilDose and in-house counsel for the Wrestling Soup Network, covers a range of pressing legal matters within the wrestling world. Jeff delves into the Janelle Grant case, the transition of U.S. Attorneys in the Southern District of New York, and the ongoing legal saga involving WWE's handling of sexual offense allegations. He also explains the nuances between monopoly, monopolistic behavior, and antitrust laws, using wrestling examples. The episode also explores Maryland's constitutionality challenge of the Child Victims Act, which impacts the Ring Boy lawsuit. Jeff promotes his podcast, Garden of Doom, and its unique content as well.00:00 Introduction and Host Background00:33 Current Legal Issues in Wrestling01:12 Janelle Grant Case Analysis07:03 Monopoly and Antitrust in Wrestling12:30 Ring Boy Lawsuit Overview22:56 Conclusion and Podcast PromotionBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/wrestling-soup--1425249/support.

Dec. 2, 2024 - New York Law Journal litigation reporter Brian Lee talks about a unique case before the state's top court that questions the effective date of the Child Victims Act.

In the latest episode of BODYSLAM BRIEFS, Evil Dos Jeff Lippman takes listeners on a journey through the legal intricacies of the wrestling world. As the in-house general counsel, Jeff brings a unique perspective to the table, shedding light on the fascinating intersection of law and wrestling history.This episode delves into the infamous Ring Boy case, a scandal that rocked the wrestling world in the early 1990s. Jeff revisits the details of the case, explaining how it has resurfaced in the legal arena today. With key figures like Vince McMahon and Linda McMahon named in the lawsuit, the case has garnered significant attention.One of the pivotal points of discussion is the Child Victims Act of 2023, recently enacted in Maryland. This legislation allows survivors of child sexual abuse to file civil lawsuits without the constraints of a statute of limitations. Jeff explains how this law has opened the door for the Ring Boy case to be revisited, offering a fresh perspective on the legal battles that ensue.Listeners are introduced to the concept of the discovery rule and the statute of limitations, as Jeff breaks down the legal jargon into digestible insights. He highlights the challenges of proving a case with events that occurred over three decades ago, emphasizing the importance of contemporary evidence and documentation.As the episode progresses, Jeff explores the potential liabilities faced by WWE and TKO Holdings, raising questions about jurisdiction and the responsibilities of parent companies. He delves into the legal strategies that may come into play and speculates on the likelihood of settlement, given that over 90% of cases tend to resolve outside of court.For wrestling fans and legal enthusiasts alike, this episode offers a captivating blend of history, law, and insider knowledge. Jeff Lippman's expertise shines through as he navigates the complexities of the case, providing listeners with a comprehensive understanding of the legal landscape surrounding wrestling controversies.If you're a fan of legal analysis and wrestling, this episode is a must-listen. Catch it now and be sure to follow for more expert commentary and exclusive content!

For this podcast episode, I had the opportunity to sit down with Steven Clark, a courageous survivor of childhood sexual abuse, and his legal team, attorneys Aaron Blank and Guy D'Andrea. Steven's case has garnered significant attention, as it has reached the Maryland Supreme Court, raising critical questions about the constitutionality of the Child Victims Act.In our conversation, Aaron and Guy provide an in-depth explanation of the legal battle they've been fighting on Steven's behalf. They discuss the recent hearing in Hartford County where they successfully defended the validity of the Child Victims Act against a motion to dismiss by the Board of Education. This law, which extends or eliminates deadlines for survivors to bring claims, is being challenged as unconstitutional.Now, with the Maryland Supreme Court taking up the case, the stakes couldn't be higher. The Court's decision will not only impact Steven's pursuit of justice but could also influence the future of many others who have suffered similar trauma. The outcome will determine whether the Child Victims Act stands as a beacon of hope for survivors or if it will be struck down, closing the door on their opportunity for legal redress.Join us as we delve into the complexities of this case, explore the potential implications of the Supreme Court's ruling, and hear from Steven himself about his journey and fight for justice.✖️✖️✖️Support the Show: Patreon.com/PreacherBoys✖️✖️✖️If you or someone you know has experienced abuse, visit courage365.org/need-help✖️✖️✖️CONNECT WITH THE SHOW:preacherboyspodcast.comhttps://www.youtube.com/@PreacherBoyshttps://www.facebook.com/preacherboysdoc/https://twitter.com/preacherboysdochttps://www.instagram.com/preacherboyspodhttps://www.tiktok.com/@preacherboyspodTo connect with a community that shares the Preacher Boys Podcast's mission to expose abuse in the IFB, join the OFFICIAL Preacher Boys Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1403898676438188/This episode is sponsored by/brought to you by BetterHelp. Give online therapy a try at betterhelp.com/PreacherBoys and get on your way to being your best self.Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/preacher-boys-podcast/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Growing up in suburban New York, Dylan lived through the unfathomable: three years as a victim of sex trafficking at the hands of Vincent, a troubled young man who promised to marry Dylan when he turned eighteen. Years later--long after a police investigation that went nowhere, and after the statute of limitations for the crimes perpetrated against him have run out--the long shadow of Dylan's trauma still looms over the fragile life in the city he's managed to build with his fiancé, Moans, who knows little of Dylan's past. His continued existence depends upon an all-important mantra: To survive, you live through it, but never look back. Then a groundbreaking new law--the Child Victims Act--opens a new way foreword: a one-year window during which Dylan can sue his abusers. But for someone who was trafficked as a child, does money represent justice--does his pain have a price? As Dylan is forced to look back at what happened to him and try to make sense of his past, he begins to explore a drug and sex-fueled world of bathhouses, clubs, and strangers' apartments, only to emerge, barely alive, with a new clarity of purpose: a righteous determination to gaze, unflinching, upon the brutal men whose faces have haunted him for a decade, and to extract justice on his own terms. By turns harrowing, lyrical, and beautiful, Hertz's debut offers a startling glimpse at the unraveling of trauma--and the light that peeks, faintly, and often in surprising ways, from the other side of the window. Kyle Dillon Hertz is the author of The Lookback Window (Simon and Schuster, 2023), a New York Times Editors' Choice. His work can be found in Esquire, Freeman's, Time, and more. He received his MFA from NYU and a residency from Yaddo. He teaches at The New School. Recommended Books: Megan Nolan, Ordinary Human Failings Andrew Holleran, Dancer from the Dance Evan S. Connell, Mrs Bridge  Chris Holmes is Chair of Literatures in English and Associate Professor at Ithaca College. He writes criticism on contemporary global literatures. His book, Kazuo Ishiguro as World Literature, is under contract with Bloomsbury Publishing. He is the co-director of The New Voices Festival, a celebration of work in poetry, prose, and playwriting by up-and-coming young writers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Growing up in suburban New York, Dylan lived through the unfathomable: three years as a victim of sex trafficking at the hands of Vincent, a troubled young man who promised to marry Dylan when he turned eighteen. Years later--long after a police investigation that went nowhere, and after the statute of limitations for the crimes perpetrated against him have run out--the long shadow of Dylan's trauma still looms over the fragile life in the city he's managed to build with his fiancé, Moans, who knows little of Dylan's past. His continued existence depends upon an all-important mantra: To survive, you live through it, but never look back. Then a groundbreaking new law--the Child Victims Act--opens a new way foreword: a one-year window during which Dylan can sue his abusers. But for someone who was trafficked as a child, does money represent justice--does his pain have a price? As Dylan is forced to look back at what happened to him and try to make sense of his past, he begins to explore a drug and sex-fueled world of bathhouses, clubs, and strangers' apartments, only to emerge, barely alive, with a new clarity of purpose: a righteous determination to gaze, unflinching, upon the brutal men whose faces have haunted him for a decade, and to extract justice on his own terms. By turns harrowing, lyrical, and beautiful, Hertz's debut offers a startling glimpse at the unraveling of trauma--and the light that peeks, faintly, and often in surprising ways, from the other side of the window. Kyle Dillon Hertz is the author of The Lookback Window (Simon and Schuster, 2023), a New York Times Editors' Choice. His work can be found in Esquire, Freeman's, Time, and more. He received his MFA from NYU and a residency from Yaddo. He teaches at The New School. Recommended Books: Megan Nolan, Ordinary Human Failings Andrew Holleran, Dancer from the Dance Evan S. Connell, Mrs Bridge  Chris Holmes is Chair of Literatures in English and Associate Professor at Ithaca College. He writes criticism on contemporary global literatures. His book, Kazuo Ishiguro as World Literature, is under contract with Bloomsbury Publishing. He is the co-director of The New Voices Festival, a celebration of work in poetry, prose, and playwriting by up-and-coming young writers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Growing up in suburban New York, Dylan lived through the unfathomable: three years as a victim of sex trafficking at the hands of Vincent, a troubled young man who promised to marry Dylan when he turned eighteen. Years later--long after a police investigation that went nowhere, and after the statute of limitations for the crimes perpetrated against him have run out--the long shadow of Dylan's trauma still looms over the fragile life in the city he's managed to build with his fiancé, Moans, who knows little of Dylan's past. His continued existence depends upon an all-important mantra: To survive, you live through it, but never look back. Then a groundbreaking new law--the Child Victims Act--opens a new way foreword: a one-year window during which Dylan can sue his abusers. But for someone who was trafficked as a child, does money represent justice--does his pain have a price? As Dylan is forced to look back at what happened to him and try to make sense of his past, he begins to explore a drug and sex-fueled world of bathhouses, clubs, and strangers' apartments, only to emerge, barely alive, with a new clarity of purpose: a righteous determination to gaze, unflinching, upon the brutal men whose faces have haunted him for a decade, and to extract justice on his own terms. By turns harrowing, lyrical, and beautiful, Hertz's debut offers a startling glimpse at the unraveling of trauma--and the light that peeks, faintly, and often in surprising ways, from the other side of the window. Kyle Dillon Hertz is the author of The Lookback Window (Simon and Schuster, 2023), a New York Times Editors' Choice. His work can be found in Esquire, Freeman's, Time, and more. He received his MFA from NYU and a residency from Yaddo. He teaches at The New School. Recommended Books: Megan Nolan, Ordinary Human Failings Andrew Holleran, Dancer from the Dance Evan S. Connell, Mrs Bridge  Chris Holmes is Chair of Literatures in English and Associate Professor at Ithaca College. He writes criticism on contemporary global literatures. His book, Kazuo Ishiguro as World Literature, is under contract with Bloomsbury Publishing. He is the co-director of The New Voices Festival, a celebration of work in poetry, prose, and playwriting by up-and-coming young writers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

Growing up in suburban New York, Dylan lived through the unfathomable: three years as a victim of sex trafficking at the hands of Vincent, a troubled young man who promised to marry Dylan when he turned eighteen. Years later--long after a police investigation that went nowhere, and after the statute of limitations for the crimes perpetrated against him have run out--the long shadow of Dylan's trauma still looms over the fragile life in the city he's managed to build with his fiancé, Moans, who knows little of Dylan's past. His continued existence depends upon an all-important mantra: To survive, you live through it, but never look back. Then a groundbreaking new law--the Child Victims Act--opens a new way foreword: a one-year window during which Dylan can sue his abusers. But for someone who was trafficked as a child, does money represent justice--does his pain have a price? As Dylan is forced to look back at what happened to him and try to make sense of his past, he begins to explore a drug and sex-fueled world of bathhouses, clubs, and strangers' apartments, only to emerge, barely alive, with a new clarity of purpose: a righteous determination to gaze, unflinching, upon the brutal men whose faces have haunted him for a decade, and to extract justice on his own terms. By turns harrowing, lyrical, and beautiful, Hertz's debut offers a startling glimpse at the unraveling of trauma--and the light that peeks, faintly, and often in surprising ways, from the other side of the window. Kyle Dillon Hertz is the author of The Lookback Window (Simon and Schuster, 2023), a New York Times Editors' Choice. His work can be found in Esquire, Freeman's, Time, and more. He received his MFA from NYU and a residency from Yaddo. He teaches at The New School. Recommended Books: Megan Nolan, Ordinary Human Failings Andrew Holleran, Dancer from the Dance Evan S. Connell, Mrs Bridge  Chris Holmes is Chair of Literatures in English and Associate Professor at Ithaca College. He writes criticism on contemporary global literatures. His book, Kazuo Ishiguro as World Literature, is under contract with Bloomsbury Publishing. He is the co-director of The New Voices Festival, a celebration of work in poetry, prose, and playwriting by up-and-coming young writers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literature

On this day in legal history, November 27, 1815, marked a significant moment in the constitutional journey of Poland. Emperor Alexander I of Russia, in his capacity as King of Poland, signed a constitution for the Kingdom of Poland, a state reconstituted under Russian dominance. This event followed the Congress of Vienna's directive to provide a constitutional framework for Poland, leading to the unofficial naming of the state as Congress Poland or Kongresówka.The Kingdom of Poland, established as one of the smallest Polish states in history, was significantly smaller than both the preceding Duchy of Warsaw and the earlier Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. The constitution was unilaterally granted by the ruler without parliamentary vote, reflecting a top-down approach to governance.Prince Adam Czartoryski played a pivotal role in drafting this constitution, although its final version bore the edits and influences of Emperor Alexander I and his advisors. Notably liberal for its time, the constitution promised freedoms including speech and religious tolerance, showcasing the influence of both Polish and Russian Enlightenment thought. However, in contrast to the Constitution of the Duchy of Warsaw, it favored the nobility and rolled back certain rights previously extended to Polish Jews and peasants.The Russian authorities never fully honored the constitution's provisions. Its liberal yet vague articles were frequently manipulated, avoided, or outright violated. The promised parliament, scheduled to convene biennially, only met sporadically, with sessions in 1818, 1820, 1826, and 1830, the latter two held secretly. The infrequent sessions and the government's conservative stance within them sparked liberal dissent among deputies.This growing dissatisfaction, fueled by the disregard for constitutional promises, eventually led to the November Uprising in 1830. During this tumultuous period, the constitution underwent modifications, but following the uprising's failure, it was replaced by the Organic Statute of the Kingdom of Poland on February 26, 1832. This new statute, far more conservative and granted by Tsar Nicholas I of Russia, never saw actual implementation, marking the end of a brief but pivotal chapter in Poland's constitutional history.Kirkland & Ellis, a top-grossing law firm in Big Law, recently reported substantial earnings from retainer payments connected to the bankruptcies of Rite Aid Corp. and WeWork Inc., totaling $41.5 million. These payments come in addition to a $2.5 million retainer from another bankrupt client, SmileDirectClub Inc. Kirkland, recognized for its large number of nonequity partners, has recently inducted seven new partners from its restructuring practice, which gained prominence for representing several cryptocurrency companies in Chapter 11 cases.Kirkland's notable role in high-profile bankruptcies involves complex legal and financial navigations, though the firm did not comment on its specific work for WeWork and Rite Aid. In WeWork's case, Kirkland received over $22 million in retainers and is involved in the company's bankruptcy process to address lease issues, with billing rates for its lawyers ranging from $685 to $2,245 per hour. Other law firms, including Munger, Tolles & Olson; Cole Schotz; and Canada's Goodmans, are also advising WeWork, with varying retainer fees and hourly rates.For Rite Aid's bankruptcy, Kirkland disclosed receiving about $19.5 million in retainers, with similar hourly rates as in the WeWork case. Rite Aid has engaged additional legal counsel, including Cole Schotz, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, and Kobre & Kim, each receiving significant retainer payments and billing at various hourly rates. The company, under new legal leadership, faces a deadline to emerge from Chapter 11 by March 1.WeWork, Rite Aid Bankruptcy Fees $41.5 Million Haul for KirklandThe Federal Defender Supreme Court Resource & Assistance Panel (DSCRAP) has become instrumental in aiding federal public defenders in preparing for arguments before the US Supreme Court. Andrew Adler, a federal defender, exemplifies this effort, making his third appearance at the Supreme Court, a rare achievement for federal public defenders who usually argue only once before the justices. This trend is notable, as federal defenders across the nation have argued at least one case each term since 2000, according to Adler.The Supreme Court's limited case docket intensifies the competition for arguing cases, with elite law firms often pressuring defenders to hand over their cases to more experienced advocates. To counter this, DSCRAP supports first-time advocates by partnering them with experienced federal defenders. This initiative is a response to criticisms from Supreme Court justices regarding the quality of representation provided by criminal defense attorneys.Justice Sonia Sotomayor, for instance, criticized attorneys unwilling to pass their cases to seasoned Supreme Court advocates, labeling it as "malpractice." This sentiment reflects the dominance of a small, elite group of big firm lawyers in the Supreme Court bar. However, federal defenders often possess deep subject matter expertise and extensive experience in federal appellate courts.Andrew Adler's preparation for his current case, Jackson v. United States, demonstrates the collaborative efforts to ensure successful arguments. DSCRAP assisted in brainstorming strategies and planned moot courts for Adler, while he also worked with Supreme Court veteran Jeff Fisher for brief preparation. Michael Caruso, the federal public defender for the Southern District of Florida, emphasizes the value of partnering with experienced high court veterans for insights and argument preparation.This collaborative approach aims to balance the often David and Goliath-like scenario federal defenders face when opposing top government lawyers, like the U.S. Solicitor General's Office attorneys. The partnerships and support systems developed within the federal defender community illustrate their commitment to providing quality representation in the nation's highest court, countering the perceived home court advantage of repeat players.Federal Defenders Combine Forces to Argue at US Supreme CourtThe new Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules for clawing back executive pay are causing significant challenges and discussions in corporate America. These rules, mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 but only issued in 2022, require companies to adopt policies to recoup bonuses from executives in cases of accounting errors. Failing to implement these policies by the December 1 deadline risks expulsion from stock exchanges like Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange.The complexity of these rules is considerable, as demonstrated by a legal team at Latham & Watkins LLP, who spent over five hours on a call just to create a flowchart for clients. The SEC's directive primarily targets bonuses linked to earnings metrics that are later found to be miscalculated. This not only includes major financial restatements, known as "Big R" corrections, but also smaller, often unnoticed adjustments labeled "Little R" revisions.These "Little R" revisions, typically slipped into regular financial filings, are more common than the more conspicuous "Big R" restatements. However, the SEC's new rules do not cover out-of-period adjustments, which are minor fixes to immaterial errors in past financial statements. Despite this, companies must now indicate on their annual financial statements if any past correction, including out-of-period adjustments, was made.This means companies must now discern between "Little R" revisions and out-of-period adjustments more carefully, a task that has gained new significance under these rules. As Keith Halverstam of Latham & Watkins LLP notes, this represents a new reality where both executive and accounting teams need to be acutely aware of these distinctions.Beyond accounting complexities, the SEC rules also raise questions about their applicability to overseas companies listed on US exchanges, especially in countries where clawing back pay is prohibited. Additionally, the rules apply to the pre-tax amount of wrongly awarded compensation, posing challenges for long-term incentive programs tied to company stock performance.As companies navigate these new regulations, the focus will also shift to how these policies are implemented in practice, leading to further questions and potential issues, as noted by Veronica Wissel of Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP. This situation indicates a significant shift in executive compensation and corporate governance, requiring meticulous compliance and strategic planning.SEC Executive Clawback Rules Bring Late Nights as Deadline NearsIn recent days, New York has seen a surge in lawsuits filed against notable individuals under the Adult Survivors Act (ASA). This act, passed in May 2022, was a critical amendment to state law, allowing alleged victims of sexual offenses, where the statute of limitations had lapsed, to file civil suits within a one-year period. This "lookback window" began on November 24, 2022, and was set to close on November 24, 2023, creating a sense of urgency for filings.The ASA was designed to address the delayed effects of trauma often experienced by survivors of sexual assault, recognizing that many are unable to come forward immediately after the incident. This legislation mirrors the earlier Child Victims Act of 2019, providing a similar opportunity for adults.As the deadline approached, there was a notable increase in high-profile lawsuits. Figures like Sean "Diddy" Combs, New York Mayor Eric Adams, and former President Donald Trump were among those sued under the ASA. For example, Trump was ordered to pay $5 million in damages to writer E. Jean Carroll for defamation and battery related to an incident alleged to have occurred in 1996.This wave of lawsuits highlights a crucial aspect of the ASA: its capacity to empower survivors of historic sexual abuse to seek justice, regardless of the elapsed time. While the law initially saw relatively few filings, the rush near the deadline indicates a significant response from survivors seizing this opportunity.Overall, the ASA has facilitated over 2,500 legal actions, underscoring the widespread impact of sexual assault and the need for legal avenues to address long-standing grievances. The law's expiry has prompted a final push for justice, bringing numerous cases into the public eye and spotlighting the pervasive issue of sexual misconduct across various sectors.Adult Survivors Act deadline prompts rush of sexual assault lawsuitsGovernor Hochul Signs Adult Survivors ActActor Jamie Foxx accused of sexual abuse in New York lawsuit | ReutersNew York Mayor Eric Adams accused of sexual assault in 1993 | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The Child Victims Act lifts the statute of limitations on when sexual abuse victims may sue perpetrators. Steven J. Kelly is a principal at the law firm Grant & Eisenhofer. He represents some of the first-to-file plaintiffs. We hear their stories.  Plus, what does the Archdiocese of Baltimore's bankruptcy filing mean for survivors of clergy abuse? We speak with Professor Pamela Foohey of Cardozo School of Law, who argues that the process pushes survivors into settlements. With Christopher Odinet of Iowa College of Law, Foohey recently published the article, “Silencing Litigation Through Bankruptcy,” in the Virginia Law Review. Links:Baltimore Archdiocese bankruptcy brings new time crunch for alleged victimsArchbishop Lori's Message on Chapter 11What's a creditor's committee? 7 abuse victims to negotiate for all in Archdiocese of Baltimore bankruptcyDo you have a question or comment about a show or a story idea to pitch? Contact On the Record at: Senior Supervising Producer, Maureen Harvie she/her/hers mharvie@wypr.org 410-235-1903 Senior Producer, Melissa Gerr she/her/hers mgerr@wypr.org 410-235-1157 Producer Sam Bermas-Dawes he/him/his sbdawes@wypr.org 410-235-1472

The legal landscape changed in Maryland yesterday. A number of new laws took effect. We talked about one of them here on Midday last week: the Child Victims Act, which eliminated the statute of limitations on civil suits for victims of sexual abuse. We thought it would be helpful to ask our Statehouse reporter and News Director, Matt Bush, to give us an overview of a few more of the bills that are now the law of the land. For more on the laws, you can view more here: Gun limits, end of statute of limitations headline new laws taking effect Oct. 1 in Maryland.Email us at midday@wypr.org, tweet us: @MiddayWYPR, or call us at 410-662-8780.

Today on Midday, a discussion about the the Child Victims Act becomes law in Maryland. The law allows survivors of sexual assault in Maryland the right to sue the Archdiocese of Baltimore and others for civil damages, regardless of when the abuse they suffered took place. Prior to the law, survivors of sexual assault were ruled out of suing alleged abusers once they were past age 38. What will be the effect of the new law that wipes out the statute of limitations in these cases? The Child Victims Act of 2023 goes into effect on October 1st. Two survivors of abuse by employees of the Archdiocese of Baltimore join us to discuss the new law and its consequences. Teresa Lancaster was a student at Archbishop Keough High School in the early 1970s. Her story is one of the central elements of the Netflix documentary, The Keepers. We are also joined by Tony Petrowski, who was abused as a middle school student at St. Elizabeth's Catholic School on Lakewood Avenue in Baltimore. Jonathan Schochor is the Founding Partner and Chairman with Schochor, Staton, Goldberg and Cardea, a law firm in Baltimore that represents victims of sexual assault. RAINN is the nation's largest anti-sexual violence organization. RAINN created and operates the National Sexual Assault Hotline (1 800-656-4673) in partnership with more than 1,000 local sexual assault service providers across the country. If you or someone you know has been sexually assaulted, help is available.Email us at midday@wypr.org, tweet us: @MiddayWYPR, or call us at 410-662-8780.

It may take years for people who were sexually abused as children to come to grips with what happened and decide how to move forward. Until now, if they were past age 38, Maryland law ruled out suing alleged abusers. What will be the effect of new law that wipes out the statute of limitations? The Child Victims Act of 2023 goes into effect on October 1st.  We speak with Delegate C.T. Wilson, who championed this change, and Lisae Jordan,  executive director and counsel at the Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault (MCASA). Resources:Find a Rape Crisis and Recovery Center near youMCASA's Sexual Assault Legal Institute (SALI)RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network)RAINN's National Sexual Assault Hotline - 1-800-656-4673Call 211 for resources in MarylandDo you have a question or comment about a show or a story idea to pitch? Contact On the Record at: Senior Supervising Producer, Maureen Harvie she/her/hers mharvie@wypr.org 410-235-1903 Senior Producer, Melissa Gerr she/her/hers mgerr@wypr.org 410-235-1157 Producer Sam Bermas-Dawes he/him/his sbdawes@wypr.org 410-235-1472

A 23-year-old babysitter was charged for allegedly suffocating and strangling the 1-year-old she was supposed to be caring for in February. Georgia authorities said Abby Elizabeth Choosewood “nearly killed” during the disturbing attack. The Law&Crime Network's Angenette Levy breaks down the horrifying case with Lt. Kevin Holbrook from the Gainesville Police Department and Florina Altshiler, an attorney specialized in Child Victims Act cases.LAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergWriting & Video Editing - Michael DeiningerGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa Bein & Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieThey Walk Among AmericaDevil In The DormThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A Pennsylvania elementary school principal was charged with “willingly” failing to report the alleged sexual abuse of a 5-year-old girl at the hands of his 19-year-old son. Fifty-one-year-old Gregory Mandalas allegedly turned a blind eye to the perverted acts of his son, Matthew Mandalas. The Law&Crime Network's Angenette Levy discusses the investigation with Florina Altshiler, a defense attorney with a specialty in the Child Victims Act and sexual misconduct defense.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Save 10% on your entire POM Pepper Spray order by using code LAWCRIME10 at http://bit.ly/3IGNFxvLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergWriting & Video Editing - Michael DeiningerGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa Bein & Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieObjectionsThey Walk Among AmericaDevil In The DormThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A daily news briefing from Catholic News Agency, powered by artificial intelligence. Ask your smart speaker to play “Catholic News,” or listen every morning wherever you get podcasts. www.catholicnewsagency.com - Today is Saint Patrick's Day. As of yesterday, 72.6% of dioceses in the United States are offering some relief from the no-meat-on-Fridays-during-Lent rule for Saint Patrick's Day. 93 diocesan bishops are providing a dispensation with no strings attached — although many of those bishops suggest extra prayers or spiritual exercises or abstaining from meat on another day. Thirty-four diocesan bishops said yes but gave additional conditions, requiring a substitute through what canon law calls a ‘commutation' of the requirement, such as attending Mass on Saint Patrick's Day, saying the Breastplate of Saint Patrick prayer, praying the rosary, abstaining from meat another day, or helping the poor. Also in the yes-but category is the Archdiocese for the US Military Services, which is requiring abstinence from meat on another day the same week as Saint Patrick's Day for those planning to eat meat on Friday, March 17. Forty-six diocesan bishops, or 26.3% of the dioceses, have said no to a general dispensation or commutation for all Catholics in the diocese, although many of those say they would grant individual dispensations upon request. For a complete map showing where Catholics are allowed to eat meat this Saint Patrick's Day, visit catholicnewsagency.com. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/253789/where-are-catholics-allowed-to-eat-corned-beef-on-st-patricks-day-this-lent Catholic bishops in the United Kingdom said a new law criminalizing prayer and outreach outside abortion clinics in England and Wales discriminates against people of faith. Britain's House of Commons approved legislation on March 7 to create “buffer zones” across the country, which strictly bans behavior that “interferes with any person's decision to access, provide, or facilitate the provision of abortion services” around abortion facilities. The law's broad provision would prohibit a wide range of behavior, including silent prayer. Religious freedom is essential for society and human flourishing, the bishops' statement said. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/253878/uk-bishops-call-buffer-zones-banning-prayer-outside-of-abortion-clinics-discriminatory The Catholic Diocese of Albany has decided to file for bankruptcy, saying a financial reorganization will help provide some compensation for the hundreds of sex abuse victims who have filed lawsuits. Bishop Edward Scharfenberger of Albany said parishes and schools are not part of the filing and are incorporated as different entities. Scharfenberger said the diocese has been named in more than 400 lawsuits filed from August 2019 to August 2021 under the Child Victims Act of 2019. There is no timeline for the Chapter 11 bankruptcy, the Albany Diocese said in a statement. Other reorganizations have continued for several years. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/253877/facing-hundreds-of-sex-abuse-lawsuits-albany-diocese-to-declare-bankruptcy Today, the Church celebrates Saint Patrick. He was captured and brought as a slave to Ireland before escaping back to Britain, but later returned to Ireland as a bishop to minister to the small Christian communities. Using the traditions and symbols of the Celtic people, he explained Christianity in a way that made sense to the Irish and was thus very successful in converting the natives. He remains one of the most beloved Saints of Ireland. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/saint/st-patrick-of-ireland-180

There are few true heroes in our midst. The people who stick their necks out to help others, and who do it not for money or fame, but because they truly care to help those whom nobody cares about. Those are the unsung heroes. Here on the Definitive Rap we bring the truth to the forefront. We respect people of all faiths, and we believe in America, and Justice For All. Our guest today, Mark Appel, lives and breathes for peace and justice. Baila Sebrow, producer and host of The Definitive Rap sat down with Mark Appel, a long-time advocate who has dedicated his life to advancing civil rights for all Americans and bridging the divide between different communities.  Mark started by giving a detailed account of his background, and explained how he became such a successful advocate for so many years.  He talked about how he spent ten years rallying the support for the bill called the passage of the Child Victims Act, a great victory for all victims of sex abuse. Mark explained his motivation to address the challenge of bringing multicultural communities and people together, to form The Bridge Multicultural and Advocacy  Project, a unity center that aims to address issues across cultural lines, and advocates for transformational change in New York's diverse communities. *WATCH THIS INTERVIEW

There are few true heroes in our midst. The people who stick their necks out to help others, and who do it not for money or fame, but because they truly care to help those whom nobody cares about. Those are the unsung heroes. Here on the Definitive Rap we bring the truth to the forefront. We respect people of all faiths, and we believe in America, and Justice For All. Our guest today, Mark Appel, lives and breathes for peace and justice. Baila Sebrow, producer and host of The Definitive Rap sat down with Mark Appel, a long-time advocate who has dedicated his life to advancing civil rights for all Americans and bridging the divide between different communities.  Mark started by giving a detailed account of his background, and explained how he became such a successful advocate for so many years.  He talked about how he spent ten years rallying the support for the bill called the passage of the Child Victims Act, a great victory for all victims of sex abuse. Mark explained his motivation to address the challenge of bringing multicultural communities and people together, to form The Bridge Multicultural and Advocacy  Project, a unity center that aims to address issues across cultural lines, and advocates for transformational change in New York's diverse communities. *WATCH THIS INTERVIEW

Late Edition: Crime Beat Chronicles is a true crime podcast that pairs dramatic readings of articles with interviews conducted with journalists who covered the stories. For this set of episodes we're looking at a multi-part series from the Buffalo News Watchdog Team of Lou Michel, Dan Herbeck, and Mike McAndrew that launched Friday, Jan. 20, about a decades old murder of a Catholic Priest. The homicide went unsolved amid vague rumors of a cover-up. Read more: Keep up with the series as the articles are published Day 1: 'Father isn't coming': All was silent at the Sisters of St. Joseph Motherhouse when the first few nuns filed into the small chapel and bowed their heads in prayer. It was 6:30 a.m. on March 13, 1966. But O'Connor, expected to arrive soon to perform the 7 a.m. Mass, never appeared. Read more Day 2: Three boys discover a body in Scajaquada Creek: The dead man's wallet was missing, but officers discovered he was Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, 44, one of the most prominent priests in the Buffalo Catholic Diocese. Read more Day 3: His Impala is found, and police zero in on homicide: It took more than 14 hours before police located O'Connor's 1966 gray, four-door Chevy Impala. It was parked just over 1 mile away from where his body was found in an upscale neighborhood, two blocks north of Delaware Park, when it was found at 3:20 a.m. Monday, March 14, 1966. The possibility of suicide was soon replaced by homicide. Read more Day 4: A rising star's death is a 'staggering blow' to Catholic community: Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor rose from humble roots to become one of Buffalo's most influential priests, making his murder all the more shocking to the deeply Catholic community of the 1960s. For more than half a century, his unsolved murder has generated all kinds of speculation about the identity and motive of the killer or killers. Theories have included speculation about his sexual orientation to suggestions that O'Connor heard a confession about a sin so terrible that it put him in grave danger. Read more Day 5: A 57-year-old box of evidence reveals a case that goes cold: Inside a tiny interrogation room at the Buffalo Police homicide bureau, journalists, for two days, read and reread files, took extensive notes and compared details in reports. It became clear that what started out as a massive investigation involving dozens of detectives was suddenly halted without an explanation provided in the official reports or to the public. Read more Day 6: Renowned sleuth Leo Donovan oversaw murder investigation: Leo J. Donovan was no stranger to headline-making murder cases. By the time he retired in 1985, he had served as the chief of the Buffalo Police homicide squad longer than anyone in the department's history. During his 21 years in that position, Donovan headed investigations into about 4,000 unexplained deaths and homicides, including some of the most notorious crimes in Buffalo over the past century. But he was a relative newcomer to high-profile cases in 1966. Read more Day 7: A diocese journalist emerges as a suspect: Buffalo homicide detectives took a special interest in a young reporter for the Catholic Diocese newspaper after his boss was murdered. A day after Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor's body was found floating in Scajaquada Creek on March 13, 1966, detectives interviewed Robert Armbruster. He told them he was physically attracted to the priest, but had fantasized about taking an ax to his head, according to 56-year-old police reports obtained by The Buffalo News. Read more Day 8: Detectives chased tips around the clock after murder: Though so much of the work conducted by detectives would lead to dead-ends, the 56-year-old homicide file The Buffalo News reviewed in 2022 reflects meticulous police work was being carried out early in the probe. Read more Day 9: Did his sexuality have anything to do with his murder?: None of the Buffalo police reports on the unsolved murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor identify him as being gay. But it is clear that homicide detectives wanted to know 57 years ago if homosexuality had anything to do with the crime. In reports on the 1966 case, detectives said they received information from fellow officers suggesting they look at criminals known to rob gay men and investigate gay bars for possible leads. Read more Day 10: A priest becomes a suspect in the monsignor's murder: The 56-year-old reports obtained by The Buffalo News revealed for the first time that the Rev. John D. Lewandowski was considered a suspect by police. And while the reports do not say why, there are clues that suggest reasons for focusing on Lewandowski. Read more Day 11: Priest suspected in murder was accused of molesting boys: Decked out in a skin-tight wrestler's uniform and high-top boots, Rev. John D. Lewandowski in the 1960s would sometimes hold weekend training sessions where he would teach wrestling moves to adolescent and teenage boys. But according to some of the seven men who decades later filed Child Victims Act lawsuits accusing Lewandowski of sexual abuse, the priest used the wrestling sessions to connect with victims he molested. They also recalled that Lewandowski told them he knew how to use wrestling moves to kill someone. Read more Day 12: A trip to Bemus Point to fingerprint and interview wayward priest: Thirteen days after the murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, two of Buffalo's top homicide investigators traveled 70 miles through a snowstorm to conduct a highly unusual interview. Buffalo police homicide squad Chief Leo J. Donovan and Sgt. John C. Rapp visited a retreat house run by the Buffalo Catholic Diocese in Bemus Point, a popular vacation spot on Chautauqua Lake. There they would interview the Rev. John D. Lewandowski. Donovan's six-page account of the interview, dated March 26, 1966, is among the most fascinating reports in the O'Connor case file. Read more Day 13: Diocese secretly used Bemus Point mansion to house molester priests: In 1966, Buffalo priests who were accused of sexually abusing children did not have to worry about being arrested. Instead, some were sent for a time out in the lap of luxury – a stately mansion in this beautiful vacation community, on a property with lush, rolling lawns, tennis courts and a gorgeous view of Chautauqua Lake, a Buffalo News investigation has revealed. The mansion served as the Buffalo Diocese's secret place of confinement for at least two molester priests in the 1960s. Read more Day 14: Suddenly, the murder investigation ends: For the first month, the Buffalo Police Department threw everything they had at solving the 1966 murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor. Detectives were brought in from precincts all over Buffalo to help the Homicide Squad find a killer. FBI agents, State Police and the New York City Police Department were consulted. But then, the investigation was suddenly shut down, with no arrests or explanation. Read more Day 15: Former prosecutor links a monsignor to murder: Buffalo's Catholic Diocese has never seen another priest like Monsignor Franklin M. Kelliher, the former amateur boxing champion and professional wrestler who acted as the unofficial disciplinarian for priests who misbehaved. Priests who drank to excess, gambled, stole money, molested children, had affairs or engaged in other crimes or frowned-upon behavior were taken to Kelliher for physical punishment, according to two police sources and several retired priests who spoke to The Buffalo News. Read more Day 16: Could a Buffalo bishop shut down a murder investigation?: Bishop James A. McNulty left no doubt who was the boss during the nine years he spent in charge of Buffalo's Catholic Diocese. But was he powerful enough to stop Buffalo police from investigating the murder of one of his priests? Did he? Nearly 57 years later after the death of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, with Bishop James A. McNulty and everyone in his inner circle long dead, questions remain about the former bishop and whether he had a role in ending the police investigation into the still unsolved homicide. Read more Day 17: What became of two suspects in unsolved murder?: Two brothers of Robert Armbruster, who was once a suspect in the unsolved 1966 murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, say he was a fragile, lovable man incapable of violence. The nieces and nephews of Rev. John D. Lewandowski, who also was once a suspect in the murder, declined to talk about their uncle. Read more Day 18: Family left in the dark about why murder went unsolved: The murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor has remained unsolved, but an investigation by The Buffalo News has found that two Buffalo Diocese employees, including a priest, Rev. John D. Lewandowski, were among several suspects in the March 13, 1966, slaying. But that was something never shared with the O'Connor family, said Sharon Bottini, O'Connor's closest living relative. Read more We certainly encourage you to subscribe to Late Edition Crime Beat Chronicles wherever you get your podcasts to catch all our upcoming coverage of the series as well as keep an eye on Buffalo News for the articles as they publish starting this weekend. 'Late Edition: Crime Beat Chronicles' is a product of Lee Enterprises, a leading provider of local news, information and advertising in 77 U.S. markets and communities. The program is hosted and recorded by Nat Cardona with additional production from Lee Enterprises.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Late Edition: Crime Beat Chronicles is a true crime podcast that pairs dramatic readings of articles with interviews conducted with journalists who covered the stories. For this set of episodes we're looking at a multi-part series from the Buffalo News Watchdog Team of Lou Michel, Dan Herbeck, and Mike McAndrew that launched Friday, Jan. 20, about a decades old murder of a Catholic Priest. The homicide went unsolved amid vague rumors of a cover-up. Read more: Keep up with the series as the articles are published Day 1: 'Father isn't coming': All was silent at the Sisters of St. Joseph Motherhouse when the first few nuns filed into the small chapel and bowed their heads in prayer. It was 6:30 a.m. on March 13, 1966. But O'Connor, expected to arrive soon to perform the 7 a.m. Mass, never appeared. Read more Day 2: Three boys discover a body in Scajaquada Creek: The dead man's wallet was missing, but officers discovered he was Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, 44, one of the most prominent priests in the Buffalo Catholic Diocese. Read more Day 3: His Impala is found, and police zero in on homicide: It took more than 14 hours before police located O'Connor's 1966 gray, four-door Chevy Impala. It was parked just over 1 mile away from where his body was found in an upscale neighborhood, two blocks north of Delaware Park, when it was found at 3:20 a.m. Monday, March 14, 1966. The possibility of suicide was soon replaced by homicide. Read more Day 4: A rising star's death is a 'staggering blow' to Catholic community: Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor rose from humble roots to become one of Buffalo's most influential priests, making his murder all the more shocking to the deeply Catholic community of the 1960s. For more than half a century, his unsolved murder has generated all kinds of speculation about the identity and motive of the killer or killers. Theories have included speculation about his sexual orientation to suggestions that O'Connor heard a confession about a sin so terrible that it put him in grave danger. Read more Day 5: A 57-year-old box of evidence reveals a case that goes cold: Inside a tiny interrogation room at the Buffalo Police homicide bureau, journalists, for two days, read and reread files, took extensive notes and compared details in reports. It became clear that what started out as a massive investigation involving dozens of detectives was suddenly halted without an explanation provided in the official reports or to the public. Read more Day 6: Renowned sleuth Leo Donovan oversaw murder investigation: Leo J. Donovan was no stranger to headline-making murder cases. By the time he retired in 1985, he had served as the chief of the Buffalo Police homicide squad longer than anyone in the department's history. During his 21 years in that position, Donovan headed investigations into about 4,000 unexplained deaths and homicides, including some of the most notorious crimes in Buffalo over the past century. But he was a relative newcomer to high-profile cases in 1966. Read more Day 7: A diocese journalist emerges as a suspect: Buffalo homicide detectives took a special interest in a young reporter for the Catholic Diocese newspaper after his boss was murdered. A day after Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor's body was found floating in Scajaquada Creek on March 13, 1966, detectives interviewed Robert Armbruster. He told them he was physically attracted to the priest, but had fantasized about taking an ax to his head, according to 56-year-old police reports obtained by The Buffalo News. Read more Day 8: Detectives chased tips around the clock after murder: Though so much of the work conducted by detectives would lead to dead-ends, the 56-year-old homicide file The Buffalo News reviewed in 2022 reflects meticulous police work was being carried out early in the probe. Read more Day 9: Did his sexuality have anything to do with his murder?: None of the Buffalo police reports on the unsolved murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor identify him as being gay. But it is clear that homicide detectives wanted to know 57 years ago if homosexuality had anything to do with the crime. In reports on the 1966 case, detectives said they received information from fellow officers suggesting they look at criminals known to rob gay men and investigate gay bars for possible leads. Read more Day 10: A priest becomes a suspect in the monsignor's murder: The 56-year-old reports obtained by The Buffalo News revealed for the first time that the Rev. John D. Lewandowski was considered a suspect by police. And while the reports do not say why, there are clues that suggest reasons for focusing on Lewandowski. Read more Day 11: Priest suspected in murder was accused of molesting boys: Decked out in a skin-tight wrestler's uniform and high-top boots, Rev. John D. Lewandowski in the 1960s would sometimes hold weekend training sessions where he would teach wrestling moves to adolescent and teenage boys. But according to some of the seven men who decades later filed Child Victims Act lawsuits accusing Lewandowski of sexual abuse, the priest used the wrestling sessions to connect with victims he molested. They also recalled that Lewandowski told them he knew how to use wrestling moves to kill someone. Read more Day 12: A trip to Bemus Point to fingerprint and interview wayward priest: Thirteen days after the murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, two of Buffalo's top homicide investigators traveled 70 miles through a snowstorm to conduct a highly unusual interview. Buffalo police homicide squad Chief Leo J. Donovan and Sgt. John C. Rapp visited a retreat house run by the Buffalo Catholic Diocese in Bemus Point, a popular vacation spot on Chautauqua Lake. There they would interview the Rev. John D. Lewandowski. Donovan's six-page account of the interview, dated March 26, 1966, is among the most fascinating reports in the O'Connor case file. Read more Day 13: Diocese secretly used Bemus Point mansion to house molester priests: In 1966, Buffalo priests who were accused of sexually abusing children did not have to worry about being arrested. Instead, some were sent for a time out in the lap of luxury – a stately mansion in this beautiful vacation community, on a property with lush, rolling lawns, tennis courts and a gorgeous view of Chautauqua Lake, a Buffalo News investigation has revealed. The mansion served as the Buffalo Diocese's secret place of confinement for at least two molester priests in the 1960s. Read more Day 14: Suddenly, the murder investigation ends: For the first month, the Buffalo Police Department threw everything they had at solving the 1966 murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor. Detectives were brought in from precincts all over Buffalo to help the Homicide Squad find a killer. FBI agents, State Police and the New York City Police Department were consulted. But then, the investigation was suddenly shut down, with no arrests or explanation. Read more Day 15: Former prosecutor links a monsignor to murder: Buffalo's Catholic Diocese has never seen another priest like Monsignor Franklin M. Kelliher, the former amateur boxing champion and professional wrestler who acted as the unofficial disciplinarian for priests who misbehaved. Priests who drank to excess, gambled, stole money, molested children, had affairs or engaged in other crimes or frowned-upon behavior were taken to Kelliher for physical punishment, according to two police sources and several retired priests who spoke to The Buffalo News. Read more Day 16: Could a Buffalo bishop shut down a murder investigation?: Bishop James A. McNulty left no doubt who was the boss during the nine years he spent in charge of Buffalo's Catholic Diocese. But was he powerful enough to stop Buffalo police from investigating the murder of one of his priests? Did he? Nearly 57 years later after the death of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, with Bishop James A. McNulty and everyone in his inner circle long dead, questions remain about the former bishop and whether he had a role in ending the police investigation into the still unsolved homicide. Read more Day 17: What became of two suspects in unsolved murder?: Two brothers of Robert Armbruster, who was once a suspect in the unsolved 1966 murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, say he was a fragile, lovable man incapable of violence. The nieces and nephews of Rev. John D. Lewandowski, who also was once a suspect in the murder, declined to talk about their uncle. Read more Day 18: Family left in the dark about why murder went unsolved: The murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor has remained unsolved, but an investigation by The Buffalo News has found that two Buffalo Diocese employees, including a priest, Rev. John D. Lewandowski, were among several suspects in the March 13, 1966, slaying. But that was something never shared with the O'Connor family, said Sharon Bottini, O'Connor's closest living relative. Coming soon! We certainly encourage you to subscribe to Late Edition Crime Beat Chronicles wherever you get your podcasts to catch all our upcoming coverage of the series as well as keep an eye on Buffalo News for the articles as they publish starting this weekend. 'Late Edition: Crime Beat Chronicles' is a product of Lee Enterprises, a leading provider of local news, information and advertising in 77 U.S. markets and communities. The program is hosted and recorded by Nat Cardona with additional production from Lee Enterprises.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Late Edition: Crime Beat Chronicles is a true crime podcast that pairs dramatic readings of articles with interviews conducted with journalists who covered the stories. For this set of episodes we're looking at a multi-part series from the Buffalo News Watchdog Team of Lou Michel, Dan Herbeck, and Mike McAndrew that launched Friday, Jan. 20, about a decades old murder of a Catholic Priest. The homicide went unsolved amid vague rumors of a cover-up. Read more: Keep up with the series as the articles are published Day 1: 'Father isn't coming': All was silent at the Sisters of St. Joseph Motherhouse when the first few nuns filed into the small chapel and bowed their heads in prayer. It was 6:30 a.m. on March 13, 1966. But O'Connor, expected to arrive soon to perform the 7 a.m. Mass, never appeared. Read more Day 2: Three boys discover a body in Scajaquada Creek: The dead man's wallet was missing, but officers discovered he was Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, 44, one of the most prominent priests in the Buffalo Catholic Diocese. Read more Day 3: His Impala is found, and police zero in on homicide: It took more than 14 hours before police located O'Connor's 1966 gray, four-door Chevy Impala. It was parked just over 1 mile away from where his body was found in an upscale neighborhood, two blocks north of Delaware Park, when it was found at 3:20 a.m. Monday, March 14, 1966. The possibility of suicide was soon replaced by homicide. Read more Day 4: A rising star's death is a 'staggering blow' to Catholic community: Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor rose from humble roots to become one of Buffalo's most influential priests, making his murder all the more shocking to the deeply Catholic community of the 1960s. For more than half a century, his unsolved murder has generated all kinds of speculation about the identity and motive of the killer or killers. Theories have included speculation about his sexual orientation to suggestions that O'Connor heard a confession about a sin so terrible that it put him in grave danger. Read more Day 5: A 57-year-old box of evidence reveals a case that goes cold: Inside a tiny interrogation room at the Buffalo Police homicide bureau, journalists, for two days, read and reread files, took extensive notes and compared details in reports. It became clear that what started out as a massive investigation involving dozens of detectives was suddenly halted without an explanation provided in the official reports or to the public. Read more Day 6: Renowned sleuth Leo Donovan oversaw murder investigation: Leo J. Donovan was no stranger to headline-making murder cases. By the time he retired in 1985, he had served as the chief of the Buffalo Police homicide squad longer than anyone in the department's history. During his 21 years in that position, Donovan headed investigations into about 4,000 unexplained deaths and homicides, including some of the most notorious crimes in Buffalo over the past century. But he was a relative newcomer to high-profile cases in 1966. Read more Day 7: A diocese journalist emerges as a suspect: Buffalo homicide detectives took a special interest in a young reporter for the Catholic Diocese newspaper after his boss was murdered. A day after Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor's body was found floating in Scajaquada Creek on March 13, 1966, detectives interviewed Robert Armbruster. He told them he was physically attracted to the priest, but had fantasized about taking an ax to his head, according to 56-year-old police reports obtained by The Buffalo News. Read more Day 8: Detectives chased tips around the clock after murder: Though so much of the work conducted by detectives would lead to dead-ends, the 56-year-old homicide file The Buffalo News reviewed in 2022 reflects meticulous police work was being carried out early in the probe. Read more Day 9: Did his sexuality have anything to do with his murder?: None of the Buffalo police reports on the unsolved murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor identify him as being gay. But it is clear that homicide detectives wanted to know 57 years ago if homosexuality had anything to do with the crime. In reports on the 1966 case, detectives said they received information from fellow officers suggesting they look at criminals known to rob gay men and investigate gay bars for possible leads. Read more Day 10: A priest becomes a suspect in the monsignor's murder: The 56-year-old reports obtained by The Buffalo News revealed for the first time that the Rev. John D. Lewandowski was considered a suspect by police. And while the reports do not say why, there are clues that suggest reasons for focusing on Lewandowski. Read more Day 11: Priest suspected in murder was accused of molesting boys: Decked out in a skin-tight wrestler's uniform and high-top boots, Rev. John D. Lewandowski in the 1960s would sometimes hold weekend training sessions where he would teach wrestling moves to adolescent and teenage boys. But according to some of the seven men who decades later filed Child Victims Act lawsuits accusing Lewandowski of sexual abuse, the priest used the wrestling sessions to connect with victims he molested. They also recalled that Lewandowski told them he knew how to use wrestling moves to kill someone. Coming Tuesday Day 12: A trip to Bemus Point to fingerprint and interview wayward priest: Thirteen days after the murder of Monsignor Francis J. O'Connor, two of Buffalo's top homicide investigators traveled 70 miles through a snowstorm to conduct a highly unusual interview. Buffalo police homicide squad Chief Leo J. Donovan and Sgt. John C. Rapp visited a retreat house run by the Buffalo Catholic Diocese in Bemus Point, a popular vacation spot on Chautauqua Lake. There they would interview the Rev. John D. Lewandowski. Donovan's six-page account of the interview, dated March 26, 1966, is among the most fascinating reports in the O'Connor case file. Coming Wednesday More installments coming soon: Day 13: Diocese secretly used Bemus Point mansion to house molester priests Day 14: Suddenly, the murder investigation ends Day 15: Former prosecutor links a monsignor to murder Day 16: Could a Buffalo bishop shut down a murder investigation? Day 17: What became of two suspects in unsolved murder? Day 18: Family left in the dark about why murder went unsolved We certainly encourage you to subscribe to Late Edition Crime Beat Chronicles wherever you get your podcasts to catch all our upcoming coverage of the series as well as keep an eye on Buffalo News for the articles as they publish starting this weekend. 'Late Edition: Crime Beat Chronicles' is a product of Lee Enterprises, a leading provider of local news, information and advertising in 77 U.S. markets and communities. The program is hosted and recorded by Nat Cardona with additional production from Lee Enterprises.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Depositions are a crucial part of discovery—and they can also be, in the hands of a talented litigator, torture for the witness. So I suspect that many lawyers on the left—and beyond—might be jealous right now of Roberta “Robbie” Kaplan, the iconic lawyer and founding partner of Kaplan Hecker & Fink (“KHF”). Last month, Robbie had the pleasure of deposing former president Donald Trump—not once, but twice.I'm guessing it wasn't a fun experience for the Donald. His niece Mary Trump, who hired Kaplan Hecker to sue her uncle for fraud, described Robbie to Bloomberg as follows: “She's brilliant, she's unrelenting, she can't be intimidated, and she's not going to back down. She eats bullies… for lunch.”Deposing the president twice in the same month is only the latest distinction for Robbie, known for handling some of the most high-profile and high-stakes cases in the country. She's most well-known for representing the late Edie Windsor in United States v. Windsor, the landmark gay-rights case in which the Supreme Court held unconstitutional section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act. But Robbie is also the lawyer of choice for major corporations like Goldman Sachs and Uber, who hire her and KHF to handle their most complex legal problems.On Monday, I was delighted to speak with Robbie for the fourth episode of the Original Jurisdiction podcast. She wasn't able to say much about the Trump depositions, but she did talk about her multiple cases against Trump in broader terms. We also spoke about what makes her unique as a litigator; her epic victory last year in Sines v. Kessler, in which she won damages of more than $25 million from the white supremacists behind the violent “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville in August 2017; her vision for Kaplan Hecker & Fink, the thriving litigation boutique she founded after more than two decades at Paul, Weiss; free-speech and cancel-culture controversies in the legal world; and whether she's a tough boss.Please check it out by clicking on the embed at the top of this post. Thanks!Show Notes:* Roberta A. Kaplan bio, Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP* Then Comes Marriage: How Two Women Fought for and Won Equal Dignity for All, Amazon* A History-Making Litigator Leaves Biglaw To Launch A Boutique, by David Lat for Above the Law* Roberta Kaplan Builds Progressive Firm Suing Trump, Defending Wall Street, by Erik Larson for Bloomberg* 2020 Attorney of the Year: Roberta Kaplan, by Jane Wester for the New York Law Journal* Lady Justice and Charlottesville Nazis, by Dahlia Lithwick for Amicus/SlatePrefer reading to listening? A transcript of the entire episode appears below.Two quick notes:* This transcript has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter meaning—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning.* Because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email. To view the entire post, simply click on "View entire message" in your email app.David Lat: Hello, and welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to by going to davidlat.substack.com.You're listening to the fourth episode of this podcast, which airs every other Wednesday. Today I'm honored to be joined by one of the nation's most celebrated, successful, and significant litigators: Roberta “Robbie” Kaplan, founding partner of Kaplan Hecker & Fink. She is most famous for winning United States v. Windsor, the landmark case in which the Supreme Court held unconstitutional a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act, paving the way for nationwide marriage equality a few years later. But she has worked on many other fascinating cases over the course of her career, including two pending cases against Donald Trump in which she deposed the former president—twice in the past month.Robbie was born in Cleveland and grew up in Ohio. After graduating from Harvard College, magna cum laude, and Columbia Law School, Robbie clerked for Judge Mark Wolf of the District of Massachusetts and the late Chief Judge Judith Kaye of the New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court. Robbie then practiced for more than two decades at the major law firm of Paul, Weiss, where she built a thriving commercial and pro bono practice, including her big win in Windsor.In 2017, Robbie left Paul Weiss to launch Kaplan Hecker & Fink (“KHF”), one of the nation's top trial boutiques, known for handling both complex commercial and white-collar cases and landmark public-interest matters. One of the first such cases filed by KHF was Sines v. Kessler, a high-profile lawsuit under the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 against twenty-four neo-Nazi and white supremacist leaders responsible for organizing the racial- and religious-based violence in Charlottesville in August 2017. That case went to trial, and a year ago this month, the jury awarded a total of more than $25 million to Robbie's clients.In our conversation, Robbie and I talked about her various Trump cases, how she knew she was destined for a legal career from a very young age, two qualities that have made her so successful as a lawyer, how KHF has managed to be so financially successful while also doing so much public-interest work, and her vision for the firm's future. Without further ado, here's my interview of Roberta “Robbie” Kaplan.DL: Thanks so much for joining me, Robbie—it's an honor to have you!Roberta Kaplan: It's a pleasure to be here.DL: To start with what's in the news—and I feel like you're always in the news—what can you tell us about your latest high-profile case, namely, E. Jean Carroll's lawsuit against former president Donald Trump? I know that you recently deposed him. Is there anything you can say either about the deposition specifically or about the litigation more generally?RK: Sure. We actually have two litigations that are very active against Donald Trump, and I actually deposed him in both, on two successive weeks. So it was a relatively exhausting period for me. I literally went to Mar-a-Lago two weeks in a row to depose him. That's about all I can say about it, in terms of the depositions themselves.But in terms of the cases, it's very interesting. The E. Jean case, which you asked about, is on the fastest track. Right now, trial is scheduled to happen on February 6th. Right now we have one case against Donald Trump for the defamatory statements he made in June 2019. That case is currently certified to the D.C. Court of Appeals as to the question of whether when he made those statements, he was acting within the scope of his employment as president—sounds like kind of a crazy question, but that's the question. And the D.C. Court of Appeals, I believe, recognizing the need for speed here, has scheduled that case on a very, very expedited schedule, with oral arguments to be on January 10. So I think it's entirely possible that we have a ruling from the D.C. Court of Appeals before the trial before Judge [Lewis] Kaplan starts.Even if that's not true, however, we have a second case that we've told everyone in the world, including Judge Kaplan and Trump's lawyers, that we intend to file on November 24, which is the first day we can file it. That is a case directly for battery, the common-law cause of action by E. Jean against Donald Trump, based on a new law that was passed in New York called the Adult Survivors Act. It's patterned on the Child Victims Act, and it gives people who were survivors of rape that happened a long time ago basically a free one-year period to bring claims, notwithstanding statutes of limitations. That case we're definitely bringing out November 24th, and I don't think anyone will be surprised to learn that we probably will add to that case some new defamatory statements that Donald Trump made on Truth Social against our client—again, none of which are subject to any Westfall Act issue at all, because he wasn't president when he made them.So big picture, it's highly likely, particularly given the judge we have—Judge Kaplan, no relation—that we will go to trial on all or at least some of those claims in February.DL: Wow.RK: And the new case shouldn't really delay anything because it's basically the exact same facts. As we told the court, the only thing that's different about the new case is the damages theory, so we will have different experts. You obviously have different damages for being raped than you do for defamation. But that's really it. Everything else has already been done in discovery. Fact discovery is closed, and I see very little reason for any additional fact discovery, again, because the facts are totally overlapping.DL: So what are the two depositions? What was the difference between the two depos?RK: The first deposition, which happened the week before, was in our fraud case. Before Judge [Lorna] Schofield in the S.D.N.Y., we have a nationwide class action, on behalf of people who invested—I'm using the word “invested” in quotes—in a business opportunity—I'm using “business opportunity” in quotes too—that Donald Trump endorsed and heavily promoted before he was president, known as “ACN” or “American Communications Network.”It's a multilevel marketing scheme—I don't think even they deny that—in which people pay $500 or $1,000 to become part of this opportunity. Then the goal is to sell video phones. The idea of selling video phones when Skype and other software was already heavily in use—not really the smartest idea in the world—and when I say video phones, I mean big, standard-looking video phones, like I haven't seen since I was a young associate, probably.The only way to make money as part of this multilevel marketing scheme is to recruit other people in it. You don't make money from selling the phones, you make money from bringing other people in, which is the classic hallmark of a multilevel marketing scheme. Trump was paid a lot of money, at least $11 million or so, from this entity over a period of years. He went to conventions where these people were recruited, and he had huge crowds going nuts for him that kind of looked like his conventions now, honestly. And he said it was the greatest investment he's ever heard of, he did tons of due diligence, he knew it was a great company, a great business opportunity, “people think I do this for the money, but I just like being here.”I gave you a sense of the kind of the statements he made, and we allege those were all fraudulent, in that they were untrue and he knew them to be untrue. In that case too, fact discovery is closed—there are a couple of exceptions that the magistrate judge ordered, but it's essentially closed. But in that case, given how much bigger the scope is, we are about to go into expert discovery and then class certification. So that case is behind the E. Jean Carroll case for those reasons, although we're very eager to try it before the next presidential campaign for sure.DL: Oh, interesting.RK: Because we don't want to lose our defendant.DL: Indeed. Totally, totally.So to rewind a little bit… as I know from having read your wonderful memoir, Then Comes Marriage, you knew from an early age that you wanted to be a lawyer. What can you tell us about your childhood or your upbringing that might have shed light on your future career or that shaped your career choice as a lawyer?RK: When I was a kid, I liked to talk a lot. I still do. I spent a lot of time with my maternal grandmother, who was a very wise, very smart person. And there's a famous story in my family that when my uncle was in the Peace Corps in India at the time, and there is a series of letters between my mom, my grandmother, and my uncle from India, and in those letters—we still have copies—my grandmother is talking about how I just keep talking all time, and how at one point she said to me, ‘Robbie, you know I love you, but can you just be quiet for like three minutes? Can you stop for three minutes?' And I said something like, ‘No grandma, I can't. I just can't help myself. I love to talk.'DL: Ha!RK: And at a certain point, at a pretty young age, because I liked to read, I realized that if you're a lawyer, you got paid to talk. And I was like, “Okay, that's the job for me!”Then Sandra Day O'Connor—this is going to show my age, but she was made a Supreme Court justice, I believe when I was in high school. And that had a big impact on me at the time, because prior to that I don't think a lot of women thought they really had—not that I wanted to be a Supreme Court justice, but after that [women] thought they really had a future in the law. I remember that to this day, when that happened, what a big thing that was.And I just told everyone that I'm 85 years old….DL: Did judicial office ever cross your mind? Was that something you might have been interested in, in the past?RK: I certainly have a lot of friends who are judges and I admire what they do, and I think it's a great job. But I like to be a fighter. I like to be an advocate, and obviously I can't do that as judge. I think I would find it too quiet probably for my taste, even at the district-court or trial-court level. But there's no question that more and more we need great judges, and it's probably the single—at least in my job, in my world—the single most important job anyone can have. The only legal philosophy that ultimately works for me is legal realism, which means that often how a case goes—the pace of the case, how it flows, and ultimately what the result will be—is going to be based not only the philosophy but also the life experiences and understanding of the judge. That's just crucial. So the more people who are people of high character and great experience become judges, all the better.DL: I totally agree with you, totally agree. Looking at your remarkable career as a lawyer, what would you say is your superpower that is unique to Robbie Kaplan? Obviously, we know about how hard you work and how much you prepare, and of course your tactical brilliance, but is there something you would regard as a little different [about yourself]?RK: So I have a son who's now 16, but when he was little, one of his favorite books that I used to read, hundreds if not thousands of times, was called Dog with a Bone. And I think the reason I liked that book so much probably said something about me, which is that, as a lawyer, I really am like a dog with a bone. I do not give up as a lawyer. Our firm doesn't give up. And if I don't succeed on something the first time for a client, I succeed the second or third time, and it's that stubbornness maybe—stubbornness isn't usually considered a good quality, but it's that ability to keep on fighting, our resilience, that is our number-one quality.Then I'd say, second, creativity. I'm the least creative human being on the planet. I can't draw. My son goes crazy if I try to sing in the car because I'm so off key. I could never do creative writing. My pottery teacher basically kicked me out of class in high school because he asked me why every single pot I made look like a bong. And I wasn't even trying to make a bong! I was like, “I don't know what you mean!” So I have no artistic talent. But to the extent I have any creativity at all, I apply it to cases and the law, and how to achieve what we want to achieve for our clients in a creative and often unusual way.DL: That makes me think of the Charlottesville case, and your case against the individuals who caused such violence there and how you used a very old statute that was designed to be deployed against the Klan to go after these white supremacists, which was quite brilliant and creative. How did that theory come to you?RK: We saw what happened in Charlottesville, and we knew something had to be done about it. We were very concerned—and my firm had four people at the time, four lawyers—we were very concerned that the Department of Justice, then headed by Jeff Sessions, was not going do anything. Which we turned out to be right about.Pretty quickly after Charlottesville happened, someone got into the Discord servers that the organizers used and leaked a whole bunch of messages. This made it very clear that this was a conspiracy. So okay, great, we have the facts, we have clients, we went down there—but what law do we use? And there's not a lot, frankly, of current law to deal with this, in part because no one—I hope we're not going back to those times—but at least in my lifetime up to now, no one ever thought this was a huge problem. No one ever thought that we would have private conspiracies that were racially motivated, that planned, promoted, and engaged in violence. That may be changing, and that's one of the most disturbing things about our country right now, but that's generally been true for decades and decades.We had to go back and look for a statute called the KKK Act of 1871, which was passed to do exactly what it says it was passed to do, which was to try to curb the growth of the then-new Ku Klux Klan in the Deep South. Arguably it didn't have great success in that regard, but there were cases in the 1870s when it was passed trying to curtail or slow or stop the growth of the Klan.When you think about what happened in Charlottesville, though, it really is the modern-day version of what that Reconstruction Congress was trying to deal with. Back in the 1870s in Alabama, mostly men would don white robes and white hoods, and they would meet in the forest, and they would plan, tragically and horribly, a lynching or whatever they were going do.Today it's much easier. All you need is a hashtag on Parler or Discord or one of these dark websites, and it's like whack-a-mole—the minute one of the sites stops hosting these people, another one will take over. So all you need is a hashtag—that keeps your anonymity for the most part, unless you self-identify in your hashtag—and you don't have to go into the woods. Literally the guys who organized Charlottesville are from all over the country, and they all were able to plan nationwide and even internationally.When we filed the Charlottesville case—this is going to show how naive I was—I thought it was a terrible one-off, but it was a one-off, and we needed to bring the case so that it would never happen again. How wrong, in humility, I have to say I was, because not only was it not a one-off, it was really a harbinger, a kind of a road map to a lot of what has happened since then. Even this guy who attacked Nancy Pelosi's husband, while there weren't 20 guys who went to the house, everything that he believed and everything that he was motivated to do was based on these same kind of dark-web, white-supremacist, violent channels, which again, if you're interested or if you're a lonely guy who's looking for a community, it's pretty easy for you to get online and get indoctrinated in their thinking.DL: Absolutely. And I know this is perhaps a little far afield from your work as a lawyer, but maybe just even as a concerned citizen, how do we deal with this problem? How do we get ourselves out of this? It seems that it's just getting worse and worse.RK: I wish I knew. It's something I think and worry about all the time. We obviously—and I'm as committed as anyone to the First Amendment—we obviously have a right to free speech in our country, and we should have a right. But it may be both with the [Communications] Decency Act and with the case law, the developed case law in the First Amendment context, maybe [it] does not make sense in the modern day. For example, under Brandenburg, when you're doing something that wreaks havoc in a crowded theater, that may be translatable to things that people do online today in the dark web almost every single day. And whether our standards need to change to deal with that is a very, very serious question. Of course, whether or not this Supreme Court as currently constituted is open to hearing any of those arguments, I don't know.DL: That's very interesting. I wonder—because there are definitely some conservatives out there who want to revisit First Amendment doctrine as well—I wonder if this might be some weird area where maybe you agree with some of them?RK: We obviously have separation of church and state, though I'm a religious Jew, and Judaism going all the way back to the destruction of the Second Temple, in 62 AD or 66 AD, has been obsessed with speech. It's obsessed with speech because it understands that a lot of the damage that people can do to other people is through speaking. If you look at history, there's no question. Now, I'm not saying that we give up our right to free speech. It's embedded in our Constitution for good reason, and it came out of a world where people were severely restricted in what they could think and what they could say. But the link between certain kinds of speech and violence at this point is uncontroversial, and how we deal with speech that may not be committing violence, but is no question prompting and encouraging and invoking other people to commit violence, is a very serious issue.DL: Let me ask you this then, and again, perhaps I'm going a little bit out of what you usually focus on as a civil-rights, public-interest, and commercial litigator, but what is your take on what's happening to free speech in U.S. law schools right now? Because there have been speakers who have been shouted down, conservative speakers mainly, but of course, obviously conservatives have no problem going after free speech in other areas.What are your thoughts on that? Do you share the concern that certain speakers might come to law schools and inflict what activists call “harm” on students?RK: What I know about this, David, I mostly know from following your column, so that's basically the limit of my knowledge because I've been super-busy lately, but I have the general gist because you're a good journalist and I follow what you write. People have a right to protest. They should. But they don't have a right to protest in a way that stops other people from speaking.And there's no question that on both sides in our country right now—in fact, both the radical left and the radical right are looking more and more similar every day, which is petrifying because that's what it looked like in Germany in the thirties. So it's petrifying, but people both on the radical right and in the radical left who want to deprive other people of the ability to speak is not acceptable. It's not what the Founders meant. Speech and debate and discourse—even going back to Jewish law—is something to be highly encouraged. And we all make the situation worse, honestly, when we—I hate to use this expression, but when we cancel other people from expressing their views.Just because you don't agree with someone—I'm sure you and I don't agree on everything—doesn't mean that we shouldn't discuss and debate and argue with each other, and it's terribly distressing because it leads to the kind of breakdown in civil society I think that we're seeing today. And that's also incredibly scary.DL: Related to these cancel-culture controversies, what are your thoughts on the extent to which advocates can or should be held accountable for their clients? Even though you are most known or most famous for your civil-rights work, your public-interest work, you also represent Goldman Sachs, Airbnb, large companies, and there have been some on the left who have taken this sort of purist approach: “Oh, well, you represent all these progressive causes, but then you represent all these evil companies and defendants and what have you. “ So what are your thoughts on that, the extent to which lawyers should be held accountable for the sins of their clients?RK: I don't think lawyers should ever be held accountable for the sins of their clients. That's what lawyers do, and if lawyers were in any way held accountable for the sins of their clients, then we wouldn't really have a legal profession. The only exceptions to that would be when lawyers commit the sins of their clients as part of their representation, and that's where, for me, you can't cross the line. I think every lawyer I know weighs these things differently.Let me begin to say, I don't acknowledge for a second that Goldman Sachs or Airbnb or any of our other clients…DL: I'm playing devil's advocate—I have nothing against them personally….RK: … are evil or do anything evil or anything like that.You have to look at it differently in the criminal context than in the civil context. Criminally, I think my colleagues at Kaplan Hecker would say that everyone is entitled to a defense, and while there may be some criminal defendants that we wouldn't or that they wouldn't want to represent, the breadth of whom you represent criminally when someone's facing imprisonment is different than civil.Civilly, personally, it's a choice—and we, at Kaplan Hecker, think very seriously about these issues. We talk about them among the partners, and we won't take on a client who we feel somehow contravenes our values in some fundamental way. But that's a choice. I wouldn't judge another lawyer who did that because that's what lawyers do, if that makes sense.DL: That makes perfect sense, especially as you were saying in the civil context as well, because look, [clients] have a wide variety of lawyers they can choose from, and you have clients that you can choose from, you're very busy, and not everyone is entitled to Roberta Kaplan. I totally get that.RK: Other than E. Jean Carroll, who's entitled to me.DL: Indeed, indeed—and Edie Windsor, who was amazing, of course. This might be a dumb question, but is [Windsor] the win that you are most proud of in your long career? And if that is, then do you have a number two?RK: Charlottesville. Edie would be first, Charlottesville number two. Charlottesville, unfortunately—or fortunately, depending on how you look at it—was not covered that much. And the reason why is there were two highly racially motivated criminal trials going on at the same time. They were both in state court, so they were televised. So for the press, it was very easy to cover both those cases rather than cover Charlottesville, which had no cameras in the courtroom because we were in federal court, with very severe restrictions for Covid, and other things about access to the courtroom too. And I guess sadly in certain ways, the record we made wasn't really the focus of people's attention the way it should have been.But because of that, I don't think people realize how incredibly difficult it was. We were on trial for about four weeks. We had about a week of jury selection, so about five weeks total. Two of the defendants were pro se, Richard Spencer and Chris Cantwell. Chris Cantwell was then serving a sentence in federal prison for making violent threats against another white supremacist—I think he threatened to rape and kill his wife—but a week either before or after that, he made similar violent threats against me, saying something like, “When this case is over, we're gonna….”Can I swear on this?DL: Yeah, go for it.RK: “When this case is over, we're gonna have a lot of f**king fun with Robbie Kaplan.” And so we were in trial in this closed courtroom—the whole courthouse was closed, there was no other case going on for four weeks—with these two, with a bunch of defendants, but two of them who were pro se. I think Judge Moon rightly probably let them get away with almost anything they wanted to do because he was very concerned about an appellate record. And in retrospect, he was probably right.But living through it every day was extremely hard. They would just make incredibly outrageous arguments. Chris Cantwell in his closing started screaming, and I thought threatening the jury. The marshals would say to me, “Okay, you know, if Cantwell gets closer to you, we're gonna stay closer by you in case he tries anything.” It was crazy. And so just as a sheer endurance contest, and for being able to keep our dignity in the face of a trial where literally every day these guys were talking about how much they loved Mein Kampf—the rhetoric was unbelievable—is something I'm very proud of. And it's not just me, it's our entire team. I don't know how we did it so long, but we somehow managed to do it, and getting the verdict we did was incredible.DL: Absolutely. Congratulations. And Karen Dunn [of Paul, Weiss], Alan Levine [of Cooley]—you had a lot of other amazing lawyers involved as well, and other law firms. Did you have personal security at some point in addition to the marshals?RK: Yeah, I can't get into it, but yeah, so that made it hard too. We were really kind of trapped in the hotel in a lot of ways for security reasons. So imagine going from this closed-in courtroom to being trapped within the hotel for four weeks and thinking about how you're going to cross-examine someone about Mein Kampf or put on Deborah Lipstadt to talk about why these guys are obsessed with the Holocaust. It was something, for sure.DL: Yeah. But a great victory, a huge verdict, and a real blow against white supremacists and others who would harm the country.On a happier note, Kaplan Hecker & Fink celebrated its fifth anniversary, I guess this was over the summer?RK: Yeah, July 1.DL: Congratulations. What are you most proud of about the firm so far?RK: When we set out to create this firm, we had certain specific core values. One, doing work in the public interest together with commercial work and white-collar work. Two, having a paramount respect for maintaining our culture and making sure that we all liked each other and were friends and had the same values. And three, being as non-hierarchical as you can possibly be, in the sense that we hire, I think we now have 10 percent of our lawyers are Supreme Court clerks. That's kind of insane—like, I couldn't get a job with me anymore. But because we bring in such brilliant people, we make sure that we listen to their ideas, from day one.What I'm most proud of is that we kept to that. We really have to this day kept to that. Our greatest challenge, frankly, is not getting so large that we lose it. That's frankly the thing that we worry about the most right now. There are a number of partnerships where the partners don't know each other well enough to keep that sense of camaraderie and culture, and that's what we face every day. We're not there yet for sure, but that's what we think about a lot.DL: Right now the firm I think has around 60 lawyers, maybe 10 partners or so?RK: I think we're about—well, maybe about 13 or 14 partners.DL: Oh, okay.RK: And I think the limit for me, based on my experience, is about 25. Once you get to more than 25, it's hard for everyone to be friends the same way we are now. So we have some room to grow.DL: And what about total lawyers? Right now you're around 60-ish?RK: Yeah. Again, we don't know, but I think everyone agrees that at 125 we'd pretty much be at our limits. Again, we're nowhere near that now, but that's kind of what people have in mind, and I'm not sure all of us want to get even that big. We also, I think speaking unanimously for the partners, are not into this idea of having a lot of satellite offices.DL: That was my next question.RK: We have New York, which is kind of the main office, and then we have D.C., and I don't anticipate us expanding anywhere else. Before Covid, we might have thought about an office in California. One of the few good things about Covid, of very few good things, is that you see that you can practice across state lines in a much easier way than I ever anticipated. So I can't imagine [opening more offices] anytime in the near future.DL: Yeah, I totally agree with you. I don't think it's quite as imperative, and in this day and age of remote work, it is much easier.Let me ask you this question because people have asked me about it, and I'm genuinely curious for the answer. At Kaplan Hecker & Fink, you do tons of public interest work, you do tons of pro bono work, and then, on the other hand, you still pay above the Biglaw salary scale for associates.Something here is not computing. How do you do it? Maybe I'm being too nosy, but… are you content to just make, you know, a couple million rather than many millions, like you did at Paul, Weiss? What's the secret here?RK: I'm not going to get into any numbers—obviously, my partners would kill me—but let me put it this way: other than in our first year probably, I have not had to sacrifice anything financially at Kaplan Hecker & Fink.DL: Wow.RK: And I think for me and almost all the partners, we are doing appreciably better than we would have at big firms.What's our secret sauce? For one thing, we are very, very efficient. Even though our fees aren't significantly lower than big firms, our bills tend to be, because we don't have to have four levels of people working on something. The work product that we get from our associates is usually excellent and doesn't take as much work than it might at a big firm.Two, we're very creative about fee arrangements, which is also not a big-firm thing, at least in the past—it may be more so now. My managing partner, Julie Fink, was a client at Pfizer for years before she came here, and so she really understood this. We're very creative about success fees or contingency fees or flat fees in a way that I think is hard at big firms.DL: Hmm-mmm.RK: But suffice it to say that we're doing—knock wood, I'm knocking wood right now—we're doing okay, and we're pleased to be able to pay our associates and our staff the way we do. And money is not the paramount thing. No one comes to Kaplan Hecker thinking, “I want to earn as much as a hedge-fund person or an investment banker or a tech guy.” We do very well, and no one is in any financial distress. But maximizing dollar amounts per share, per partner, is not our number-one goal.DL: That makes perfect sense. I'm curious, since you mentioned contingency-fee arrangements—do you do a significant amount of plaintiff-side that work that helps generate unusually high revenue per lawyer, perhaps?RK: We've done some, we're certainly interested in doing more. We probably get, I don't know, I'd have to look at the numbers,.we get between six and a dozen people calling a week [with such cases]. We've probably turned down, I think the numbers have got to be 90, upwards of 95 percent of those. But the ones we take on tend to be profitable, so yes, that certainly helps the bottom line.DL: And then another thing I've heard about the firm is some of your public-interest work is also paid work, right? That it's not just entirely pro bono?RK: Yeah, some of it is funded. It's funded at a lower rate, so we have a public-interest rate we use that's about half our regular rate. We do a number of cases like that—a lot of the election work, cases that Joshua Matz does, are funded in that way.DL: Okay. So one last question before we go to my little lightning round of final questions. And again, maybe this is a delicate subject, but some people in the law firm world say you're a tough boss. Do you consider yourself a tough boss?RK: So let me tell you a story. Paul, Weiss had upward reviews. I don't remember when they started, but at some point when I was a partner, they started upward reviews. And my upward reviews—I'm not proud of this—but I would always have maybe one or two associates at a time that I didn't work so well with, and it always turned out that of the people who did the reviews, those would be the people who would turn in reviews. And so my upward reviews were not great. Then I did the Windsor case, and all of a sudden my upward reviews were stellar! I remember my wife saying to me, “Well, look, I don't understand.” Because I don't think I changed as a boss. I think what changed is the way people perceived me as a boss.DL: Hmm-mmm.RK: So, I don't know. Those were a long time ago, and I know I was under a lot of stress as a young partner at Paul, Weiss. But I don't think anyone today—you can ask them yourselves—has a problem with me as a boss. I certainly, and we all do, have high standards. We operate in very demanding situations, and our clients justifiably expect a lot from us. But I don't think anyone in the Charlottesville case or in E. Jean or in any of the paying matters for Airbnb or Uber would say I'm tough. If by tough you mean I have high standards, yes. But I'm also mentoring people and giving people opportunities to take depositions and to examine people at trial. We were the only firm in Charlottesville that had associates examining witnesses.DL: Wow. That's remarkable.RK: And that speaks for itself.DL: Totally, totally.So here are my standard final questions, which are standard for all my lawyer guests.My first is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as that abstract system that rules over us all.RK: I think what I like the least is the tendency of lawyers and judges at times to fail to see that behind all this case law and precedent and statutory language are real people, and that each case affects a real live person. And it's hard to keep those things balanced in your head, but good lawyers and good judges need to. And I sometimes find it very frustrating when people take things to such a level of abstraction that they fail to see the common humanity in what we do.DL: And I think that is one of your talents as a lawyer, just bringing out the humanity of your clients, whether it's Edie Windsor or Heather Heyer or E. Jean Carroll. I think your storytelling about these very real, flesh-and-blood people is something that just stands out about your practice,RK: Thank you, because I would like someone to say that about me, so I'm very pleased that you have. That's something we really care about a lot at Kaplan Hecker.DL: My second question is—and this'll be interesting because I know that from a young age, I think you have a line in your book about how at age 10 or 12, you were plotting out your legal career—what would you be if you were not a lawyer?RK: Believe it or not, because it's pretty timely, I thought seriously about becoming a Russian historian.DL: That was your undergrad major.RK: Yeah, I was a Russian history and lit major, and I spent—I think it was probably the single biggest influence on who I became—I spent the spring semester of my junior year in Moscow, in what was then the Soviet Union, but glasnost had been announced. So it was kind of the beginning of change, although change that didn't last very long. And I think that semester, I was fluent in Russian then, watching and living in what was then a totalitarian regime in, in a lot of ways—we were bugged and all kinds of things—just had a huge impact on the way I see the world. And maybe that made me a good lawyer, because I always expect the worst—which is a good thing as a lawyer in a lot of ways, because you want to be planning for and anticipating all contingencies.I ultimately realized that there are not a lot of happy years in Russian history, sadly continuing to today, and that if I became a Russian historian, it was going to be pretty depressing. But I originally went to law school just thinking, “Okay, this will be a way to figure out what else I want to do in my life.” And then I fell in love with it. I'd kind of forgotten about what I was thinking as a 10-year-old about getting paid to talk.Oh, and I flirted with the idea of going to the CIA.DL: Oh?RK: I started taking Russian because that was a big period of global crisis between the Soviet Union and the United States. My professor at Harvard was Richard Pipes, who came up with the phrase “the evil empire.” And I thought about it, but at that time, I don't think it would've been very easy for someone who was—I wasn't out as gay, but I certainly had concerns that I was gay and or lesbian, and I was smart enough to know that that probably wouldn't mix too well with going into either the NSA or CIA. So I didn't do it.DL: Mmm-hmm.RK: Probably the best for me in a whole lot of ways.DL: And certainly history has benefited from your choice to become a lawyer. So my third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?RK: Believe it or not, I'm probably at the high end of the people you've talked to, seven to eight hours a night. I've never been someone who's functioned well with very little sleep. I remember my freshman year in college, some of my friends and I decided as an experiment that we were going to stay up all night and then write some essay that was required for some writing class we had to take, taking a lot of NoDoz, like only freshmen in college would be stupid enough to do something like that. But suffice it to say, I had to ask for an extension of the due date for the essay.When I'm on trial, I sleep obviously a lot less, but even then I'll go to bed at midnight and wake up at four or five in the morning. I still need to sleep every night.DL: I'm glad to hear that. I always love talking to successful people who [get decent sleep]. And who are also working parents—you have a son. I think it's great when people can… Look, I know work-life balance may be sort of an illusion or maybe a little much to ask, but I'm glad to hear that you can get a decent amount of sleep.RK: I've had migraines ever since I was 12. I suffer from migraines, and if you sleep too little, it will bring on migraines. I remember once, when I was working for Chief Judge Kaye, I hadn't slept enough or I don't know what had happened, but she came into my office and I was curled up under my desk in the fetal position because I had a migraine. And I'll never forget, she thought I would die. She's like, “What is going on?” So since I suffer from something like that, I'm very careful about doing things that won't bring on a migraine, and lack of sleep—or even too much sleep, both sides—can cause migraines.DL: My final question: any words of wisdom for listeners who look at your life and career and say, I want to be Robbie Kaplan?RK: I'm not sure anyone should say that because we all have our own lives, and you shouldn't want my life any more than anyone should want anyone else's.But I would say one, stick to your guts. The single greatest lesson I've learned as a lawyer is to trust your own guts because they often tell you the right thing. There's a lot of distractions that you may listen to or follow instead of following your own inner voice, and that's really important, to hear your own inner voice.And two, and I alluded to this earlier, your ability to function as a lawyer is based on your integrity, and you should never, ever, no matter what the fee, what the pressure, what the circumstance—and again, we're seeing this today, unfortunately—never do anything for a client that in any way compromises your integrity. I learned that at Paul, Weiss. I learned it from my mentor at Paul, Weiss, Marty London, and a bunch of others. And it's the single most important thing you need to know as a lawyer.DL: Well said. Thank you so much, Robbie, for joining me. I am so grateful for your time and your insight, and I know my listeners will appreciate it as well.RK: It's a pleasure.DL: Thanks again to Robbie for joining me. She's had such a remarkable life and legal career, and it was wonderful to hear about her landmark wins and what she's working on today. If you haven't already read it, I highly recommend her memoir, Then Comes Marriage.As always, thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers, for tuning in. If you'd like to connect with me, you can email me at davidlat@substack.com, and you can find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe to Original Jurisdiction. Since this podcast is new, please help spread the word by telling your friends. And if you don't already, please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, as is most of the newsletter content, but it is made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode of the Original Jurisdiction podcast will appear two weeks from now, on Wednesday, November 16. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects.Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; and (3) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Today's guest, Sarah Klein, is a preeminent sexual abuse attorney at Manly, Stewart & Finaldi. A survivor of sexual abuse herself, Klein specializes in representing sexual abuse survivors. A former gymnast, she is the first known victim of former Olympic women's gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar.  She discusses how she overcame the trauma, while fueling her fight for justice not only for herself, but for others who have been abused. She talks about the warning signs that parents and teachers should look for, especially with younger children, and where to turn for help.   Klein is a fierce advocate for legal, cultural, and political change, actively spearheading the fight to extend the statute of limitations for abuse survivors across all 50 states. She regularly testifies in front of state legislative bodies and was among the small group of key and notable people invited to the Child Victims Act bill signing in New York.  Klein holds a J.D./M.B.A. and is an alumna of Columbia University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Global Entrepreneurship program. She sits on the Board of CHILD USAdvocacy and Yale University's Sports Equity Lab, pursuing research that can inform policies around safe sporting environments and help fight abuse, in all forms, for all athletes.  She is the host of the podcast “Bar Fights: Taking on Issues that Matter.” Info: ManlyStewart.com

More than 400 victims of sexual abuse have filed claims against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany under New York's Child Victims Act. Some of those claims include allegations against the former leader of the diocese, Bishop Howard J. Hubbard.  On this episode of "The Eagle," Investigations Editor Brendan Lyons talks about the latest allegations leveled against Hubbard by two brothers from Warren county. (This segment contains descriptions of situations that may be disturbing for some. Please listen with care.) Also on this episode, we'll go over the results of the gubernatorial primary and discuss the sudden movement in a decades-old cold case.

On this week's 51%, we speak with professors Shani Orgad and Rosalind Gill about their new book, Confidence Culture, examining the prominence of confidence and self-help discourse in modern-day marketing, workplaces, relationships — and well, everywhere else. We also discuss a bill in the New York legislature that would give adult survivors of sexual assault the opportunity to look back and sue their abusers. Guests: Dr. Shani Orgad and Dr. Rosalind Gill, authors of Confidence Culture 51% is a national production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio. It's produced by Jesse King. Our executive producer is Dr. Alan Chartock, and our theme is "Lolita" by the Albany-based artist Girl Blue. Follow Along You're listening to 51%, a WAMC production dedicated to women's issues and experiences. Thanks for tuning in, I'm Jesse King. Next week, we're kicking off a series on women in business, which personally I'm pretty excited for — but before we do that, I want to talk about confidence. Oftentimes, when we talk about women in business, there's a lot of focus on how women can better advocate for themselves and step up to the plate. We're supposed to lean in, push ourselves into new territory, break the glass ceiling. To paraphrase some advice Kim Kardashian recently got a lot of heat for — because I can't say the actual quote on the radio — we're supposed to get up and work.  I feel that also applies to the way we look at ourselves in general, too. We're frequently told to love ourselves, work on ourselves, feel comfortable in the skin we're in — all great messages. But I have to be honest: it can be a lot of pressure, and sometimes I don't. Sometimes I look at other go-getters and I'm like, “Man, I wish I could be like that.” Sometimes I don't love the skin, or hair, or clothes that I'm in. It's a lot of work being confident.  Our guests today have spent years looking into this phenomenon, which they call “confidence culture.” Dr. Shani Orgad is a professor of media and communications at the London School of Economics and Political Science, while Dr. Rosalind Gill teaches cultural and social analysis at the City University of London. Their new book — called Confidence Culture — interrogates the way we talk about confidence, and how, in some ways, self-help culture might hold us back.  Why is confidence discourse so prevalent right now? Gill: Well, we talk about it in more depth in the book, and we kind of track it back through self-help literature and self-help culture and the expansion of that, and the way that that's kind of taken off on social media. But we also sort of track it in terms of the global financial crisis, the recession, austerity, the kinds of messages that were more and more individualistic and, at least, very noticeable in the UK – for women to be to be thrifty, to make do and mend, [to] work on themselves, to use what resources they have to kind of hustle, I guess, in culture, most broadly. But we also talk about how it's kind of related to the rise in visibility of feminism. From around sort of 2014, it's been documented that feminism has really become much more visible as a kind of popular movement, and as a discourse across media. And we very much feel that this visibility of feminism has kind of allowed a space for these discourses of confidence to flourish. But of course, it's a very specific kind of feminism. It's a very individualistic feminism, it's not a kind of collective, outward-facing, kind of “changing structures” kind of feminism. It's very much a sort of inward looking, working on yourself to improve your position, kind of an emphasis. How do you see confidence culture working? What are the different parts that come together to create this movement? Gill: I mean, one of the things that was really, really striking to us was that we were working across different areas – like very different areas: the workplace, advertising, you know, “love your body” imagery, sex and relationships. In academic fields, these are spread quite widely, yet, what we're encountering was the same messages, again and again. And it wasn't just that they were the same broad messages, it's actually the same words and phrases that were being used, repeatedly. You know, the sort of “Strike a pose,” “Feel comfortable in your own skin,” “Love yourself,” “Believe in yourself.” And it really felt as if this wasn't just something that was happening in individual areas. It was kind of more than the sum of the parts. Orgad: And so it works through discourse – but we also know that it's very, very important as a visual regime. And again, as Ros mentioned, often through very similar visual imagery. So we identified what we call the “confidence pose,” which is, you know, the kind of Wonder Woman pose where you stand with your feet wide apart, hands on your hips, and so on. And this has been popularized by people like American social psychologist Amy Cuddy, who gave her most popular TED talk about power poses, where she literally shows Wonder Woman as the exemplar of this pose. What we noted is that, visually, this is was a really important signifier of confidence – across advertisements, we looked across women's magazines, business journals, and reports. Again, in different domains and context, you will see the very same visual appearances that signified confidence. We also realized that it's not only discourse and not only kind of a visual regime, but confidence also, importantly, works through emotions, through the affective level. In other words, it's not just about telling women certain things and encouraging them to change the way they think, or the way they look, crucially, but also fundamentally the way they feel. We identified particular aspects, particular emotions that are very much associated with confidence: resilience, positive thinking, gratitude. But crucially, it's also about certain emotions that confidence is not aligned with. For instance, we found how the particular type of confidence that confidence culture encourages, which is very individualized and positive, also often comes and goes hand in hand with prohibiting anger, or prohibiting those feelings that are deemed supposedly “ugly” or “negative.” So don't be bitter, don't be angry – be confident. And finally, we identify the way that confidence culture works also through practices – through not just things that you say, or not just even things that you feel, but also literally through things that you do. So again, it's about how you write emails. In this context. Google launched their “Sorry, Not Sorry” plugin a few years ago, which was addressed, particularly to women, interestingly, not starting your email with, “I'm just writing to…,” “No worries if not,” all these kinds of edits that are particularly, again, addressed to women – because of this assumption that there is some kind of a deficit and this internal defect almost, or these self-inflicted wounds that we should somehow overcome. And partly, were encouraged to overcome through changing our practices, even through changing the way we breathe. We found a range of texts, to our astonishment, that are about how you should retrain, reeducate yourself, how to breathe, in order to become more assertive, to love yourself, and so on. So it's ubiquitous, and that's why we call it “culture,” across very distinct domains, but also across very different realms: the visual, the textual, the emotional, and also the lived practices that we are all kind of engaging in an everyday basis. Your book mentions the popularity of confidence workshops or classes for women in the workplace – which surprised me, I don't think that I have personally come across that yet. It kind of seems strange to me to have it company-sponsored. But can you tell me a little bit more about that? Orgad: Yeah. And I think that is partly what we try to bring through the book, this kind of strangeness to it. To pause, to question things that have become so normalized and accepted. I'm really glad for you that you haven't encountered it, we have encountered them ourselves. But also, since the book has been published, we've been receiving numerous emails and messages on social media from women, who say, “I was sent to one of these courses! Now I understand!” And evidently and importantly, beyond the anecdotal, these are also commercially viable programs that lots of workplaces are signing into. And, you know, sometimes they might not be explicitly called “confidence” – they are sometimes, for instance, under the guise of “leadership.” But then when you look at what they contain, they would be, often in very troublingly gendered ways, directed to encouraging women and trying to help women to build their confidence and so on. And I think it's important for us to say that we do recognize that these are often well-meaning programs, in the same way that we recognize that the body positivity movement and “love your body” messages are and may be well meaning – and indeed may help women, individual women, to feel better about themselves, or to negotiate a pay raise, or to be more assertive in a meeting at work. We don't want to dismiss this. But we are troubled by the way that these programs, confidence coaching and similar kind of programs, are very much individualizing both the problem and the responsibility for fixing the problem. Workplaces invest a lot of money in initiatives that ultimately individualize it to employees, and particularly to women employees, to find the problem, or their internal issues and psychological obstacles, as it were. There are programs, for instance – and these are women-only programs, so in workplaces that are mixed workplaces, women-only programs are designed to help only those women in the work through a range of techniques that they're being taught – it can include things like mindfulness and yoga, things that are to do with your physical kind of confidence, how you project confidence physically, through more kind of psychological work on yourself. Changing the ways you communicate, for instance, in written communication, and so on. One of the interesting things that we noticed during the pandemic is that we were both, like many other people, spending hours on Zoom. And one of the interesting things that flourished during the pandemic is “virtually confident” workshops, which were about teaching people – but again, especially women – how to project confidence on screen. It was found that women, much more than men, tend to touch themselves on screen, and so there were entire programs that Ros and I attended about making yourself aware and, again, how you use your voice and how you project confidence, how you occupy space on the screen, how you position yourself, what background you choose, and so on and so forth. So commercially, they're viable, and they're successful, which also suggests that it's something that there isn't just appetite for it, but a purchase to it. I don't know, if you want to add, Ros. Gill: I think I just wanted to add something about our own ambivalence. And it goes back to something that you said right at the start Jesse, about feeling that you receive a lot of these messages – and just to really, really kind of highlight that we are not critical of confidence messaging, and we're not critical of women who find that messaging productive, helpful in their lives or, you know, beneficial for them to feel better. We confess to having cried at our fair share of Dove adverts and to having kind of adopted many of the confidence practices – both on ourselves, having done these courses, but also trying to encourage our students. We always encourage them, “Take up more space in the room, be bold when speaking at a conference, don't write apologetically,” and everything. So just to really emphasize that our target isn't confidence itself, and it isn't the women that adopt those programs, but it's what the culture does, and the way that it's kind of been placed beyond debate. And it's almost become like a cult in the sense that it's kind of an article of faith that is unquestionable. What would you say are the side effects of the culture? What does it mask over, and what is the effect on those in it? Gill: I think the main things that it does are, first of all, it kind of places all the responsibility and all the blame on women themselves. So it treats it as if this is some kind of pathology, this is some kind of defect, it's some kind of internal deficit. It's something that women lack, and that they have to work on making up for. So it's very blaming as a discourse. There's an example in the book, The Confidence Code, which is, you know, a New York Times bestseller, a very celebrated book – but they talk about women scratching themselves, scratching themselves like babies do, and say that we need to put on the mittens so that we don't scratch ourselves. Which we found to be so troubling, because it's such a infantilizing metaphor. So there's that whole kind of element of blame that is really problematic. And then there's the flip side of that, of like, what's that doing when you kind of put all the responsibility for a lack of confidence, and for gender inequality, on women's shoulders. It's as if we're doing this to ourselves, we put ourselves in this position, rather than looking at the structures and institutions and barriers that actually are in place that are preventing women and other oppressed and marginalized groups from actually making progress. You mentioned earlier the kind of imagery you were noticing in the ads and campaigns you were studying. Did you notice a particular demographic or kind of women who were being targeted to be more confident, or who were most showcased and represented as “confident” in these ads? Gill: We've tried to be really, really attentive to differences across the entire book, and we hope that the book offers a really intersectional feminist analysis of what we're seeing. So we've looked across age, we've looked across race and ethnicity, we've looked across disability and sexuality. I think what we've really tried to problematize, and it comes out most visibly in relation to the advertising, is a kind of faux diversity, in a way, a sort of hollowing out of diversity. At first, we were kind of hopeful that this kind of advertising was going to actually open up space for many more different kinds of women to be shown, who aren't usually the kind of white, middle class, cisgender, able-bodied, women that dominate the visual habitat that we all live in. We did see more diversity, but then we immediately saw that being somehow undercut or undermined with a kind of “one size fits all.” So this sort of sense that, “Well, whatever the problem, whoever the group, there's just one solution” – and it's to be more confident, confidence training programs, something like that. So it's a kind of double-move of recognizing diversity, only to then kind of say, “Well, it doesn't matter.” So what do we do? I mean, how can we help women feel more confident without making them feel like there's pressure on them? Or that there's something wrong with them? Orgad: Yeah, I think it's a really good question. And I would really just reiterate what was said earlier, that we are not against confidence, and we want women to thrive and feel safer and happier and more confident. But we feel really strongly that, at the same time, we need (and by we, we mean not just with women, but crucially as a society) to really think critically about how not just to invest in demanding and encouraging and exhorting women to be more confident and fix the problem as it were themselves, but to think and nourish structural thinking. And so we ended the book, in our conclusion, we call it “Beyond Confidence.” And we're trying to look at examples that perhaps are not entirely outside confidence or against confidence –because again, we are not ourselves against confidence – but that do introduce those things that, as you mentioned before, Jesse, that confidence culture masks and perhaps minimizes or marginalizes. And we talked about what we call “confidence climate” – how can we think about nurturing and building a climate that enables and allows women and everybody and other disempowered groups to feel safer and feel more confident, rather than putting again the onus on individuals to do that work? In this context we bring Lizzo as an interesting example, because she's kind of the self-confidence queen, but at the same time, Lizzo is a really interesting kind of person and persona to think through about what we can do differently. Because she foregrounds, for instance, interdependence, she foregrounds the ways in which she herself, to become confident, is dependent on her family, on her network of friends, on the community who travels with her on her tour. So one way, for instance, that we would want to think about building a climate of confidence is a climate that encourages our dependence on each other, and doesn't deem being dependent on somebody abhorrent or ugly or undesirable. The [current] confidence culture is not about needing help from anybody else, it's about you caring for yourself, because nobody else will. So these are kind of ways that we feel that should come, and we would hope would come, alongside the more kind of individual work that perhaps women can do, or do do – and we would have liked to see workplaces investing more in structural changes that create places and workplaces that are confident workplaces, where employees can thrive as confident beings, rather than sending them on these courses that keep telling them the problem is you, you fix it. Drs. Shani Orgad and Rosalind Gill are the authors of Confidence Culture, out now on Duke University Press. Shani and Rosalind, thanks so much for taking the time. We're gonna switch gears before we head out to recognize Sexual Assault Awareness Month - and a warning to those who may be sensitive to the subject. On Thursday, New York state lawmakers joined survivors in Westchester County to call attention to a bill that would give some adult survivors the opportunity to sue their abusers in court. The Adult Survivors Act is similar to the Child Victims Act passed by the legislature in 2019, which gave survivors of childhood sexual abuse a one-year lookback window to sue their abusers, in some cases long after the state's statute of limitations expired. The one-year window was ultimately extended another year due to the coronavirus pandemic. This time, the Adult Survivors Act would open up that opportunity to those who were 18 years or older at the time of their abuse. The bill was passed by the State Senate last year, but it has so far stalled in the Assembly.  It was a blustery Thursday in New York's Hudson Valley, but advocates with the victims assistance nonprofit Safe Horizon still gathered outside the Westchester County Court in White Plains to push for the bill's passage.   State Senator Shelly Mayer, a Democrat from the 37th District, is a co-sponsor of the bill. "This is so basic to our system of laws. We're not talking about criminal penalties here, we're talking about the opportunity to confront your accuser and make a civil claim for damages," says Mayer. "And that is what our systems of laws is based on. The equality of opportunity to assert your claim." Safe Horizon Vice President of Government Affairs Michael Polenberg says more than 10,000 lawsuits were filed as a result of the Child Victims Act by the time its lookback window closed last August. Four of the state's eight Roman Catholic dioceses filed for bankruptcy, as did the Boy Scouts of America, at least partly due to a large number of lawsuits regarding sexual abuse. In 2019, lawmakers also expanded the civil and criminal statute of limitations for several felony sex offenses in the state. The criminal statute of limitations for second and third-degree rape increased from five years to 20 and 10 years, respectively, and Polenburg says the civil statute now stands at 20 years for both — but he notes those changes were made proactively, not retroactively.   "Meaning certain survivors who were abused before 2019 still only have a few years to file a civil lawsuit," he adds.   Polenberg says that, as child victims have been given the chance to look back, so should adults. For many survivors, coming to terms with what they went through can take years, even decades. Donna Hylton, activist and author of the memoir, A Little Piece of Light, says she's been surviving trauma and sexual abuse for the majority of her life – something she didn't really come to terms with until after her incarceration at age 20. Hylton says she was incarcerated for 27 years, and that people often misunderstand the sheer number of adult survivors in state prisons alone. “That 85 percent that we've been told for so long, of women, young women, and gender-expansive people that are in the system, that have been abused, is wrong. It's more like 97 percent. Closer to 98 percent. Why? Because people still don't talk. Why? Because people still don't listen," says Hylton. Assemblymember Amy Paulin, a Democrat from the 88th District, says she became a survivor at age 14, and it took years for her to say it out loud.   “I buried it, it was something I was embarrassed about, it was something that I never told anyone about — and I don't know that that would have been different if I was four years older," says Paulin. "If you're 17, you're a minor, you're 18 and all of sudden you're not. And I don't know what shifts or changes in a young woman's mind…not that much. So we have not addressed the remedies for so many young women who likely have not or did not even come to grips with their own sexual assault. So this is a very important bill.” “For many years, it was the State Assembly that moved the Child Victims Act forward. We're now in the situation where it's the Senate who's moving on the Adult Survivors Act — they passed it last year unanimously, everyone voted in support. This year, the bill has already moved through the Judiciary Committee and the Finance Committee, and it's now heading to the floor, and it's the Assembly where the bill seems to be stuck," adds Polenberg. "So we're hopeful that, with the support of the assemblymembers here today, that we can finally move this bill forward this year." Fellow Democratic State Assemblymembers Chris Burdick and Tom Abinanti joined Paulin at the press conference Thursday. New York's legislative session wraps on June 2.   Safe Horizon has operated a network of New York City programs helping survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence, human trafficking, homelessness and more since 1978. The nonprofit says it responds to roughly 250,000 New Yorkers a year who have experienced violence or abuse.  51% is a national production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio. It's produced by Jesse King. Our executive producer is Dr. Alan Chartock, and our theme is "Lolita" by the Albany-based artist Girl Blue.

On this week's 51%, we speak with professors Shani Orgad and Rosalind Gill about their new book, Confidence Culture, examining the prominence of confidence and self-help discourse in modern-day marketing, workplaces, relationships — and well, everywhere else. We also discuss a bill in the New York legislature that would give adult survivors of sexual assault the opportunity to look back and sue their abusers. Guests: Dr. Shani Orgad and Dr. Rosalind Gill, authors of Confidence Culture 51% is a national production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio. It's produced by Jesse King. Our executive producer is Dr. Alan Chartock, and our theme is "Lolita" by the Albany-based artist Girl Blue. Follow Along You're listening to 51%, a WAMC production dedicated to women's issues and experiences. Thanks for tuning in, I'm Jesse King. Next week, we're kicking off a series on women in business, which personally I'm pretty excited for — but before we do that, I want to talk about confidence. Oftentimes, when we talk about women in business, there's a lot of focus on how women can better advocate for themselves and step up to the plate. We're supposed to lean in, push ourselves into new territory, break the glass ceiling. To paraphrase some advice Kim Kardashian recently got a lot of heat for — because I can't say the actual quote on the radio — we're supposed to get up and work.  I feel that also applies to the way we look at ourselves in general, too. We're frequently told to love ourselves, work on ourselves, feel comfortable in the skin we're in — all great messages. But I have to be honest: it can be a lot of pressure, and sometimes I don't. Sometimes I look at other go-getters and I'm like, “Man, I wish I could be like that.” Sometimes I don't love the skin, or hair, or clothes that I'm in. It's a lot of work being confident.  Our guests today have spent years looking into this phenomenon, which they call “confidence culture.” Dr. Shani Orgad is a professor of media and communications at the London School of Economics and Political Science, while Dr. Rosalind Gill teaches cultural and social analysis at the City University of London. Their new book — called Confidence Culture — interrogates the way we talk about confidence, and how, in some ways, self-help culture might hold us back.  Why is confidence discourse so prevalent right now? Gill: Well, we talk about it in more depth in the book, and we kind of track it back through self-help literature and self-help culture and the expansion of that, and the way that that's kind of taken off on social media. But we also sort of track it in terms of the global financial crisis, the recession, austerity, the kinds of messages that were more and more individualistic and, at least, very noticeable in the UK – for women to be to be thrifty, to make do and mend, [to] work on themselves, to use what resources they have to kind of hustle, I guess, in culture, most broadly. But we also talk about how it's kind of related to the rise in visibility of feminism. From around sort of 2014, it's been documented that feminism has really become much more visible as a kind of popular movement, and as a discourse across media. And we very much feel that this visibility of feminism has kind of allowed a space for these discourses of confidence to flourish. But of course, it's a very specific kind of feminism. It's a very individualistic feminism, it's not a kind of collective, outward-facing, kind of “changing structures” kind of feminism. It's very much a sort of inward looking, working on yourself to improve your position, kind of an emphasis. How do you see confidence culture working? What are the different parts that come together to create this movement? Gill: I mean, one of the things that was really, really striking to us was that we were working across different areas – like very different areas: the workplace, advertising, you know, “love your body” imagery, sex and relationships. In academic fields, these are spread quite widely, yet, what we're encountering was the same messages, again and again. And it wasn't just that they were the same broad messages, it's actually the same words and phrases that were being used, repeatedly. You know, the sort of “Strike a pose,” “Feel comfortable in your own skin,” “Love yourself,” “Believe in yourself.” And it really felt as if this wasn't just something that was happening in individual areas. It was kind of more than the sum of the parts. Orgad: And so it works through discourse – but we also know that it's very, very important as a visual regime. And again, as Ros mentioned, often through very similar visual imagery. So we identified what we call the “confidence pose,” which is, you know, the kind of Wonder Woman pose where you stand with your feet wide apart, hands on your hips, and so on. And this has been popularized by people like American social psychologist Amy Cuddy, who gave her most popular TED talk about power poses, where she literally shows Wonder Woman as the exemplar of this pose. What we noted is that, visually, this is was a really important signifier of confidence – across advertisements, we looked across women's magazines, business journals, and reports. Again, in different domains and context, you will see the very same visual appearances that signified confidence. We also realized that it's not only discourse and not only kind of a visual regime, but confidence also, importantly, works through emotions, through the affective level. In other words, it's not just about telling women certain things and encouraging them to change the way they think, or the way they look, crucially, but also fundamentally the way they feel. We identified particular aspects, particular emotions that are very much associated with confidence: resilience, positive thinking, gratitude. But crucially, it's also about certain emotions that confidence is not aligned with. For instance, we found how the particular type of confidence that confidence culture encourages, which is very individualized and positive, also often comes and goes hand in hand with prohibiting anger, or prohibiting those feelings that are deemed supposedly “ugly” or “negative.” So don't be bitter, don't be angry – be confident. And finally, we identify the way that confidence culture works also through practices – through not just things that you say, or not just even things that you feel, but also literally through things that you do. So again, it's about how you write emails. In this context. Google launched their “Sorry, Not Sorry” plugin a few years ago, which was addressed, particularly to women, interestingly, not starting your email with, “I'm just writing to…,” “No worries if not,” all these kinds of edits that are particularly, again, addressed to women – because of this assumption that there is some kind of a deficit and this internal defect almost, or these self-inflicted wounds that we should somehow overcome. And partly, were encouraged to overcome through changing our practices, even through changing the way we breathe. We found a range of texts, to our astonishment, that are about how you should retrain, reeducate yourself, how to breathe, in order to become more assertive, to love yourself, and so on. So it's ubiquitous, and that's why we call it “culture,” across very distinct domains, but also across very different realms: the visual, the textual, the emotional, and also the lived practices that we are all kind of engaging in an everyday basis. Your book mentions the popularity of confidence workshops or classes for women in the workplace – which surprised me, I don't think that I have personally come across that yet. It kind of seems strange to me to have it company-sponsored. But can you tell me a little bit more about that? Orgad: Yeah. And I think that is partly what we try to bring through the book, this kind of strangeness to it. To pause, to question things that have become so normalized and accepted. I'm really glad for you that you haven't encountered it, we have encountered them ourselves. But also, since the book has been published, we've been receiving numerous emails and messages on social media from women, who say, “I was sent to one of these courses! Now I understand!” And evidently and importantly, beyond the anecdotal, these are also commercially viable programs that lots of workplaces are signing into. And, you know, sometimes they might not be explicitly called “confidence” – they are sometimes, for instance, under the guise of “leadership.” But then when you look at what they contain, they would be, often in very troublingly gendered ways, directed to encouraging women and trying to help women to build their confidence and so on. And I think it's important for us to say that we do recognize that these are often well-meaning programs, in the same way that we recognize that the body positivity movement and “love your body” messages are and may be well meaning – and indeed may help women, individual women, to feel better about themselves, or to negotiate a pay raise, or to be more assertive in a meeting at work. We don't want to dismiss this. But we are troubled by the way that these programs, confidence coaching and similar kind of programs, are very much individualizing both the problem and the responsibility for fixing the problem. Workplaces invest a lot of money in initiatives that ultimately individualize it to employees, and particularly to women employees, to find the problem, or their internal issues and psychological obstacles, as it were. There are programs, for instance – and these are women-only programs, so in workplaces that are mixed workplaces, women-only programs are designed to help only those women in the work through a range of techniques that they're being taught – it can include things like mindfulness and yoga, things that are to do with your physical kind of confidence, how you project confidence physically, through more kind of psychological work on yourself. Changing the ways you communicate, for instance, in written communication, and so on. One of the interesting things that we noticed during the pandemic is that we were both, like many other people, spending hours on Zoom. And one of the interesting things that flourished during the pandemic is “virtually confident” workshops, which were about teaching people – but again, especially women – how to project confidence on screen. It was found that women, much more than men, tend to touch themselves on screen, and so there were entire programs that Ros and I attended about making yourself aware and, again, how you use your voice and how you project confidence, how you occupy space on the screen, how you position yourself, what background you choose, and so on and so forth. So commercially, they're viable, and they're successful, which also suggests that it's something that there isn't just appetite for it, but a purchase to it. I don't know, if you want to add, Ros. Gill: I think I just wanted to add something about our own ambivalence. And it goes back to something that you said right at the start Jesse, about feeling that you receive a lot of these messages – and just to really, really kind of highlight that we are not critical of confidence messaging, and we're not critical of women who find that messaging productive, helpful in their lives or, you know, beneficial for them to feel better. We confess to having cried at our fair share of Dove adverts and to having kind of adopted many of the confidence practices – both on ourselves, having done these courses, but also trying to encourage our students. We always encourage them, “Take up more space in the room, be bold when speaking at a conference, don't write apologetically,” and everything. So just to really emphasize that our target isn't confidence itself, and it isn't the women that adopt those programs, but it's what the culture does, and the way that it's kind of been placed beyond debate. And it's almost become like a cult in the sense that it's kind of an article of faith that is unquestionable. What would you say are the side effects of the culture? What does it mask over, and what is the effect on those in it? Gill: I think the main things that it does are, first of all, it kind of places all the responsibility and all the blame on women themselves. So it treats it as if this is some kind of pathology, this is some kind of defect, it's some kind of internal deficit. It's something that women lack, and that they have to work on making up for. So it's very blaming as a discourse. There's an example in the book, The Confidence Code, which is, you know, a New York Times bestseller, a very celebrated book – but they talk about women scratching themselves, scratching themselves like babies do, and say that we need to put on the mittens so that we don't scratch ourselves. Which we found to be so troubling, because it's such a infantilizing metaphor. So there's that whole kind of element of blame that is really problematic. And then there's the flip side of that, of like, what's that doing when you kind of put all the responsibility for a lack of confidence, and for gender inequality, on women's shoulders. It's as if we're doing this to ourselves, we put ourselves in this position, rather than looking at the structures and institutions and barriers that actually are in place that are preventing women and other oppressed and marginalized groups from actually making progress. You mentioned earlier the kind of imagery you were noticing in the ads and campaigns you were studying. Did you notice a particular demographic or kind of women who were being targeted to be more confident, or who were most showcased and represented as “confident” in these ads? Gill: We've tried to be really, really attentive to differences across the entire book, and we hope that the book offers a really intersectional feminist analysis of what we're seeing. So we've looked across age, we've looked across race and ethnicity, we've looked across disability and sexuality. I think what we've really tried to problematize, and it comes out most visibly in relation to the advertising, is a kind of faux diversity, in a way, a sort of hollowing out of diversity. At first, we were kind of hopeful that this kind of advertising was going to actually open up space for many more different kinds of women to be shown, who aren't usually the kind of white, middle class, cisgender, able-bodied, women that dominate the visual habitat that we all live in. We did see more diversity, but then we immediately saw that being somehow undercut or undermined with a kind of “one size fits all.” So this sort of sense that, “Well, whatever the problem, whoever the group, there's just one solution” – and it's to be more confident, confidence training programs, something like that. So it's a kind of double-move of recognizing diversity, only to then kind of say, “Well, it doesn't matter.” So what do we do? I mean, how can we help women feel more confident without making them feel like there's pressure on them? Or that there's something wrong with them? Orgad: Yeah, I think it's a really good question. And I would really just reiterate what was said earlier, that we are not against confidence, and we want women to thrive and feel safer and happier and more confident. But we feel really strongly that, at the same time, we need (and by we, we mean not just with women, but crucially as a society) to really think critically about how not just to invest in demanding and encouraging and exhorting women to be more confident and fix the problem as it were themselves, but to think and nourish structural thinking. And so we ended the book, in our conclusion, we call it “Beyond Confidence.” And we're trying to look at examples that perhaps are not entirely outside confidence or against confidence –because again, we are not ourselves against confidence – but that do introduce those things that, as you mentioned before, Jesse, that confidence culture masks and perhaps minimizes or marginalizes. And we talked about what we call “confidence climate” – how can we think about nurturing and building a climate that enables and allows women and everybody and other disempowered groups to feel safer and feel more confident, rather than putting again the onus on individuals to do that work? In this context we bring Lizzo as an interesting example, because she's kind of the self-confidence queen, but at the same time, Lizzo is a really interesting kind of person and persona to think through about what we can do differently. Because she foregrounds, for instance, interdependence, she foregrounds the ways in which she herself, to become confident, is dependent on her family, on her network of friends, on the community who travels with her on her tour. So one way, for instance, that we would want to think about building a climate of confidence is a climate that encourages our dependence on each other, and doesn't deem being dependent on somebody abhorrent or ugly or undesirable. The [current] confidence culture is not about needing help from anybody else, it's about you caring for yourself, because nobody else will. So these are kind of ways that we feel that should come, and we would hope would come, alongside the more kind of individual work that perhaps women can do, or do do – and we would have liked to see workplaces investing more in structural changes that create places and workplaces that are confident workplaces, where employees can thrive as confident beings, rather than sending them on these courses that keep telling them the problem is you, you fix it. Drs. Shani Orgad and Rosalind Gill are the authors of Confidence Culture, out now on Duke University Press. Shani and Rosalind, thanks so much for taking the time. We're gonna switch gears before we head out to recognize Sexual Assault Awareness Month - and a warning to those who may be sensitive to the subject. On Thursday, New York state lawmakers joined survivors in Westchester County to call attention to a bill that would give some adult survivors the opportunity to sue their abusers in court. The Adult Survivors Act is similar to the Child Victims Act passed by the legislature in 2019, which gave survivors of childhood sexual abuse a one-year lookback window to sue their abusers, in some cases long after the state's statute of limitations expired. The one-year window was ultimately extended another year due to the coronavirus pandemic. This time, the Adult Survivors Act would open up that opportunity to those who were 18 years or older at the time of their abuse. The bill was passed by the State Senate last year, but it has so far stalled in the Assembly.  It was a blustery Thursday in New York's Hudson Valley, but advocates with the victims assistance nonprofit Safe Horizon still gathered outside the Westchester County Court in White Plains to push for the bill's passage.   State Senator Shelly Mayer, a Democrat from the 37th District, is a co-sponsor of the bill. "This is so basic to our system of laws. We're not talking about criminal penalties here, we're talking about the opportunity to confront your accuser and make a civil claim for damages," says Mayer. "And that is what our systems of laws is based on. The equality of opportunity to assert your claim." Safe Horizon Vice President of Government Affairs Michael Polenberg says more than 10,000 lawsuits were filed as a result of the Child Victims Act by the time its lookback window closed last August. Four of the state's eight Roman Catholic dioceses filed for bankruptcy, as did the Boy Scouts of America, at least partly due to a large number of lawsuits regarding sexual abuse. In 2019, lawmakers also expanded the civil and criminal statute of limitations for several felony sex offenses in the state. The criminal statute of limitations for second and third-degree rape increased from five years to 20 and 10 years, respectively, and Polenburg says the civil statute now stands at 20 years for both — but he notes those changes were made proactively, not retroactively.   "Meaning certain survivors who were abused before 2019 still only have a few years to file a civil lawsuit," he adds.   Polenberg says that, as child victims have been given the chance to look back, so should adults. For many survivors, coming to terms with what they went through can take years, even decades. Donna Hylton, activist and author of the memoir, A Little Piece of Light, says she's been surviving trauma and sexual abuse for the majority of her life – something she didn't really come to terms with until after her incarceration at age 20. Hylton says she was incarcerated for 27 years, and that people often misunderstand the sheer number of adult survivors in state prisons alone. “That 85 percent that we've been told for so long, of women, young women, and gender-expansive people that are in the system, that have been abused, is wrong. It's more like 97 percent. Closer to 98 percent. Why? Because people still don't talk. Why? Because people still don't listen," says Hylton. Assemblymember Amy Paulin, a Democrat from the 88th District, says she became a survivor at age 14, and it took years for her to say it out loud.   “I buried it, it was something I was embarrassed about, it was something that I never told anyone about — and I don't know that that would have been different if I was four years older," says Paulin. "If you're 17, you're a minor, you're 18 and all of sudden you're not. And I don't know what shifts or changes in a young woman's mind…not that much. So we have not addressed the remedies for so many young women who likely have not or did not even come to grips with their own sexual assault. So this is a very important bill.” “For many years, it was the State Assembly that moved the Child Victims Act forward. We're now in the situation where it's the Senate who's moving on the Adult Survivors Act — they passed it last year unanimously, everyone voted in support. This year, the bill has already moved through the Judiciary Committee and the Finance Committee, and it's now heading to the floor, and it's the Assembly where the bill seems to be stuck," adds Polenberg. "So we're hopeful that, with the support of the assemblymembers here today, that we can finally move this bill forward this year." Fellow Democratic State Assemblymembers Chris Burdick and Tom Abinanti joined Paulin at the press conference Thursday. New York's legislative session wraps on June 2.   Safe Horizon has operated a network of New York City programs helping survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence, human trafficking, homelessness and more since 1978. The nonprofit says it responds to roughly 250,000 New Yorkers a year who have experienced violence or abuse.  51% is a national production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio. It's produced by Jesse King. Our executive producer is Dr. Alan Chartock, and our theme is "Lolita" by the Albany-based artist Girl Blue.

Feb. 25, 2022 - It's been three years since the adoption of the Child Victims Act, so we're assessing the ramifications of the law with victims' rights attorney Carrie Goldberg, who also makes the case for establishing a similar measure for survivors of sexual abuse as adults.

The following episode contains content on sexual violence that some listeners may find disturbing. Discretion is advised. Carré Otis is a supermodel, survivor and author. Carré appeared in campaigns for Guess and Calvin Klein and on the American and International covers of Vogue, Harper's Bazaar, Elle, Marie Claire & others. Listen to Dr. Allie in conversation with Carré about her early childhood, trauma and mental health, her path to healing, and more recently her public disclosures. Carré was 17 when she was scouted and then sent from New York to Paris to live with former President of Elite Europe Gérald Marie, who repeatedly raped her. Carré recently traveled to Paris where she and a dozen other survivors testified against Marie. Carré also recently filed a civil case in New York before the state's Child Victims Act look-back window closed. Carré, a longtime member of the Model Alliance Leadership Council, still models and is currently represented by Iconic Focus Models, an all women-owned agency. **Certain topics discussed in this episode are the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation and civil litigation. The statements and claims expressed by our guests are their own. Model Mentality and Mind Studios LLC makes no representation or warranties related to the truthfulness or veracity of any of its guests' statements and claims, including as they may relate to any ongoing criminal investigation or civil litigation.** Please note that the contents of Model Mentality are for informational purposes only. The content is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your mental health professional or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding your condition. Never disregard professional advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have heard on Model Mentality. As always, if you are in crisis or you think you may have an emergency, call your doctor or 911 immediately. If you're having suicidal thoughts, call 1-800-273-TALK (8255) to talk to a skilled, trained counselor at a crisis center in your area at any time (National Suicide Prevention Lifeline). If you are located outside the United States, call your local emergency line immediately. The views and opinions expressed by guests of the podcast are those of each individual guest and do not reflect the views and opinions of Mind Studios or Dr. Allie Sharma and do not constitute an endorsement of such views and opinions. Thank you for listening to Model Mentality. Model Mentality is brought to you by Mind Studios. Links: Follow Carré Otis on IG @iamcarreotis. References for the 'Let's Get Clinical' segment: World Health Organization (WHO). Global and regional estimates of violence against women: prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2013. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/modelmentality/support

The top-rated weekly law and politics podcast -- LegalAF -- produced by Meidas Touch and anchored by MT founder and civil rights lawyer, Ben Meiselas and national trial lawyer and strategist, Michael Popok, is back for another hard-hitting, thought-provoking yet entertaining look at the most compelling developments at the intersection of law and politics. At the top of the podcast, Ben and Popok honor the victims and first responders and their families on the 20th Anniversary of September 11th. Then, Ben and Popok explore and explode this week's political litigation developments:  The DOJ bombshell/landmark suit of The United States of America v. the State of Texas, filed this week to find that the Texas abortion ban (SB8) “defiantly” violates: the US Constitution, a woman's Constitutional-right to terminate her pregnancy prior to viability, and the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, Commerce Clause, and the Intergovernmental Immunity doctrine. Oath Keeper attorney and others possibly being charged by DOJ with Federal crime of “seditious conspiracy” concerning the January 6th attack on the Capitol. President Biden's Vaccine Mandates for business and federal workers through OSHA, the 1905 SCOTUS precedent to support it, and the GQP predictable resistance to the new public health laws. Fulton County, Georgia's District Attorney continued criminal investigation into Trump's phone call on January 2nd to the Georgia Secretary of State to “find votes” and fraudulently overturn the election results, and possible crimes committed by Rudy Giuliani and Sen. Lindsey Graham. A Florida Federal judge finding that Governor DeSantis' “anti-protest” law passed in response to the BLM movement, violates the Constitution's First Amendment protecting free speech and the right to peaceably assembly, and harks back to Jim Crow days and the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. A federal civil suit filed against Prince Andrew under New York's Child Victims Act brought by a plaintiff who alleges that as part of the Jeffrey Epstein web of depravity, she was raped by the Prince when she was a teenager, and a discussion of how her lawyers were finally able to serve him with the lawsuit in England. Special Easter Eggs Alert: Popok breaks out an egg timer to keep the show humming along, and we have our first sponsor! Please visit Policygenius.com right now and compare insurance quotes today! Reminder and Programming Note: All past episodes of Legal AF originally featured on the MeidasTouch podcast can now be found here.     Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In a new lawsuit, a man alleges that Bambaataa abused and trafficked him since the age of 12. Afrika Bambaataa has been sued by a man who mentioned that the hip-hop pioneer abused and sex trafficked him from 1991 to 1995, beginning when the accuser was 12 years old, according to court documents viewed by The Lionel B Show. Bambaataa was around 33 or 34 years old at the beginning of the period in question. The lawsuit was filed in New York State Supreme Court on August 4th on behalf of a plaintiff identified as John Doe. The plaintiff lives in the Bronx and filed the lawsuit under the state's 2019 Child Victims Act also known as CVA, which opened up a limited time window for adults to sue over childhood sexual abuse regardless of when it allegedly occurred. According to the lawsuit, Doe was “repeatedly sexually abused and sex trafficked” by Bambaataa at the Bronx River Houses public housing project, where they both lived. The victim and his lawyers claim that Bambaataa “eventually began to inappropriately touch [Doe] in his private areas while [Doe] was in [Bambaataa's apartment].” They also allege Bambaataa “eventually encouraged [Doe] to watch pornographic videos while in [Bambaataa]'s apartment,” which “progressed to mutual masturbation…and sodomy.” Additionally, they allege that Doe “became a victim of sex trafficking as [Bambaataa] would transport [Doe] to other locations and offer [him] for sex to other adult men. During said encounters [Bambaataa] would watch as [Doe] was

In this week's episode of the HJ Talks About Abuse podcast, we look at the civil case that has been brought against Prince Andrew in the US, at a New York federal court under the state's Child Victims Act. This is brought by Virginia Giuffre who claims that Prince Andrew had sex with her while she was 17 (a minor), with the knowledge that she had been trafficked by his former friend, Jeffrey Epstein. She claims that incidents occurred in both New York and in London. Prince Andrew is the sole defendant to the civil suit. Thus far, he does not appear to have responded to the issuing of the claim. Often, the place of residence of the Defendant and the place of the injury would be the place that has jurisdiction and where the case should ultimately be brought. In this case, the UK would seem suitable. Alan and Feleena discuss why the claim may be being brought in the US as opposed to the UK. Giuffre's lawyers, we assume, have considered the limitation issues and the applicable laws in both the US and UK and found the US preferrable for Giuffre. Another consideration appears to be tactical and in relation to the other criminal proceedings that have occurred. This includes the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. She has pleaded not guilty to sex-trafficking charges and faces trial in November. (Epstein took his own life in a US federal jail in August 2019, a month after he was arrested on the same charges.) The case will, no doubt, develop and receive a lot of media coverage which we will be following with interest. We encourage anyone who has comments or concerns relating to this subject, or about abuse in general, to get in touch with Alan Collins at Alan.collins@hughjames.com or Feleena Grosvenor at Feleena.grosvenor@hughjames.com. Sources: Prince Andrew cannot ignore US court case, says accuser's lawyer | Prince Andrew | The Guardian

A daily news briefing from Catholic News Agency, powered by artificial intelligence. Ask your smart speaker to play “Catholic News,” or listen every morning wherever you get podcasts. www.catholicnewsagency.com - A new civil sex abuse lawsuit has been filed against former cardinal Theodore McCarrick. The lawsuit also named an Opus Dei priest who is currently a pastor in the Archdiocese of New York. Lawyers say Father Michael Barrett abused the plaintiff for several years, beginning when the plaintiff was twelve. The lawsuit was filed under New York's Child Victims Act, a law which created a temporary window for new civil sex abuse lawsuits to be filed in old cases where the statute of limitations had already expired. The time window for civil lawsuits expires on Aug. 14. A top publisher of hymns will stop publishing works by Catholic composer David Haas. GIA Publications has reportedly received additional allegations of sexual misconduct against Haas. Haas, a member of the laity, was a mainstay in the "contemporary liturgical music" movement that began in the 1970s. Among his more popular songs are, "Glory to God," "You are Mine," "We are Called," and "Blest are They," Some Catholic institutions are calling for conscience exemptions to COVID-19 vaccinations. New York City announced this week that it will require proof of vaccination for workers and patrons of some businesses. The local archdiocese has warned priests against granting religious vaccine exemptions for Catholics. The head of the National Catholic Bioethics Center has argued that well-founded conscientious objections are part of Catholic doctrine. The Catholic archbishop of Dublin paid tribute this week to a local priest, who died saving the life of his parish secretary. The 72-year-old priest died on Tuesday, after reportedly pushing his secretary out of the way of an oncoming bus, in a village in County Cork. The bus driver also died. Local reports suggest he lost control of the bus after suffering a medical trauma. Today is the feast of the second-century Saint Emygdius. He was a bishop who was martyred for his missionary work in Germany. He is a patron against earthquakes.

Former television actress and high-ranking NXIVM member Allison Mack awaits her sentence June 30 for crimes involving Keith Raniere's cult-like organization. On this episode of The Eagle, reporter Rob Gavin talks to Tabby Chapman, a former NXIVM coach who worked closely with Mack for a time. Chapman shares her thoughts about the sentencing and experiences with Mack, recalling both an infectious charisma and the "Smallville" star's unpredictable darker side. Also on this episode, reporter Ed McKinley takes a deep dive into the Child Victims Act as the two-year "look-back" window for filing lawsuits comes to a close. 

(Apr 7, 2021) The new state budget is a big win for progressive Democrats, with long-awaited achievements like a boost to schools and higher taxes on the wealthy. But the North Country's conservative delegation says the budget is foolhardy and will lead to debt in years to come. Also: Child victims filed 80 sex abuse suits against priests in the Diocese of Ogdensburg under the Child Victims Act

Bridie Farrell was a teenage Olympic hopeful in short track speed skating when she crossed paths with an older male star of that sport. The relationship became an abusive one, Farrell says, and for years she stayed silent about her ordeal. But after she went public with what she experienced, she became a tireless social justice advocate. In this Part Two of the latest "Stories with Street CRed" podcast, Farrell joins me and reporter Mike O'Keeffe to discuss her story, sex abuse in sports, the challenges covering this issue and the passage of the Child Victims Act in New York State.

In the early 2000s, New York Daily News reporter Mike O'Keeffe worked on a series of stories involving Ernie Lorch, the founder of the powerful Riverside Church youth basketball program. Lorch, who died in 2012, had been accused of sex abuse by several former Riverside players. In the first of a two-part podcast, O'Keeffe and I discuss the Lorch case and other sex abuse scandals in sports; the challenges with reporting these kinds of stories and some of the recent milestones for survivors, including the passage of the Child Victims Act in New York State.

Drive-Through Events Scheduled in Communities Across the State as Part of Nourish New York Initiative Will Help to Put Food on the Table for 20,000 Households Impacted by COVID-19 Over the Next Week Confirms 2,938 Additional Coronavirus Cases in New York State - Bringing Statewide Total to 330,407; New Cases in 49 Counties

Gary Greenberg talks about Cardinal Dolan and the Child Victims Act

Cuomo Craves Control, Child Victims Act Blocked, and Christie's Denouement

Gary Greenberg talks about Emma Willard and the Child Victims Act

Gary Greenberg talks about the failure of the NYS Legislature to pass Child Victims Act

  Gary Greenberg, minority owner of the Vernon Downs Casino and Racetrack,  talks about the Child Victims Act pending in the NYS Legislature