> Or as Peter Thiel put it when he bankrupted Gawker: "If you're a single-digit millionaire like Hulk Hogan, you have no effective access to our legal system."
Which is amusing since the lawyer that Thiel used is constantly suing on behalf of single-digit millionaires to stifle free speech all over the country (including threatening to sue the NYT for reporting on Harvey Weinstein's crimes). Not a whole lot of principles in that group.
> Which is amusing as the lawyer Thiel used is constantly suing on behalf of single-digit millionaires to stifle free speech all over the country (including threatening to sue the NYT for reporting on Harvey Weinstein's crimes)
Harvey Weinstein isn't a single-digit millionaire but a triple-digit one, his net worth is estimated at $240-300 million. This (and the lawyers work for Thiel) is consistent with, though does not imply, Thiel’s contention that the wealth at which one has effective access to the legally system is much greater than that of a single-digit millionaire. Not sure what other “single-digit” millionaires you think he is working on behalf of, but your one concrete example certainly isn't one.
Or Barry Honig's penny stock charades where Harder represented the fraudster in suing people who wrote about his fraud and then represented another alleged penny-stock fraudster John Hurry in his suits against journalists who wrote about his fraud:
Harder is a bad dude who sues journalists for seriously troubling reasons. That many people agreed with his takedown of Gawker is unfortunate when the rest of his 'portfolio' is so poisonous to the first amendment.
Honig seems to probably be at least a double-digit millionaire (at least, prior to the sanctions for the fraud).
Ayyadurai, however, does seem to be a single-digit millionaire or less.
> Harder is a bad dude who sues journalists for seriously troubling reasons.
Sure, I just don't see evidence that it's primarily or even regularly on behalf of people who aren't significantly wealthier (or sponsored by someone wealthier) than single-digit millionaires, such that it is somehow a contradiction to Thiel’s claim about the limited effective legal power of people at merely that level of wealth when they lack a wealthier benefactor.
Which is partially my point -- Thiel's "principle" was that less wealthy people don't have the same access, so he ponied up some of his billions of dollars to hire a lawyer that famously sues independent journalists and other non-wealthy people. Even in the Gawker case, he didn't limit his suit to Gawker, but he also sued the $60k/yr journalists writing for the site.
I guess one way to prove your point about lack of access to the legal system for average people is to be an astounding hypocrite and sue some of those people, but I don't feel like that's the common legacy of that whole episode.
Yeah, my disagreement was fairly narrow; I'm not endorsing the morality of Thiel’s or Harder’s behavior, only saying that it doesn't seem to obviously conflict with Thiel’s description of the legal representation of mere millionaires.
I think that's a bit harsh. Even people who confess and for whom the prosecution has good evidence, can and will get lawyers or public defenders.
How would you feel if a public defender took the position of "nah, this gal is clearly a criminal, we have seen the footage --its a pass, let her represent herself".
Ok, what if lawyers were biased and "simply" declined to represent one class of people because I dunno, they are "debtors" and don't deserve representation against an authoshop which ripped them off.
They do, all the time. You have no expectation of legal council outside of criminal law. Debt collectors are running roughshod on the poor and vulnerable.
Getting a public defender is not the same as getting a dedicated legal team- not even close. Some public defenders have over a hundred active cases, so they clearly aren't focusing on each individual, and when working those cases they have an incredibly small budget. Getting a lawyer and getting an actual defense are different things.
I'm not sure they even have a budget all. I mean, there is presumably a budget for copying files and making phone calls maybe but not for hiring independent experts etc.
Which is amusing since the lawyer that Thiel used is constantly suing on behalf of single-digit millionaires to stifle free speech all over the country (including threatening to sue the NYT for reporting on Harvey Weinstein's crimes). Not a whole lot of principles in that group.